Hidden SA speed cameras

You will find the Authorities do allow for this when they put in the signes so they are double dipping.

Honky

Last year I spent 6mths in the passenger seat due to points over a 5year period which included two lots of double points, one was for a trailer plug fell out and the other a rolling stop turning left with a full load on the trailer nearly got charged with that one musnt abuse the police. Anyhow now I am constantly looking at my speedo. I don't answer the phone the kids do. I am for ever having people tail gate me when im doing the limit but to hell with them.
I had my fair share of hidden cameras and paid the price. I would have to say after living in SA 16 years ago they use to hide back then. They are starting that in QLD.

Tim, couldn't agree with you more.

As the saying goes, "Choose your speed, choose your consequences".

Just another keyboard warrior having a whinge on the internet about something that was their own fault because they were breaking the law.

What a waste of a thread.

I think thats the issue guys - as presented he has not broken the law.

The camera operator has and so should be fined.

Robin,

Looking at what was written in the OP
"As I approached the 80km zone I started to accelerate slowly and aprox 20 mtrs from the 80zone I was doing 70kph."

To me seems he was still in the 60 zone and yet to enter the 80 zone which therefore is above the legal max speed for that section of road.


Cheers Kev

Hi Kev

Yeah its the 100 meters grey zone before/after signs thats the issue.

Unless under special circumstances they are not allowed to set up there in the knowledge that people may accelerate from 60 up to 80 so that by the time they get to 80 sign they can actually be doing 80.

This is certainly in the guidelines - used to be + - 200 meters in Vic recently until they realised that with 200 to slow down and 200 to speed up you could technically never need to get down to actually 40kph when passing a school zone a couple of hundred meters long.

hi
we all do it but!
any driver who increases their speed before they have passed the sign that gives an increase can legally be fined

the above complaintant stated that he was doing 70 in a 60 zone before 20mtr before he passed the 80zone sign
so i would have thought that seeing that he has done a million km's as a coach driver he would be aware of this
or has he always broken the law as an experienced coach driver ????????

i think needs to take it fair and square on the chin and stop complaining
the above law has been around ever since i got my licence about 45yrs ago
so be it cheers

Come on Fellas - Give the guy a break - It is as he said - Not about safety, its about raising money.

If they were that close to speed zone changes just a plain ripoff. It is obvious the need for reduce speed is no longer valid and they are opening it up in 20k lots.

Absolutely no need to have a speed camera in this location. On the other hand there should always be leeway when speed limits reduce, as the signs are always placed prior to the speed needing to be as stated to give you a fair chance.

Why say this - Well I have put up many a speed sign and chosen the location myself around our towns.

Cheers Tony

I would suggest that the OP was actually in a 50 zone, not a 60 zone as some of you have assumed. So by his own admission he was 20 kmh over the speed limit.
I haven't been to Wool Bay for a few years, but I'm pretty sure it would be a 50 kmh zone.
The stated fine of $300 would back this up too ( more than 14 kmh over the limit).
If he was in a 60 zone the fine would be closer to $200.

At least there will be one less hoon driver to worry about on the roads in SA :-)

Cheers
Glenn

>> " If there are any visible speed cameras, then the speeding speeding truck drivers (fortunately the minority) just warn then other idiot mates. " > "Anything that the police can do to get these idiots off the road, the safer it will be for all road users. " <<


.... a more visible presence monitoring motorists behaviour .... rather than the hidden monitoring of 5 & 10 kph excesses for revenue .... would probably be a good thing.

"monitoring of 5 & 10 kph excesses for revenue"


Ok so 5 or 10 kph excess is OK.
Why not 15 or 20 kph? No let's say 25 or 30 kph. Oh to hell with it, let's say 100 or 110 kph.

If you deliberately drive a vehicle in excess of the posted limit as it appears here then I'd rather you not be on the road at all thanks.

If it's OK to exceed the speed limit then I guess red lights are optional, one way signs are a nuisance to be ignored, stop signs, giveway signs, roundabout rules all optional. So which rules must we follow and which one's are OK to ignore?

sighhhhhh ........


.... A MORE VISIBLE PRESENCE MONITORING MOTORISTS BEHAVIOUR ... RATHER THAN THE HIDDEN monitoring of 5 & 10 kph excesses for revenue .... WOULD PROBABLY BE A GOOD THING.

I was under the impression that all B doubles where speed limited to 100. Although that does not mean they cannot get up to 110 down a hill.
Mark perhaps you could enlighten us
Cheers Pete

sighhhhhh ........

.... A MORE VISIBLE PRESENCE MONITORING MOTORISTS BEHAVIOUR ...
AS WELL AS
HIDDEN monitoring of ZERO kph excesses for
COMPLIANCE .... WOULD DEFINATELY BE A GOOD THING.

