Zero Tollerance for Speeding...

[Gob]

Margin for error on speeding reduced to zero

Alexandra Smith
March 25, 2011

MOTORISTS have always been kept in the dark about the leeway given to drivers caught speeding, but a leaked cabinet document reveals the secret 3km/h tolerance that has been given to speeding drivers will be axed.

It could mean thousands of motorists are fined for travelling just a couple of kilometres per hour over the speed limit.

The tolerance level is a margin given to motorists who exceed the speed limit as ''a benefit of the doubt'', but the Roads and Traffic Authority has always refused to reveal the leeway, citing ''road safety issues''.

A leaked report from the budget committee of cabinet, dated December 9 last year, says the 3km/h tolerance will be removed. It says it will axe the ''internal and undisclosed tolerance as applied by the State Debt Recovery Office to digitally captured infringements as notified by the RTA''.

One senior Sydney policeman said the revised margin of error was so small that a new set of tyres or the width of a speedometer needle could land motorists on the wrong side of the law.

A spokeswoman for the RTA refused to confirm the tolerance and said it was a matter for the State Debt Recovery Office. A spokesman for the Treasurer said the office enforced policies set by the RTA and the transport department.

While NSW has always fiercely guarded its tolerance, the Victorian government revealed in 2007 that its tolerance level was 2km/h for fixed speed cameras and 3km/h for mobile speed cameras, plus a discretionary tolerance.

Australian design rules used to allow for a 10 per cent tolerance either way on car speedometers, but now the rules only allow for the tolerance above the actual travel speed.

The cabinet report, obtained by the Herald, also reveals that the committee endorsed the ''accelerated roll-out of digital safety cameras by the Roads and Traffic Authority to be complete by June 2011''.

The RTA is replacing red light cameras with safety cameras, which can detect motorists who run red lights as well as those who speed, regardless of the colour of the light, at 200 sites across the state.

About 100 of the cameras have already been installed, all of them in Sydney.

http://smh.drive.com.au/motor-news/marg ... 1c8kp.html

[Miles]

Around these parts if it's raining you get a pass as the local law enforcement seem to think they may melt.

[Timster]

Ermmm. I am not qualified to speak on this subject...


And it was only 160 mph, older...I ran out of road before I could obtain 195.

[The Hen]

We still have a reasonable margin in the ACT. Ten percent plus two kilometers.

[Crackpot]

90 in a 70 today

[Gob]

You got caught?

[Crackpot]

Yep and I wasn't even intentionally speeding.

[Gob]

Does that make it better or worse?

What fine are you expecting?

[Crackpot]

$140 plus processing

[Gob]

Ouch!

[Crackpot]

and that doesn't count the ticket surcharge

[loCAtek]

izzat all? Go to work furlough

[dgs49]

During the years while the U.S. was suffering through its mandatory-and-universally-ignored 55MPH national speed limit, humorist Dave Barry once wrote that we were the only country in the world with an unpublished speed limit. His point being that the State Cops had a "real" speed limit over which they would ticket someone, but they were personally sworn to secrecy about that that limit was.

My wife travels to work on a 55MPH highway where, if you are going less than 75 you are in danger of being assaulted from behind - even in the "slow" lane.

Every three years or so I get a "speeding" ticket under exactly the same circumstances: I am moving with the flow of traffic, and traffic is flowing at about 15mph over the posted speed limit. A cop picks me out for some unknown reason (driving a red Mercedes, riding a motorcycle, etc), and there is really no defense. The traffic court will routinely reduce the nominal speed to the highest you can go without being charged "points," (with no reduction in the fee), and I go home "happy." It doesn't affect my insurance.

On a related subject, three times in the past week I have narrowly avoided an accident with women who were driving while talking on a cell phone. Twice they did pretend-stops at intersections, proceeding through into my path and the other time she changed lanes with me directly beside her on the highway, running me onto the shoulder.

It ain't a scientific survey, but one tends to draw conclusions, eh?

[Scooter]

That people who are talking on cellphones tend to drive distractedly, or that you only happen to notice it when women are behind the wheel?

[dgs49]

Rules to live by:

(1) Anyone talking on a cellphone while behind the wheel of a car is a potential hazard, man or woman,

(2) At any given moment while behind the wheel, a woman is more likely to be talking than a man,

(3) Even when distracted to point out that she is doing something stupid and/or dangerous, a woman's conversation - and whatever she is doing on the road - will go forward, unabated; often the offending woman will even give you the hairy-eyeball for interrupting her conversation,

(4) Don't assume ANYTHING when you encounter a person driving while talking on a cellphone.

None of which is to say that men are blameless. In my experience, the worst cases with men are those who are driving commercial vehicles (plumbers, cable guys, utility workers, etc), and apparently sorting out their next appointment while driving to it. These guys are totally engrossed and are barely aware that they are in a moving vehicle, much less driving one competently.

[oldr_n_wsr]

NY just passed a law that adds 2 points on your license for driving while on a cell phone or texting (in addition to the fine and surcharge).

[The Hen]

It is a three point licence penalty in Aus.