Vic traffic police told to target low-level speeding offenders

[jpblue1000]

[QUOTE=irish2;5002218]Last time I checked they don't run your car on a dyno to check speedo accuracy at roadworthy time. Correctly operating also only needs to refer to the manufacturers tolerances at the time of production. Are you going to get a special speedo gear fabricated to fix something that was within manufacturing specs?

QUOTE]
Interesting
http://www.vacc.com.au/ConsumerInfo/...7/Default.aspx

JP

[Matty4]

Originally Posted by jpblue1000

Not picking on you mate just using what you said to illicit discussion.
What’s wrong with raising revenue?. Much of this topic is about the 'blatant' use of speeding fines as revenue raising. So! the authorities have found a palatable way of raising funds to fund the community activities. What’s the alternative. How does the community get what it wants from its authorities, roads, ports, communications, police, defence, schools, clean environments, social welfare, hospitals etc. This stuff does not come for free. So your options are pay fines for being caught breeching a law or raise taxes. The taxes you cannot avoid, no matter how careful you are on the accelerator, no matter how much you whinge. the speeding tax you can avoid.
Of course the other way is to leave taxes where they are, return speeding taxes to the good old days when you were happy to receive a fine and cut services to the community. But which ones will you do without, probably the one your neighbour wants, or his neighbour relies on. Not a popular direction, a very unpalatable solution to the community.
Or maybe an argument about preventing wasted government spending, wouldn’t need additional revenue if they spent wisely. Waste is common in government no matter how big, what persuasion and where, be thankful we have disguised first world corruption. The problem is the government decision makers are spending someone else’s money not their own, they have no real need to be efficient, in fact inefficient government spending can be a good thing as it spreads money back into the community. So irrespective of what government is in charge there is going to be what you consider waste, but again your neighbour may think its good spending and their neighbour may actually need it.

JP

I guess the biggest bugbear of mine (and many others it seems) is that every time these types of issues crop up the Chief Commissioner of VicPol and the Assistant Traffic Commissioner (or any other puppet available at the time) pops their head up on the telly and comes out and categorically states that this is NOT about revenue raising!!

If, as they state, that it's all about getting "dangerous" drivers to behave, isn't the greatest deterrent an instant loss of licence?

Imagine, 10km/h over the limit, no fine, but start walking for a month. What a deterrent!! But this doesn't provide funds for GovCo. They need you to stay on the road and continue to speed and pay your fines.

[Matty4]

Originally Posted by zilo

TOG are the poor bastards who have no future I the police force, just sit in the car all day, no promotion prospects.

And have to keep pulling more and more drivers over every year to make budgets.

It's a sick system.

They aren't called "Jury F*&%ers" by other squads in the force for no reason either..

[jpblue1000]

Originally Posted by Matty4

I guess the biggest bugbear of mine (and many others it seems) is that every time these types of issues crop up the Chief Commissioner of VicPol and the Assistant Traffic Commissioner (or any other puppet available at the time) pops their head up on the telly and comes out and categorically states that this is NOT about revenue raising!!

Becuase its a more palatable story than we cant afford nurses/teachers, soldiers/taxcuts so your taxes have to go up!

JP

[MercuryT]

Obvious just revenue-raising 101. Has nothing to do with safety, never has been.

Tassie police seem cruisier on speeding than other states though in my experience. In Vic and NSW they seem to want to catch you for anything and everything.

ps: For example, I've only been pulled over twice in last few years (for excessive noise), then when policeman finds a guy in a suit who is polite to them, both times has ended up having a laugh about it and left within a minute! Not sure this would happen in other states, it may do though and I might be wrong for sure.

[MITCHAY]

If the majority of Victorians are like the ones I see around here it would be pretty hard to get done for 1km/h when they are already doing 10-20km/h under it :

[Elks]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

Ah well you all know who to vote this upcoming election then don't you?

No. I truly don't anymore. Let's looks at the choices.

Fringe dwellers with single and often extreme agendas, Right wing lunatics in the pocket of big business or the Liberals. ......

Three poor choices.

[Bill M]

Originally Posted by xxx000

1. not if people don't comply

2. it's maths

did you lot complain in the same manner using the same 'logic' on the intro of RBT? The same arguments put forward here could be said about RBT but we now agree it's intro was worthwhile, what's different about speeding?

Road Policing Command Assistant Commissioner Robert Hill said it was time to make travelling only a couple of kilometres above the speed limit as socially unacceptable as drink driving.

A couple of kilometers is two, his words. This is a completely different scenario as there are many variables affecting speed at 62 km.

Comparing the two is simplistic.

[Bill M]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

Ah well you all know who to vote this upcoming election then don't you?

On the face of it yes, that would be an alternative if your vote was solely based on this issue. Sadly I do not believe it will make a difference.
Remember the current govt was saying this when in opposition...

http://www.themotorreport.com.au/504...ate-opposition

http://www.thecourier.com.au/story/5...-fine-bonanza/

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politi...907-1jxp2.html

There is more if members care to search. Looks like we're screwed.