Congratulations Lex

Im pleased you finally managed to say what you want to say ... rather than butchering my post about my preference for pro active policing.

Glad I could help

I do agree there should be more visible presence as well. In fact, IMHO there should be less emphasis on speed cameras on more on visible enforcement.

As for B doubles speed limited to 100 KM/Hr, that is laughable. I have had B doubles tailgating at 110 Km/Hr going uphill in 110 Km/Hr zones plenty of times.

I should emphasis that the truck drivers behaving like this are a small minority. Most truck drivers I find to be excellent and very courteous road users.

However, because of the huge risk that idiot truck drivers pose to other road users due to the size of the vehicles, every effort needs to be made to get them off the road.

while greater police visibility and presence would be a deterant, that would pull police resources from concentrating on more serious crimes. Catching speeding vehicles is best done and processed by machines without any involvment from the police.

When a police office pulls some one over they check the following

Is the driver Licensed ?
Is the vehicle registered ?
Does the vehicle have any obvious defects ?
Is the driver drunk ?
Is the driver under the influence of drugs ?
Is the vehicle overloaded ?
In the case of heavy vehicles, has the driver been having adequate rest stops.
etc etc.

The police office will then educate Driver as to why they are being pulled over.

Machines do none of these. Machines have their place, but they are not an adequate replacement for policing. Excessive use of speed cameras is a cop-out by politicians who do not provide enough funding to the police services to properly patrol the roads .

And remember, police on patrol enforce all the other road rules, not just speeding.

As for roads safety being less important than other offenses, I think the next of kin of the thousand odd Australians killed every year on the roads would beg to disagree. Not to mention the tens of thousands with serious injuries.

So the argument should be centred around whether the number of police officers doing speed (and other checks) has decreased with the introduction of speed cameras. Until we have those stats it's a fairly useless debate.

ie. Are speed cameras an additional way to fight crime or do they simply replace existing officers.

Mr Pointyhead

by golly was he was close are you sure of the mesurments ?

after 4200 ks around oz i missed all that fun my biggest beef is cars .
trucks i had no problem with and also radio contac sure woks for me regards
morry

hi made a blew should have read 42 thousand ks around oz

hi made a blew should have read 42 thousand ks around oz

quote "Was not winging at being booked"(sic)

quote "one of those hiiden revenue raisers."(sic)
quote "saw the theif (sic)"
quote "llegalised theft from the stealing police and Govt"
qoute "I find this episode that most outrageous thing "

I'd hate to see a post where you were whinging. :-)

Bushpig just pay up mate SA needs your money . LOL

There's no reason why you couldn't speed if you want to also.
I epect there wasn't a speed camera for 5.5hrs or more of the trip either

a couple regularly ... plus a couple of overhead setups.

And its OK .... Id only be naughty below the posted speed limit .... its too dangerous at speeds over 100kph ...... pfftttt

I believe they've had point to point for heavy vehicles in NSW at least for some time.

Craig2,

This has come up before (in NSW) and proven to be myth (at the moment). Do you have any credible sources for your information?

Regards

Gramps,
Check here Site Link

Dave,

Thanks for that. I knew NSW had the Safe-T-Cams for heavy vehicles but I'm assuming Craig was inferring that a similar system was being implemented for smaller vehicles i.e. under 4.5 tons.

Eventually, I'm sure govts would love to have that sort of system implemented but up till now they've repeatedly denied it. I think Roozendahl was the last NSW minister to state that publicly.

Regards

Gramps,
The Safe-T-Cam has the ability to track cars as well but it is not used, I think it has something to do with privacy laws, One day they will find a legal way around it but till then cars are left alone. Those cameras can see right into the back of the cab or read the name on your work shirt in fog that thick you can barely see the the front of your bonnet.
Cheers Dave...

Dave,

Be careful who you let travel in the cab with you hahahahaha

It will more than likely be used on cars in the future even if they do bring in this new tax on kms travelled, as foreshadowed in the Henry Taxation Review, as well. That could be a real shocker.

Regards

Here is the link to the Article in the Couriel Mail

Article Courier Mail

Craig,

Woooohooooo, finally a State Govt with the stones to implement the technology in respect of cars rather than just heavy vehicles. It was only a matter of time. Vic and NSW will undoubtedly fall into line if the Qld implementation is successful.

Thanks for that.

Regards

I found this in thread 75216 which is quite ironic really.

Member - Bushpig replied:

Do the math. Speed limit 100kph. Your speed 95 kph. 5kph for 5 hours equals 25 kms less than the speedsters. Extra time ...oh about 15mins. Slow down, save fuel, be more relaxed and virtually get there at the same time.

SA is a great state so how about taking a little of your own advice, slowing down and heading back there for a visit some time. Speed cameras are here to stay and they fulfill a purpose in the road safety picture.

