Constable Kodak Query

[csv8]

I was booked by Constable Kodak and queried the revenue raising fine as the snorkel was pointing up the hill, on the opposite side of the road, to where I was travelling. ie, I wasn't in line with the opening of the snorkel.
QPolice said "the camera can take a photograph across the road, and photograph, cars travelling in both directions" If the snorkel opening is facing up the hill, pointing at cars travelling towards it. How can it photograph me travelling the opposite way ?????????????????????????????
QPolice advice, " challenge it in court, and our highly trained detection officers will explain it"
They have any excuse to revenue raise.

[Peuty]

I assume you are talking about the air intake snorkle bolted to the side of the car, and if so, what has that got to do with anything? The camera unit sits in the passenger side of the car....

[csv8]

I was told the camera sits in the snorkel ???? Thats why the opening points to the back not the front ??

[Peuty]

Originally Posted by csv8

I was told the camera sits in the snorkel ???? Thats why the opening points to the back not the front ??

Nope, definitely not.

[BA_Turbs]

Originally Posted by csv8

I was told the camera sits in the snorkel ???? Thats why the opening points to the back not the front ??

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha...

Hahahahahahahahahahaha...

Ha.


Sorry, I just think that's pretty funny.

[big_waity]

Originally Posted by BA_Turbs

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha...

Hahahahahahahahahahaha...

Ha.


Sorry, I just think that's pretty funny.

X2!

Cop the fine on the chin mate. You broke the law, you got caught. I reckon 10km over the limit in most places isn't going to kill people. But, the law is the law. If you don't like it, don't drive.

[JC]

Originally Posted by csv8

I was booked by Constable Kodak and queried the revenue raising fine as the snorkel was pointing up the hill, on the opposite side of the road, to where I was travelling. ie, I wasn't in line with the opening of the snorkel.
QPolice said "the camera can take a photograph across the road, and photograph, cars travelling in both directions" If the snorkel opening is facing up the hill, pointing at cars travelling towards it. How can it photograph me travelling the opposite way ?????????????????????????????
QPolice advice, " challenge it in court, and our highly trained detection officers will explain it"
They have any excuse to revenue raise.

You will need to get a copy of the guidelines used for samera setup and then prove that the camera was NOT setup as per the guidelines to get anywhere. Good luck with that.

Did you ever think that if you weren't speeding, you wouldn't have been caught?

[csv8]

Originally Posted by JC

You will need to get a copy of the guidelines used for samera setup and then prove that the camera was NOT setup as per the guidelines to get anywhere. Good luck with that.

Did you ever think that if you weren't speeding, you wouldn't have been caught?

I have no problem with speed cameras ONLY how they are set up.They aren't used as originally intended. This section of road hasn't had a fatality in years and was at the base of a hill. They where originally only going to be used in areas of fatalities. Now they are everywhere ,where governments can raise revenue.

[JC]

Originally Posted by csv8

I have no problem with speed cameras ONLY how they are set up.They aren't used as originally intended. This section of road hasn't had a fatality in years and was at the base of a hill. They where originally only going to be used in areas of fatalities. Now they are everywhere ,where governments can raise revenue.

Fair enough - I agree with you on that. But you also have to know that if you are speeding, you run the risk of being caught. You have never actually denied that you were speeding; you're just complaining that they caught you.

While there is no "safe" speeding as such (and I don't mean that speed kills, just a speed that you can travel at without being booked for it), I generally stay within the accepted tolerances for speed limits, so that I don't get caught. I also happen to know how accurate my speedo is, so I can safely sit on 65 in a 60 zone and know that I am actually complying with the law.

If it's only a small fine and a few points, cop it on the chin and learn from it. If it's a large fine with large points, then I really can't see how you could complain.

[Cappy_Hamper]

Originally Posted by JC

Fair enough - I agree with you on that. But you also have to know that if you are speeding, you run the risk of being caught. You have never actually denied that you were speeding; you're just complaining that they caught you.

While there is no "safe" speeding as such (and I don't mean that speed kills, just a speed that you can travel at without being booked for it), I generally stay within the accepted tolerances for speed limits, so that I don't get caught. I also happen to know how accurate my speedo is, so I can safely sit on 65 in a 60 zone and know that I am actually complying with the law.

If it's only a small fine and a few points, cop it on the chin and learn from it. If it's a large fine with large points, then I really can't see how you could complain.

So is the tolerance 5km/h at 60 or is your speedo out by 5km/h @ 60?

