An email I recieved regarding speed cameras, what do you think ?

[dave289]

I recieved this email and thought some may find it interesting, has anyone used their information to their benefit ? and what do you make of the info provided ?

Dear Dave,

We find it incredible that, in this day and age, with all the information out there, some people still honestly believe that speed cameras actually “Save lives”. Now, apart from the obvious fact that a speed camera has never jumped off a pole and resuscitated anyone or physically saved a single life at all, there is actually overwhelming evidence that not only do they not save lives but they actually increase accidents! We encourage anyone who has ever had their life saved by a speed camera to please write to us and let us know.



Now, we have been saying this since we started our website over two and a half years ago but, back then, people didn’t believe us. So, about a year ago, we put up the following webpage - http://www.aussiespeedingfines.com/p...e-Cameras.html - which has evidence from studies done around the world that speed cameras increase accidents. These studies also show that when speed cameras are removed and/or speed limits are raised, there are fewe r accidents.



The following story is from the Courier Mail in Brisbane and relates to a particular camera in London, England and it backs up what we have had on our website perfectly. http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/s...19-954,00.html



Statements like “…. but figures released by police show crashes have risen by a quarter at the site.” and “A Freedom of Information request …. showed casualties have almost doubled since 2001 when the camera was set up.” should be of concern to motorists in every country that still uses speed cameras. The reality is that casualties have almost doubled in the spot that this camera was installed but it remains there because it has raised a million dollars in revenue.



So, why do people still choose to believe that speed cameras are there for anything other than revenue raising? We really don’t know but the following story from the Sunday Times in Perth certainly confirms the fact that people are starting to catch on to the issues we have been raising for a number of years now. http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/stor...7-2761,00.html



It is the following paragraph, from that story, that concerns us the most and is the whole reason that we launched our website in the first place – “There are also worries that innocent motorists could be slapped with fines.” Speed cameras have been proven time and again to be fundamentally flawed and that is why hundreds of thousands of innocent motorists are unjustly and unfairly fined each year and why we are doing everything we can to put a stop to it.



Please keep in mind the next paragraph of that same story – “In Victoria, Tenix Solutions was stripped of a multimillion-government contract in 2007 after a string of bungles. More than 1100 speeding tickets were wrongly issued.” What on earth makes anyone in WA think the same won’t happen there?



The fact is that speed cameras are there for one thing and one thing only – raising revenue. Again, should you have any doubt about this, please see pages 8 - 12 of the following report and see how proud the Redflex Group are for making so much money from innocent motorists - http://www.redflex.com/public_docume...20Briefing.pdf Yes, we know it’s a f ew years old and we know that we have sent it out before but we will continue sending this information out until people finally get the message – speed cameras are solely about raising revenue and have nothing to do with road safety!



Simple 5 year old mathematics will prove this beyond any doubt. Millions of speeding fines are issued each year and, if speed really was the “killer” that the media makes it out to be then the road toll would be in the millions, or at least hundreds of thousands. It’s not, it’s only in the hundreds. And, even in those hundreds of accidents, speed is only a factor in 5% of them! Speeding has next to nothing to do with accidents. Please see the following page for further proof of this - http://www.aussiespeedingfines.com/p...he-Future.html



The majority of accidents are caused by either not driving to the conditions or in-attention. The introduction of speed cameras has seen drivers focusing far more on their speedos than the road and traffic in front of them, thus causing more accidents and this is why these unjust and unlawful revenue raising devices must be removed. Then, motorists can go back to driving sensibly - whether a few k's above or below an arbitrarily set speed limit or not - and take responsibility for their actions rather than having Big Brother breathing down their neck whilst the road toll steadily increases!



So please, pass this e-mail onto everyone you know who drives on our roads. Let’s put an end to this lunacy once and for all and let’s get every unjust and unlawful speed camera removed from service in this country. And, again, should anyone reading this be in any doubt that all speed cameras are, in fact, unjust and unlawful, please read the following response from Dr Brittain that was sent to one of our Members recently:



Dear Mr .....