[SB076]

Originally Posted by jpblue1000

I’m not having a go mate, but using your post as to illustrate a point, and not posting because I disagree.
If you really feel your opinion is fact and there are greater evil than speeding prove it. There is an industry built up around proving speed kills then there is the opportunity to prove otherwise.
And the great thing about our country, as I mentioned below is we are actually free to protest, to form an argument and put it to the authorities without the fear of persecution, punishment, imprisonment or worse. yet the vast majority sit by mumbling discontent.
If you think the speed kills campaign has eroded your rights open your (collective) eyes and look at the silent social campaign that has taken more of your rights than you will ever know, look at the machine you live in!
Again I make a call to action...If you don't like it act against it, gather together your 'majority' and demand change. Use the freedoms so hard fought for by previous generations, don't stand for it anymore.
JP

No you are not having a go at all a forum is a great place to discuss topics like this and its good to read different points of view.

I am not against revenue raising, the country needs it and even though i would prefer to pay no taxs etc I acknowledge that they are necessary. What i would prefer is government to simply call it as it is. Stop the nonsense that it is all about safety.

In my area i have a few speed cameras both mobile and fixed, i alsohave a few black spots that are sign posted and have known fatalaties. I find it interrsting that none of these cameras ("safety devices") are in the black spots. They are all in areas where there is plenty of traffic and no doubt they generate a good return $$.

[Auslandau]

Originally Posted by jpblue1000

Becuase its a more palatable story than we cant afford nurses/teachers, soldiers/taxcuts so your taxes have to go up!

JP

Taxes should not be raised by police from people going about their business and targeted as a common criminal. To even suggest that it is OK to collect taxes this way in the guise of safety and that it should be accepted is bordering on ludicrous. While you can have this opinion, my opinion is that by doing this, in an underhanded manner. is itself criminal. It made more sad because it is supported by people who believe they are better drivers than the average, which is false. Those that haven't contributed have done so through luck, not skill or being a better driver. They are the only the supporters they have. The supporters are in total denial of their own abilities. The absolute majority of people should not be made like a criminal just to collect tax.


To say that it is now a necessity for revenue is an admission that it is a tax on all motorists. So they are totally lying on the reasons for the low tolerance level? It is not about saving lives?

It is very hard to determine an accident. Some poor unsuspecting hits a tree on the Hume. He was travelling at 106kmph. It was reported that at the time he passed a car doing 95 so he must have been. Not the fact that a kangaroo decided to make an appearance, he swerved, hit the tree, kangaroo left the scene never to be seen. The report determined that speed was a factor. The papers report that Speed was the contributing factor. People decide that he was a hoon and he was drag racing. There is outrage .......

The fact that if he was doing 99, same kangaroo, same scenario, same outcome ........ ?

If they were serious about the road toll, there would be more emphasis on the things that do not rake in the millions (billions) The Speed Industry wouldn't be so strong. If they cannot control their incomes by other means and not collect so underhandedly, we wouldn't be having this conversation (again and again)

It is very wrong and inappropriate to say that extreme tolerances are required because we need to educate the children and keep nurses in jobs. They already have their higher than any other country taxes on ciggies, alcohol and every other evil legal products in the guise of keeping us alive.

[Ben73]

I know someone who has had their licence for 2237 days and have driven for probably 2230 of those days.
Their speedo has shown more than 1km/h over the limit probably well over 40,000 individual times since they got their licence. They still have not received a single fine.

I thought they would be dead now since every time they get in a car they're pretty much certain to break the speed limit by a few km/h.
But that have only crashed once, and that was at about 10km/h not paying attention.

But yeah, 1km/h is definitely deadly. 1Km/h slower and you will be fine.

[XW-BAXR6T]

So if i go driving at a 40 km h zone and i go to 41 km h i become a rocket and im a danger to the public? and i get fined?

Absurd....Highway robbery.

[Trump]

We're the idiots for paying these modern day robber barons. Can you imagine if everyone that received a penalty notice for speeding did not pay, the entire judicial system would collapse within a week.

[MercurySilver]

its about time they fined people for doing ten kms under the bloody speed limit making traffic bank up behind them, causing people to get angry and then possibly do something stupid
much more chance of having an accident then doing 4kmh over the bloody limit

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Elks

No. I truly don't anymore. Let's looks at the choices.

Fringe dwellers with single and often extreme agendas, Right wing lunatics in the pocket of big business or the Liberals. ......

Three poor choices.

Theres about eleventy million little parties, give one of them a shot?