> " You are either speeding or you’re not, and it remains completely in your control as to whether you do or not. Yes I hear the arguments, I was only two kilometres over, or I was only 100 metres from a change in the legal speed limit, and it is only revenue raising…or I didn’t see the sign. " " Speed cameras are here because it is far cheaper than having half our police force on the road to enforce speed limits. And let’s not go down that track…police cost money, so it comes down to priorities. I don’t want my taxes spent on police having to catch people simply because they think they are above a speeding fine. A speed camera performs that and catches all. "<


Sorry Landy ... I was always under the impression that police were on the road to enforce ALL road rules ..... maybe even spot the suspicious character wearing nothing but a trenchcoat loitering outside a school ... or maybe even see someone scampering from a block of units where some pensioner has just been robbed and raped.

A speed camera only does one job and certainly doesnt catch all.

Im quite happy to have my taxes spent on police .... and health .... and education etc .... would be a vast improvement on where ever they are spending it now.


Brakko ... Bushpig acknowledges his actual speed within the posted speed limit ... His post is about the underhanded methods used to extract revenue from motorists.

My thoughts are ... If such underhanded methods have to be used by the authorities ... then the REAL instances of speeding are probably much lower than we, the great unwashed, are led to believe.

And for 30 years its been done safely

Just plain robbery is what it is!!!!

Speed cameras should not be near transition zones

Cheers Tony

Thats an interesting comparison of laws ...

Makes ya wonder eh.

Now if on a murder charge one pleads not guilty ... coz "mummy used to lock me up under the stairs when I was little" ... and the charge is lessened ....

Then should that same dark cupboard, bleeding heart story also be able to get one down from a 130kph ticket to a 105kph ticket ... ???

LOL

Yes I have also noted that my vehicles speedo is overstating the speed by about 8%, I raised the matter with Toyota and their reply was that it is within the ADR's. So then I asked how many k's is my warranty good for as I will be travelling 8% less than stated on the odometer, not to mention service intervals.

It's not just NEW cars.
That issue, incorrect speedo's, has been the subject of many a posting on here.
It has nothing to do with this post.

If you keep at or below your speedo reading you're not likely to get zapped.

Your odo is a mechanical device and is not as inaccurate as your speedo unless you've changed tyre sizes so the distance travelled is pretty close to accurate.

Disco.

Hi Bob

Anal retentive...just a realist..

The issue is that if you don't enforce the law people will start breaking it...the old well they aren't watching say I'll do as I please. Was it safe in this instance, maybe it was, so what was the problem accelerating about 100/2000 metres before the speed change? Well if the speed limit isn't enforced, maybe next time around it will be 300/400 metres and before you know it people are not observing the speed limit at all.

But any way you cut this debate when it comes up, it simply boils down to this, like it or not we are stuck with speed cameras, and if you are going to break speed limits you may get cauight and fined. A bit like hitting your head against a brick wall, it hurts till you stop.

Perhaps we should also stop putting booze buses (RBTs) near pubs just in case we catch drink drivers.....

Cheers

Bob ???? .... Your post hasnt been deleted ???? ... And there is no reason for it to be either.

"anal retentive" may ruffle some feathers and probably - blind acquiescence or gullible acceptance may be more politically correct terms to use .... but the rest was very good.

Nobody who has posted in this thread has mentioned the right or the need to travel at speeds over the posted limit .... Its all about the underhanded methods used by those supposedly looking out for us ... in regards to road safety .... and many appear to be digusted by examples they have heard of or witnessed or experienced.

On the hand there is a group who appear to be religiously attracted to the message displayed on a speed zone and worship the misguided clergy implementing the magic numbers at their whim or the alignment of the planets or whatever ........ So perhaps instead of "anal retentive" ... you should have said "zealots" ????


Landy .... Whats the go ???? ... Your posts normally ooze forum ettiquette and rationale ... Yet in this thread your posts on the topic are giving me mind pictures .... you know the ones ... those images you see on SBS WW2 documentaries ... showing the expressions on the faces of people in cattle trucks headed to the gas chambers ... defeated, despondant, acceptance of a govts criminal acts ... that sort of thing.

And as for comparing sly camera / radar placement with .... booze buses ??? .... Thats a pollies trick - bundling bad and good things together in conversation/comments to lessen the impact / distract attention from the bad thing.

If speed traps were an activity run by private business .... There would be an uproar involving Trade Practices, Fair Trading, lawsuits, civil action etc ... but of course the operation of one of the biggest money spinners for govt is protected and enshrined in legislation.

In my own case ... when it comes to travelling over the posted speed limit I have always copped it sweet ... so to speak ... but that does not include the occasions where the offence has been orchestrated for the sake of revenue .... and the orchestrations outnumber the tickets from deliberate and planned 110kph-120kph overtaking procedures many times over.