I refer to your e-mail of 29 July 2009 (below) and I would make the following responses to your questions:



1. The certificates referred to in section 10 of the National Measurement Act 1960 (Cth) are issued by either the NMI’s Chief Metrologist or legal metrology authorities appointed by the Chief Metrologist under the National Measurement Act 1960 (Cth) i.e. certifying and verifying authorities. NATA accreditation does not itself confer the right to issue c ertificates under the National Measurement Act 1960 (Cth).



2. Neither the CSIRO not the RMIT are appointed as a legal metrology authority under the National Measurement Act 1960 (Cth) and I am unaware of their NATA accreditation status.



3. Pattern approvals are granted exclusive by the NMI’s Chief Metrologist.



4. Section 109 of the Constitution refers to inconsistency between State and Commonwealth law and the former cannot grant exempts from the provisions of the National Measurement Act 1960 (Cth).



This e-mail is entirely without prejudice and nothing in it constitutes legal advice express or implied.



Yours sincerely



Richard Brittain



Dr Richard Brittain LLB

Senior Legal and Policy Officer, Legal Metrology Branch

National Measurement Institute

Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research

________________________________________

National Measurement Institute
Bradfield Rd, West Lindfield NSW 2070, Australia
PO Box 264, Lindfield NSW 2070, Australia
Ph: 61-2-8467 3645 Fax: 61-2-8467 3899
Mobile: 0408 617 438
Email: richard.brittain@measurement.gov.au



Now, if you don’t understand the significance of this e-mail and know how to apply the Section 10 argument to any and every speeding fine you receive then you need to go to our Memberships page - http://www.aussiespeedingfines.com/p...mberships.html and grab a copy of our e-book immediately.



Then, once you have become one of the truly educated and informed motorists on the roads, we would urge you to e-mail us and we will send you out some bumper stickers and/or business cards to help spread the word and put an end to the corrupt and unlawful system that is currently being forced upon the motorists of this country.



As always, we thank you all for your on-going support and we again ask that you understand that we now have over 11,000 Members and Subscribers so please be patient with us and we will reply to every e-mail as quickly as we can but it can now take us a few days to get back to everyone.



Thanks again and stay safe out there.







The Team at Aussie Speeding Fines

www.aussiespeedingfines.com

[FalconXR6]

A well educated, researched and logical approach is not what road safety is all about...

[Trendseeker]

I'd like to read what he's got to say but his web site certainly doesn't break any speed limits. I gave up after the home page still hadn't loaded after several minutes.

[China]

I am a memmember and have had one success and I am about to have another, plenty of people with vested interest are out to discredit this site. do your reaserch and you will find that it is all basicly true. I was very sceptical until I looked into it.
I do not have any affiliation with assie speeding fines other than that I am a member, I do not participate in their rewards program

P.S. I do not have any problem downloadind etc. from the website, it is not slow for me

[jonk]

I've been a member of ASF since day one. All the info is legit, it works depending on how much effort you put into using it if, you go to court.

It ain't just about speeding fines either. It's also about for instance, parking tickets which made it possible for me, to defeat a body corporate handing out tickets via a person, who was delegated by council but not employed by them. They no longer do FYI...

ASF take the 'intimidation' out of the whole process which is what feeds it.

[Keepleft]

Note the comments from Shazzasaloon91 quoting Dr Claire Noone
Director of Consumer Affairs Victoria:-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63EHd...layer_embedded

National Metrology = true. A conflict could occure between this, and AS for speed measurement. In the end, High Court stuff.

Do take note of the speeding fine notifcation under insurance 'disclosure' terms. Check your documents.

