a mobile speed camera temporarily installed on a rural road led to at least 589 fines being issued in a town of just 811 households.
Gods that data is appalling. Is it really likely that that rate speeding is really going on? Especially after the first few days once the locals are familiar with the placement of the camera and won’t be caught unawares.
As she drove past, she said an electronic speed-monitoring sign on the side of the road lit up green with a smile, indicating it believed she was going under the limit of 60km/h.
Weeks later, she discovered the camera disagreed. That was one of nine fines issued to her car between 15 and 20 September. All of them arrived the same day.
The fact that the fines take weeks to show up and you can be driving the same stretch of road that entire time, getting a fine every single day, is appalling. All but one fine per person should be thrown out on that basis alone.
The fact that their Speed Awareness Monitor thinks they were doing the right speed is also particularly bad. It seems likely to be the best evidence that this camera was just miscalbibrated and all its fines should be scrapped. But even if the camera was calibrated correctly and it’s the SAM that’s wrong, the fact that the SAM told drivers they’re going the right speed should be ground enough for aquital, in my opinion. They were given clearance and told they were doing the right thing.
It’s like if a Council officer pilut on high vis and started controlling a signalised intersection, instructing drivers to ignore the traffic lights. It doesn’t matter that that officer might not have the appropriate training or authorisation to be doing what he was doing. Drivers shouldn’t be given a red light fine for going when someone who appeared authoritative said they should go.
Why is she trusting a speed detection sign in the first place, she had a speedometer that has a guaranteed margin of error in all cars older than 2004, and a legal requirement to never show above the actual travel speed. It sounds like a cop out, either the camera was not functioning properly or these people are just country lead foots. Given that I only need to go 15 mins out of the city to see people drive significantly over the limits with regularity. Wouldn’t surprise me if half these folks have never even looked down below the dash what with keeping an eye out for pigs and roos.
a guaranteed margin of error in all cars older than 2004
Is there no guarantee from 2005 on? Am I missing a memo here?
I misstyped. It’s supposed to be younger not older. Older cars are still required to show the correct speed however in 2004 manufacturers started putting in a ‘buffer’.
Cars manufactured before 2004 will generally have a very exact speedo that has the potential to display below the travelling speed under certain circumstances, eg bigger wheels than intented for the vehicle, overinflated tires, etc.
After 2004 manufacturer’s started putting in a ‘buffer’ of anywhere between 4 to 12 km/h due to new regulation preventing the previously mentioned situation.
For example a Taraga people mover can be anywhere from 7 to 12km under the displayed speed, Camry hybrids are almost always about 4km/h slower than their shown speed, Prius are mostly 5km/h slower on the dot.
My 2002 Camry is on the money.
Experience: Few years as a taxi driver.
Very old cars were allowed a margin of error on both directions. Newer cars are allowed zero margin for error on reading low but some margin for reading high (i.e., you are guaranteed to actually be going at the speed recorded or lower—you can never be speeding if your speedo says you’re under the limit).
We did a US trip recently, and in 5000k of driving on their major roads and highways through half a dozen states, we saw a total of 3 speed detection devices - all hand held by cops in patrol cars.
We get back to Brisbane and passed 2 speed cameras on the 30 minute trip home from the airport.
If only there were some way to avoid speeding…
Speed is such a nothing burger when it comes to safe driving, yet it seems to be the only thing the police focus on.
A more cynical person might point out the fact that it’s the easiest one to generate revenue from, and when budgets predict a rise in speed camera revenue year on year the focus is maybe not on safety.
They could pass laws fining people for anything, I think the reason speeding is the focus is because it’s easy to enforce. You can’t just point a radar gun at a lane of traffic and have it pick up all the fatigued or drunk drivers.
The people in charge tend to focus on what they can measure, regardless of how important it is.
Like I said, it’s a shame there’s no way to avoid playing into ‘their’ hands and giving them all that extra revenue.
This is completely incorrect, it is extremely simple to demonstrate that accidents increase with speed and also that such accidents are more likely to result in injury.
What you are alluding to are extremely misleading studies which do not separate fender benders as a separate category, since they are the most common collision and almost always happen due to congestion and distractions. Collisions where injuries occur are significantly more probable as speed goes up.
If we were motivated to… undermine the profitability of these
privately operatedstate revenue raisers, how closely are they surveilled?Are they privately operated? I was under the impression QPS operated them.
I may be wrong on that one - I was basing it on NSW, where I’m quite sure they’re private.
The entities mentioned in this article are TMR and QPS, and neither of them are privately operated.
Fair enough - my mistake.
Knuth said his constituents are “ropeable” about two issues: juvenile crime and speeding fines.
I get that the Katters have youth crime as one of the biggest topics they run on (I also suspect they don’t have any sustainable plans to address it). But how much youth crime can there possibly be in a podunk town of 811 people? Don’t conflate two distinct topics to score political points.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Dozens of Malanda residents say they’re preparing individual legal challenges after a mobile speed camera temporarily installed on a rural road led to at least 589 fines being issued in a town of just 811 households.
Their case has generated a wider debate about the calibration and placement of trailer-based speed cameras in rural Queensland, and length of time between an alleged offence occurring and when a fine is issued.
Trainee ambulance driver Lana Miller saw the Malanda camera for the first time heading down the hill on a bend of the winding Malanda–Atherton road, about 75 kilometres south-west of Cairns, on 15 September.
Bonadio spoke to one elderly resident who regularly drives to the aged care home to visit his wife and was caught five times turning into its driveway.
In response to questions about field testing of the device, the department spokesperson said “several validations and checks are undertaken prior to infringements being issued from TRSCs (transportable road safety cameras).”
Several rural MPs, including Katter’s Australian Party’s Knuth, have brought the issue to state parliament, warning that car-dependent regional motorists are fed up with automated speeding fines.
The original article contains 1,412 words, the summary contains 189 words. Saved 87%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Was the camera malfunctioning? Scrap all the tickets. Was it working properly? Pay up and stop crying.
There are a lot of people who think they can go whatever speed they like and no one matters but them. This one seems to have been deceptive, but only to people who refuse to look at their own speedo, installed in their car for exactly this purpose.
