Thread: Victorian new Drink/Drug Driving laws.

Originally Posted by BobL

RE: Rubber necker collisions
I agree it won't prevent rubbernecker collisions, but a vehicle at 60 kph has 2.25 x more KE than one at 40 kph, which would you rather be run into by?

If you have ever worked on a road with traffic doing 100 km/h (or even 70) in the adjacent lane you will appreciate the value of 40 km/h when workers (or police) are present.

I can tell you from experience that it's not a lot of fun and rubber neckers notwithstanding it's bloody dangerous.
One of my work colleagues had his arm broken when hit by a vehicle passing through a work site.

We have had roadworks going on near wo schools on the edge of Hervey Bay. The worst part of this
is th poor placement of signage, especially temporary signage. Some signs actually have wide tape
across their middle! others are at all sorts of angles. Add to this the flashing lights of work vehicles
outside the fenced off road ares and the mind has trouble coping,

Just a little more care in planning and placements would make a difference tthose driving here.

Originally Posted by Dibbers

creates a culture of looking at the speedo rather than the road if you ask me...

I've never understood this kind of statement. When driving I keep my eyes on the road, and can flick my eyesight down to the speedo and back again in less than a second. Do other people have to move their whole head to see the speedo? Or does it take them several seconds to focus on it?

It is reckoned by professional instructors that you should check the instruments, then the nearside mirror, offside mirror and then internal mirror about every 30 seconds in heavy traffic. All this is done in a few seconds and becomes automatic after a while.

Originally Posted by Wood'nMetal

I've never understood this kind of statement. When driving I keep my eyes on the road, and can flick my eyesight down to the speedo and back again in less than a second. Do other people have to move their whole head to see the speedo? Or does it take them several seconds to focus on it?

I think the real issue is that some people can't judge their speed by how fast the scenary is passing by.
These people need to continually check their "instruments" to judge their speed.

Originally Posted by ian

I think the real issue is that some people can't judge their speed by how fast the scenary is passing by.
These people need to continually check their "instruments" to judge their speed.

Umm... Like one paddock/sec. )

Regards
Paul

Originally Posted by Chris Parks

It is reckoned by professional instructors that you should check the instruments, then the nearside mirror, offside mirror and then internal mirror about every 30 seconds in heavy traffic. All this is done in a few seconds and becomes automatic after a while.

That's how we were taught at the driving instructors course and it comes in really handy when riding a motor bike where its best to behave like no one can see you

Originally Posted by Chris Parks

It is reckoned by professional instructors that you should check the instruments, then the nearside mirror, offside mirror and then internal mirror about every 30 seconds in heavy traffic. All this is done in a few seconds and becomes automatic after a while.

Wow, these guys are dangerous. For what it's worth that's not what I was taught, and I never did it, and I've driven about 1 million kms in 4 different countries and never been in or caused an accident on the road.
When you take your eyes off the road in front of you you are at your most vulnerable and your most dangerous, and you should only do it for serious reasons such as when you're trying to change lanes, and not for the purpose of some BS low speed limit. Your safety is way more important than a fine because you did 106 in 100 zone or something silly like that. If you are breaking the speed limit by a lot and you have no clue because you can't sense it without looking down, you shouldn't be driving in my opinion.

What I think is a big flaw in the system is that speeding fines are based on the number of k's over, I think it should be percentage based.
I get caught doing 120/110 on a two lane highway, 10k's over, yes it's illegal but there's not a lot of danger unless other factors such as road works, weather or traffic volume become an issue.
I get caught doing 50/40 in a school zone, it's the same penalty but much more dangerous, especially if it's at pick up or drop off time.

I also think fines need to be based on a percentage of your income, to be fair.
I got caught in Townsville back in 12, $250 and 3 points but I was working, on good money, the fine was a minor annoyance - I was more concerned about the points.
Fast forward eight months later, and I get slapped $120 for not wearing a push bike helmet. Work had finished, I was on centrelink with about $230 a fortnight left over after rent and that $120 really hurt.

Perhaps what we should consider, is what Germany used to do (I am not sure if they still do it) but they would donate all fines to charity OUTSIDE of their country on a rotational monthly basis ie one month it would be Oxfam next Red Cross etc.

They did this to take away any incentive to fine motorists to balance budgets etc.

Originally Posted by Fonix

What I think is a big flaw in the system is that speeding fines are based on the number of k's over, I think it should be percentage based.
I get caught doing 120/110 on a two lane highway, 10k's over, yes it's illegal but there's not a lot of danger unless other factors such as road works, weather or traffic volume become an issue.

Safe driving at 110/120 is an illusion - if something goes pear shaped at 120 or 110 and when it goes pear shaped it happens well before you have time to react and theres a much higher risk of killing your self and others than at 40/50.

Originally Posted by BobL

Safe driving at 110/120 is an illusion - if something goes pear shaped at 120 or 110 and when it goes pear shaped it happens well before you have time to react and theres a much higher risk of killing your self and others than at 40/50.

It might well be an illusion for you but for a trained driver can be well withing his/her capabilities.

I've often wondered if the accident rate for P plate drivers has reduced since the 120 hrs. rule was introduced.

On another tack, do the heavily sign posted fixed speed cameras in NSW only trap idiots?

mick

Originally Posted by Glider

I've often wondered if the accident rate for P plate drivers has reduced since the 120 hrs. rule was introduced.

On another tack, do the heavily sign posted fixed speed cameras in NSW only trap idiots?

mick

The average speed cameras? They only track trucks in NSW. The single point speed cameras? everyone knows where they are unless they are a stranger to the area and some navigation systems warn where they are. I am surprised they catch many at all.