[graham7773]

I don't know what the big deal is with speed fines. Don't speed, no fines! A bit simplistic but it works. Keep speed where it belongs, race tracks, drags etc! I smile when I hear people whinging about being fined for speeding. They have no respect for other road users nor for themselves. And only hundreds being killed each year!!! I wonder if their attitude would change if their wife, g/f, husband, b/f, kids, gran or pop were in those death statistics

[tranquilized]

Originally Posted by graham7773

I don't know what the big deal is with speed fines. Don't speed, no fines! A bit simplistic but it works. Keep speed where it belongs, race tracks, drags etc! I smile when I hear people whinging about being fined for speeding. They have no respect for other road users nor for themselves. And only hundreds being killed each year!!! I wonder if their attitude would change if their wife, g/f, husband, b/f, kids, gran or pop were in those death statistics

Your ignorance is astounding. "Dont speed, no fines" No doubt, this is true, but ignores the bigger picture. As I've said before, if every driver stopped speeding tomorrow, and not another fine was issued, the road toll wouldn't drop, it would probably go up.

Nothing is being done to reduce the road toll in this country. The fact is the governments need death on the roads to justify the cameras and to continue the infulx of revenue. Those hundreds being killed each year arn't being killed because of speeding motorists, they're being killed so our governments can make money.

If my wife/gf/husband/bg/kids/gran/pop was in those death statistics my attitude against speed cameras would only be stengthend, and I suspect the same with those behind the site.

ps: I haven't been fined for speeding for over 6 years

[Green X]

Originally Posted by graham7773

I don't know what the big deal is with speed fines. Don't speed, no fines! A bit simplistic but it works. Keep speed where it belongs, race tracks, drags etc! I smile when I hear people whinging about being fined for speeding. They have no respect for other road users nor for themselves. And only hundreds being killed each year!!! I wonder if their attitude would change if their wife, g/f, husband, b/f, kids, gran or pop were in those death statistics

All around Australia, speed cameras are on the rise, and speed limits are being lowered........ Funnily enough the road toll isn't changing. The NT introduced speed limits and speed cameras under the same "Speed kills" propaganda and the road toll went up, then all of a sudden alcohol, fatigue and unroadworthy cars became the main cause........ Oh wait a minute that was always the problem!!!!

the guy 10k's over the limit isn't the problem. it's the space cadet who's not focusing on the road or the nitwit 10km under the speed limit that is.

There will always be deaths on the roads end of story.

[Mr Hardware]

sounds like utter BS to me

[T3man]

Correct - the govts have a "vested" interest in the road toll increasing. They can then simply cry "speed kills" and graham7773 and his friends will applaud them and vote for them and not even question what proactive policies the govt will ever put in place to reduce death on roads eg driver training in schools. They are happy for instance to teach even primary school children their "rights" if a parent slaps them; and they actively encourage high school girls as young as 14 to leave home and go on a "pension" - the more people dependent on the govt the more votes they seem able to count. But there is nothing in place (that is working) to help any of our children preserve their lives when they get behind the wheel.

[mik]

its probably not fair to say camera`s do nothing (perhaps very little would be closer to the mark) except to have drivers paying more attention to the speedo for fear of floating a few k`s over the speed limit and less to the road conditions , but to the career tear ***, it probably will make no difference to these types, they will just push it hard until they come to grief or someone else does, in area`s without camera`s and most of the time a police presence.

[graham7773]

I dunno, I try to sit within 5-10k of the speed limit and cannot drive anywhere without some idiot going past me like I am parked. If I must have a smash, I would much rather it be at or near the speed limit with brakes full on than 20 or 30k over (or more) there is a formula which I am sure someone on here knows that deals with momentum and inertia which shows that damage increases exponentially as speed increases. The faster you go, the more damage you will inflict. I cannot believe that there are people who defend the type of driving that ignores speed limits

[Auslandau]

Originally Posted by graham7773

I dunno, I try to sit within 5-10k of the speed limit and cannot drive anywhere without some idiot going past me like I am parked. If I must have a smash, I would much rather it be at or near the speed limit with brakes full on than 20 or 30k over (or more) there is a formula which I am sure someone on here knows that deals with momentum and inertia which shows that damage increases exponentially as speed increases. The faster you go, the more damage you will inflict. I cannot believe that there are people who defend the type of driving that ignores speed limits

THere is a difference between someone doing 86 km/h on a freeway on a Sunday at 7.00 am and being booked for over the speed limit to someone doing 160 km/h on the same road ..... Get the space cadets going flat knackered and dangerous .... speed cameras do NOT do this. Watch the rear brake lights at Wellington east link under pass .... those doing 10 k's under and still breaking : when its 'busy' its a damn bloody hazard.