And as for this .....

" But any way you cut this debate when it comes up, it simply boils down to this, like it or not we are stuck with speed cameras, and if you are going to break speed limits you may get cauight and fined. A bit like hitting your head against a brick wall, it hurts till you stop. "

Theres a big difference between breaking a speed limit and being set up ...

Interstate travellers beware ... The Vehicle Inspection Station/Layby just out of Coonabarabran NSW, which has a variable speed zone, within the 100kph posted limit, for when the station is operating ......

Was through there yesterday and noticed from the distance that the station was not in use ... and then when closer ... realised that some forgetful RTA person had neglected to cover the badly placed, lower, speed limit sign back up.

HAH !!!!! .... in actual fact .... There was a police officer in an unmarked car selecting interstate number plates from groups of same speed (95kph-100kph) vehicles and issueing 30kph over the limit tickets to them.

Now thats really ... what did you call it Landy ???? .... ohhhhh yeahhhhh .... " enforcing the law " ...

OzTroopy

Thankyou for the compliments and I assure you nothing has changed, I’m still looking at this logically….

This type of thread seems to be all about generating sympathy for getting caught out with the ‘Stupidity Tax’ – and that is what a speeding fine boils down to these days. Mind you, perhaps we could save some sympathy for the victims and families of horrific road accidents that all too often involve speed.

The authorities can argue their case for putting speed cameras in, and I’m sure they are armed with the data to do so, that is their job, not mine – but whether it comes down to safety or revenue raiser, what difference does it make if caught? We all know the rules, like them or not. Agitate to your local MP that you want the law changed or place your protest vote at the polling booth. But whinging on EO every time someone gets a fine in the mail, and arguing it was unfair or sneaky does what?

Perhaps the counter-argument is it is just as sneaky accelerating before the speed limit changes….or nudging up the speed to 5ks over the posted limit. You see human nature being what it is it won’t matter what the speed limit is, or were the speed signs change, there will be those who will simply flaunt it. I said earlier, perhaps we should just abolish all speed limits and let drivers’ decide the best speed to travel at. Unfortunately we will simply transfer the cost, in that instance, from a monetary one, to one we will end up counting in human toll. Trouble with a perfect world is it doesn’t exist, so we need rules, like them or not!

So, why don’t we just call speeding fines a (stupidity) tax for slow learners…and move on.

And I mean no offence to EO readers…but this is the harsh reality of speed and red camera devices in this day and age! A user pays tax for those silly enough to flout the road rules (as laid down by the authorities)…..

Best regards, The Landy….

Well said Bob. I hope all those really law abiding citizens do not ever drive down Jetty Road at Glenelg in SA.

In SA it is against the law to drive on tram tracks. But due to foot path extensions for those who get on or off the tram you have to drive on the tracks on this road.

Should all motorists be fined for driving down this road?

Heya Landy

.....and complimentary it was meant to be ......... and questioning.

The thread issue is the illegitimate but legal use of the equipment rather than ... should speed cameras/radars be allowed ?

LOGICALLY ... They should be allowed ... when used CORRECTLY.

Cameras and Radars are here to stay ... Afterall, one doesnt turn off the milking machine while the cows with milk are still hooked up ... do they ???

Abolishing speed limits ??? ... nahhhh ... but abolishing all but two and providing dvr education in regard to vehicle speed/environment regardless of the posted limit may be a good thing .... but thats another topic.

Whinging on EO about illegitimate use of the eqpt ???? ..... who knows ... perhaps if theres enough of it, the tide will turn and the eqpt will get used legitimately as well as legally .... Forum power and the follow on seemed to achieve a result with the outlandish NSW suspension proposal.

And I return the compliment, of course.

However, for as long as the front-pages of our daily papers have pictures of cars wrapped around telegraph poles, and someones son & daughter being carted off to a morgue, I doubt our politicians will loosen speeding laws.

In fact from everything I read suggests there are more 'devices' about to be inflicted upon us.

Anectodal evidence suggest mobile speed cameras are changing people's behaviour, and occurences like the one that started this thread will be the outcome of 'intense policing'.

Cheers

My last follow up on this I think ....

hmmmmm ... Is that a collective EO sigh of relief I hear ????


Yep ... Nothing like harsh images and some mispresented / sensationalised facts to sway social engineering.

A loosening of the speeding laws is not whats required ... or even suggested in this thread ... well not by me anyway ....

Its the accountability by the operators / placement staff for the positioning and use of the equipment that needs tightening up ... as in cases such as Bushpigs and my example from yesterday.

I respect ... and as above - even agree ... with your insistence/acceptance of the continued use of the equipment and even to a degree its nescessity ... however you seem to be falling back on that ... rather than being concerned at its misuse.

Sorry- EO locked up last so I went to bed and sent this again this am but it already eventually got there.