[Romulus]

Originally Posted by Cappy_Hamper

So is the tolerance 5km/h at 60 or is your speedo out by 5km/h @ 60?

The tolerance is +/- 3km/h to 100km/h, over 100km/h it becomes +/- 3%. This tolerance is for radar detection, not what the local states/territories allow for your speed.

[fangq]

[QUOTE=JC]You will need to get a copy of the guidelines used for samera setup and then prove that the camera was NOT setup as per the guidelines to get anywhere. Good luck with that.

snip

is it possible to get the official manual of procedures for lidar/radar use ?
If not, why not?
Steve

[Sorted]

Originally Posted by fangq

is it possible to get the official manual of procedures for lidar/radar use ?
If not, why not?
Steve

Yes it is possible but wont do you any good.......

I remember a mobile speed camera parked in a bus stop, "illegal" but all that happened was the camera operator got a parking fine, all the ppl caught speeding still got their fines even though it was parked illegally.

[VZKOOP]

While there is no "safe" speeding as such

That should read there is no such thing as a safe speed.......

[JC]

Originally Posted by VZKOOP

That should read there is no such thing as a safe speed.......

No. Speed is distance over time. Any time you move, you move with speed. So are you saying that to move is unsafe?

[FGII-XR6]

Originally Posted by Sorted

Yes it is possible but wont do you any good.......

I remember a mobile speed camera parked in a bus stop, "illegal" but all that happened was the camera operator got a parking fine, all the ppl caught speeding still got their fines even though it was parked illegally.

In NSW a police vehicle can park illegaly if it is in the line of duty . it pi$$es me of as I drive a cab on weekends and if there is an incident at a pub or club the park in our rank and leve us with nowhere to wait for and to pick up passengers .

on the subject of the thread, were you speeding? if so pay the fine and build a bridge . now don't get me wrong I'm not perfect and have been done for speeding a few times but they are not excessive speeds and when i get done i don't cry poor me . you broke the 11th commandment, thou shalt not get busted

I may sound a bit intollerant here but i'm sick of whingers coming on here and starting a thread whinging how hard the world is because the police are doing their job. no cops and chaos would result, I would be happy to see the admin team ban all threads complaing about lawfuly issued infringement notices
you don't agree with the way that the cameras are used? join a political party work hard and suck up to the right people become a pollie and change it otherwise put a block of wood under the accelerator

[Kryton]

Originally Posted by au3xr6

I may sound a bit intollerant here but i'm sick of whingers coming on here and starting a thread whinging how hard the world is because the police are doing their job. no cops and chaos would result, I would be happy to see the admin team ban all threads complaing about lawfuly issued infringement notices
you don't agree with the way that the cameras are used? join a political party work hard and suck up to the right people become a pollie and change it otherwise put a block of wood under the accelerator

well said, i fully agree.
want to stop the "revenue raisers"?
hand your license in and youll never have to worry about a speeding ticket again.

grab a dictionary and look this up:
PERSONAL RESPONSIBILTY

[Matty4]

Originally Posted by au3xr6

.....lawfuly issued infringement notices.....

There's the rub. How do we know that it was issued lawfully, because they say so??? Can that be proven in a court of law?

[86XFFairmont]

Originally Posted by Sorted

Yes it is possible but wont do you any good.......

I remember a mobile speed camera parked in a bus stop, "illegal" but all that happened was the camera operator got a parking fine, all the ppl caught speeding still got their fines even though it was parked illegally.

yeah they all do it in melb, especially in my area lol sth oakleigh on centre rd they try and hide outside me old skool with the bus stop as kind of a cover thenbang last min ppl r standing on the brakes and having accidents and funny thing is its the main bus stop for the kids and they sit there at skool knock off so theyre real smart putting kids at risk just to raise revenue

[dodge74]

Now there's a place that I don't mind speed cameras - in a school zone. If your that stupid to be speeding around schools where kids are - double the fines I reckon.

Surely you shouldn't need to be jumping on the brakes or causing accidents if your doing the school zone speed limit of 40kmh (WA law).

Challenging cameras in WA - no cost - you can attend an office to view the photo.

If you were not driving ie the mechanic example from earlier post - fill out a form (stat dec) saying who was and they will direct the appropriate infringement to them - easy.

Solution to all - don't speed. I have bee done about half a dozen time in my driving life - not excessively, and each and every time I committed the offence. Never ever been a mistake in my favour or theirs.

Harden up and pay the money if you do the wrong thing!