Of course everyone is passing you!!!!! You stick to your 70's in an 80's zone and be more of a hazard than those doing a few k's over .....

The formula you are referring to is so flawed its laughable. You state you drive 10k's under????? So its safer doing 80 in an 90 zone than 75 in a 70 zone?

As with every single speed camera thread they get closed ...... I am sure this will too but as always just have to have my say first



| [/url] |

[dom_105]

Originally Posted by auslandau

Watch the rear brake lights at Wellington east link under pass .... those doing 10 k's under and still breaking : when its 'busy' its a damn bloody hazard.

So be it, that bank of cameras are as crooked as the milk bottle toss at the Melbourne Show. I always make note to back it down to 90 going under that bridge.

You can blame every potential accident under that overpass on those cameras, and those cameras alone.

[Auslandau]

Originally Posted by dom_105

So be it, that bank of cameras are as crooked as the milk bottle toss at the Melbourne Show. I always make note to back it down to 90 going under that bridge.

You can blame every potential accident under that overpass on those cameras, and those cameras alone.

Yes and me too ... and I have been known to break rather heavily thinking I was speeding when in fact I was on or under the limit at the last minute.



| [/url] |

[gtxb67]

Originally Posted by graham7773

there is a formula which I am sure someone on here knows that deals with momentum and inertia which shows that damage increases exponentially as speed increases. The faster you go, the more damage you will inflict. I cannot believe that there are people who defend the type of driving that ignores speed limits

this formula is totally flawed. a driver doing 50 in a 60 zone who is watching the speedo or blissfully unaware of their surroundings is much more dangerous than an alert person doing 65 in that same zone. it is not how fast you are going that matters - it is when you hit the brake and turn the steering wheel as well as the speed you are doing

and those wipe off 5 adds . . . they say if you were going 5 k's less you would just hit her and give her a bruised leg. if you were going 5 k's quicker you would have been long past her before she stepped onto the road


i am not anti speed cameras - but they do have some flawed logic. they can help create driver's who are inattentive to their surroundings, road rage and maybe even help contribute to more stupid driving - more speed cameras = less police presence, we just have to make sure we do not speed past the cameras and we will be right. there are no police cars out there to catch us

[Green X]

Originally Posted by gtxb67

this formula is totally flawed. a driver doing 50 in a 60 zone who is watching the speedo or blissfully unaware of their surroundings is much more dangerous than an alert person doing 65 in that same zone. it is not how fast you are going that matters - it is when you hit the brake and turn the steering wheel as well as the speed you are doing

and those wipe off 5 adds . . . they say if you were going 5 k's less you would just hit her and give her a bruised leg. if you were going 5 k's quicker you would have been long past her before she stepped onto the road


i am not anti speed cameras - but they do have some flawed logic. they can help create driver's who are inattentive to their surroundings, road rage and maybe even help contribute to more stupid driving - more speed cameras = less police presence, we just have to make sure we do not speed past the cameras and we will be right. there are no police cars out there to catch us

also if it was a EA falcon on 15's sporting retreads Vs a BF GT with 19's SP9000's and 6/4 Piston brakes my money is on the GT stopping quicker from 80km/h than the EA at 50km/h.

[Matty4]

I am also a member and have been for a couple of years now.
If nothing else, there is some very valuable advice contained within that sheds a great deal of light on the whole process of fighting a ticket in court if you believe that you weren't speeding.