[devilcv8]

[QUOTE=fangq]

Originally Posted by JC

is it possible to get the official manual of procedures for lidar/radar use ?
If not, why not?
Steve

depends wether it is the australian standard AS2898.2-2003 from standards australia you want or the state based operational guidlines that each state create.
I have a copy of the australian standard here and it was interesting, if short, reading.

[fangq]

Originally Posted by devilcv8

depends wether it is the australian standard AS2898.2-2003 from standards australia you want or the state based operational guidlines that each state create.
I have a copy of the australian standard here and it was interesting, if short, reading.

State based operational guidelines..
Steve

[Matty4]

Again, to those who think cameras are not revenue raisers, read on...

In my local paper this week there is an article about the crackdown on hoons and the new "hoon hotline". The full page article has an interview with Victoria's top traffic cop, Assistant Commissioner Ken Lay. In the article he states that he is a supporter of speed cameras (duh!!) but it was unlikely we would see more in the short term.

He then states, and I quote, "Speed cameras aren't necessarily the total answer. But if we thought that speed cameras could save lives, we'd certainly go to the Government and have the discussion with them".

:
Either they do or they don't. :

Now we have the top traffic cop stating that they don't believe they save lives, therefore the inference is they must be purely and simply a revenue raising device.

[Romulus]

Originally Posted by devilcv8

depends wether it is the australian standard AS2898.2-2003 from standards australia you want or the state based operational guidlines that each state create.
I have a copy of the australian standard here and it was interesting, if short, reading.

So do I.

I have a court date of 7th Jan this year in regards to a speeding infringement where I was doing 67km/h in a 60km/h zone. I've already had the prosecutor adjourn the case on the 17th of last month because I turned up and questioned the first charge of failing to identify driver. I told the magistrate I did identify the driver (myself) on the 2nd notification, and I did not receive the initial notification. I told the prosecutor perhaps they should send these infringements as registered mail to ensure everyone gets them.

I've subsequently requested the prosecutor provide me with a copy of the evidence they will use against me. Watch this space.

[afroboy]

LOL. Yeh, i checked out the view form the inside of one of the speed camera 4X4's once after it took a photo of me doing 73km/hr in an 80km/hr zone. I was p1ssed! I did a u-turn, pulled over and went knocking on the window. The constable could see i was annoyed, but he showed me the pic and explained that 'once an hour, the camera calibrates itself by taking a picture' he then pointed out that yes i was doing 73km/hr and not speeding. I advised him that it is all good for me to know that, but the general public (as far as i am aware) don't know the camera does this, and they will be stressing for the next 3 weeks waiting for a speeding fine in the mail that will never arrive as they did not commit a speeding offence. Tho in your case, i assume you were actually speeding.

[Peuty]

Nope, no camera in there.

Thats just the type of snorkle it is, it is fitted correctly and facing the correct way.

[prydey]

it never ceases to amaze me the amount of people who get done speeding and then post it on here expecting some sort of condolance or something. we all know its about revenue but on the other hand, if you weren't speeding....

[DoreSlamR]

Originally Posted by Peuty

Nope, no camera in there.

Thats just the type of snorkle it is, it is fitted correctly and facing the correct way.

But if you look veeeeeeeeeeeeeery closely there might be a camera in the tow bar hitch...or is it in the exhaust???

It could be anywhere!!!

[Scareybear]

Originally Posted by DoreSlamR

But if you look veeeeeeeeeeeeeery closely there might be a camera in the tow bar hitch...or is it in the exhaust???

It could be anywhere!!!

Nope, thats the opening for the alien probe.......... :

[gz1]

To those of you that think speed cameras are not for revenue raising:
In Feb I received a bluey in the mail claiming I was doing 79k in a 60 zone in an area that I don't normaly go to and could not recall having been there.
No prob I thought, mayby just an honest mistake, will ring up and check.
So after spending well over an hour on the phone I finaly got through to someone that "confirmed my car make" and said that as cameras don't lie pay the fine and shut up.
Still not convinced as by this stage I was definite I could not have possibly been in the area claimed, I pulled out logs from the work system which showed I was in in an area 43k's away at that time. So back on the phone to try and get a copy of the photos.
This effectively wasted another 2+ hrs and $20. plus postage.
Well I received the photos in the mail and lo and behold the car bears no resemblance to mine and the number plate is different by a couple of digits and not at all clear.
Now to get my money back for the photos, I would probably have to spend another couple of hrs at my cost greater than the $20.00 not to mention all the time I have spent already that I have zero chance of being compensated.
so either way Joe public looses. Pay a $75.00 fine or loose over $200.00 in time proving you are right.