How many times do we continually hear about these "safety cameras" being faulty?
We even had several of them turned off by the Vic Gummint because they were incorrectly calibrated and issuing fines that plainly couldn't have happened.

Education about your rights when it comes to them is priceless.
Until people stand up as a whole and demand "proper" safety measures on our roads and stop throwing their hands up in the air when they get a fine for 4km/h over saying "it's all to hard to fight it", then it will continue unabated

[Mickxr8]

my 2c. less cameras more cop cars actually ON the road should = safer roads ?. a camera doesnt know if your driving like a "tool", drunk or on drugs etc.

[China]

The other point is the speed cameras are not accurate, so the authority issuing the infringement is doing so under false pretences, same rule as your local friut shop has to have their scales checked and certified, why should speed camera's be any different

[LTDHO]

Originally Posted by mickxr8

my 2c. less cameras more cop cars actually ON the road should = safer roads ?. a camera doesnt know if your driving like a "tool", drunk or on drugs etc.

Someone buy this man a beer.

Best post I have read in a long time!

[kyro_02]

people braking before speed cameras = dangerous (ie; 100kph zone, brakes on down to 90kph) would be more dangerous then say.... someone doing 110kph and not constantly watching their speedo..

much safer to be paying attention to the surroundings...

I myself have a habit to brake to 10 under, passing a camera... because once you get a fine it's going to be hard to fight it, because the government is ALWAYS right.... what a joke.

Oh, wait, I bet the cameras can't pick me up for speeding once i pass the cameras... or before the cameras....

I agree with red light cameras ( to an extent) -- only down side is, you're watching the camera & waiting for the lights to change, can be a bit hairy. But they have speed & red light cameras all around vic since recently.. no you have to watch camera/traffic lights/speedo

[VSSII]

Seriously..

[jonk]

Why is it every speeding thread to do with camera's etc, someone has to say "Stick within the speed limit"

Is it ever realised that people get caught for sticking to the limit, and still get fined.

ASF makes you understand the difference between cops, and traffic police. Traffic cops are drones.

[500SEC]

Originally Posted by jonk

Why is it every speeding thread to do with camera's etc, someone has to say "Stick within the speed limit"

Is it ever realised that people get caught for sticking to the limit, and still get fined.

ASF makes you understand the difference between cops, and traffic police. Traffic cops are drones.

Agreed. Traffic cops are not your friend, and do not seem to care about eliminating poor driving behaviour (just revenue-earning speed traps).

[bingoTE50]

Well I have to say that the times I got pinged I knew I was speeding,so I did not contest the fines,my bad luck. Was I speeding dangerously , no ... 3 lane highway at 11.45 pm ,not a car within hundreds of meters . Revenue raising -definitely.
I know the police are frustrated as I am with the killing of our young people in particular,but fining people out of a license does not fix the underlying problem of lack of experience,driving to conditions,poor habits and the knowledge that advanced driving courses give you. A course like Ian Luffs in Sydney is a real eye opener to many people experienced and inexperienced. It is a car safety message focusing on anticipation,spacial awareness,peripheral vision,common sense,and ultimately car control. Everyone,young and old should do these courses ,I have done three now and you learn or re-skill every time. I know my son will do one once he has his P's.

[Phyber]

I hate having to check my speedo constantly while driving. It always takes half a second to really figure out what's going on in front of you when you look back up and that is a danger zone right there...can't sit 5 under though or you cause trouble in the traffic. I'll go 10 under lazily when I'm alone on the road, then notice and get back up to speed. It would be much nicer if there were police on the roads to bust those who are clearly driving dangerously instead of replacing them with cameras. I could then hover within 5 of the limit easily and be looking at the road much more.

Seeing people failing to indicate while moving across lanes, cutting people off and other general assorted ***-hattery is what makes me shake my head and wish I was an officer so I could actually do something about the poor driver I'm being distracted by.

>_<

/rant