[69XWGT]

Originally Posted by jpblue1000

I’m not having a go mate, but using your post as to illustrate a point, and not posting because I disagree.
If you really feel your opinion is fact and there are greater evil than speeding prove it. There is an industry built up around proving speed kills then there is the opportunity to prove otherwise.
And the great thing about our country, as I mentioned below is we are actually free to protest, to form an argument and put it to the authorities without the fear of persecution, punishment, imprisonment or worse. yet the vast majority sit by mumbling discontent.
If you think the speed kills campaign has eroded your rights open your (collective) eyes and look at the silent social campaign that has taken more of your rights than you will ever know, look at the machine you live in!
Again I make a call to action...If you don't like it act against it, gather together your 'majority' and demand change. Use the freedoms so hard fought for by previous generations, don't stand for it anymore.
JP

I'd much rather be in the proximity of someone doing 5 or 10 kilometres over the speed limit and totally aware of their surroundings than some young clown texting on his mobile phone or what I see nearly everyday driving between Brisbane and the Gold Coast on the M1 and that is a bunch of kids all playing around in a car on the way to the coast.

Regardless of how much spin you try to put on it, it is blatant revenue raising and it is not OK for senior Police officers to become political puppets for a bunch of dead **** politicians who waste billions of our dollars.

In fact the best thing that could happen to Australia is the abolishment of state governments.
We would be billions better off and in QLD we wouldn't have to put with extreme right idealism and un-educated farmers

[malazn mafia]

Well I guess the bright side about Victoria is being able to register a car for about half-price what it costs in NSW or QLD. Let's hope the revenue raising teams in Prickroads don't get any ideas.

[Silver Ghia]

There is one policeman who is honest. An article in todays Herald-Sun:

Veteran police officer fears backlash over speed crackdown

A VETERAN police officer has broken ranks to say a tough new speed policy will turn people against the force.

Sergeant Phil Wild, who has been with Victoria Police for 42 years, said the push to book people for low-level speeding offences was a bad move.

“The consequences of this flawed and unfair policy will be felt by the mostly law-abiding members of the motoring public, the mums and dads who are struggling to make ends meet,” he said.

“My junior members, the constables and senior constables at the front line of policing will also suffer when the respect and confidence of the public dries up.”

He said there was near-unanimous community opposition to the policy and he could not argue with widespread opinion that it was about revenue raising.

Sgt Wild said vehicle speedometers were not calibrated to be 100 per cent accurate and a driver drifting over the limit by a few kilometres an hour did not represent a significant safety threat.

“Policing in this way would have the effect of turning the public away from the police and the ramifications of that would be horrendous for all,” he said.

“I took an oath to serve the people of Victoria. Nowhere in that oath did it say that I had the right to persecute the public or to encourage my junior members to do so.”

Sgt Wild said he accepted that he ran the risk of “consequences” for going public.

Victoria Police recently announced officers had been instructed to start fining more motorists for low-level speeding offences.

Assistant Commissioner Robert Hill said at the time that 15 deaths and 300 injuries could be prevented each year if drivers cut their average speed by 1km/h.

Mr Hill wanted to make low-level speeding as socially unacceptable as drink-driving.

“Research indicates that 20 per cent of our fatalities *involve low level speeding,” he said.

He said police officers had discretion about when to apply the law but denied they had been instructed to fine drivers going 1 or 2km/h over the limit.

“A commonsense approach has always been encouraged,” he said.

“While we are disappointed at the comments made by the serving police officer, Victoria Police is committed to improving the safety of our roads for all members of the community.”

And here is the letter written by him:

There is an examination that all Victorian Police members must pass.

It is not an exam to gain entry to the Force or to obtain a promotion.

We do not simply sit the examination, pass it and move on.

We must pass this examination on most days of our careers and often several times a day.

The examination is known as the S.E.L.F. test, and it works like this …

Before taking action or making a decision to take an action, we must ask ourselves the following (in brief):

S — Scrutiny Will my decision withstand public scrutiny by the community?

E — Ethical Is my decision ethical?

L — Lawful Is my decision lawful?

F — Fair Is my decision fair on the community, my colleagues and others?

If the answer to any one of these questions is “no”, then I am required to reconsider my decision and take a different course.

My superiors tell me I must, the organisational values of the force tell me I must, my own conscience tells me I must.

On the 20th of January this year, Road Policing Command forwarded an instruction to members to the effect that we (Victoria Police) are to commence writing penalty notices for low-level speeding offences.

The instruction goes on to say that all speed limits should be strictly enforced (my emphasis).

This means that the motoring public can now expect to receive a penalty notice for travelling at perhaps 1, 2, or 3km/h above the limit (The ‘wipe off five’ ads having conditioned us accordingly).

In delivering this instruction, I am of the view that certain of our leaders have failed the S.E.L.F test themselves — not just on one or two of the points, but on all four!

(a) The instruction does not withstand public scrutiny:

I refer to pg40 of the Herald Sun of the 24th January where 18 of the 20 letters to the editor on that date provide totally negative feedback (the remaining two were unrelated). Radio talkback callers have been almost unanimous in their condemnation of the policy.

(b) The instruction is not ethical:

The reasons given for the implementation of this program are in my view, demonstrably wrong. Some of the conclusions reached as a result of “research” are questionable and cannot be properly measured.

For example, it is claimed that if every driver on our roads were to lower their average speed by 1km/h, 15 lives would be saved every year.

If the reasons given are wrong, then there must be another reason. The greater portion of the community appear to believe that the reason is revenue raising and I cannot disagree with that.For a government department such as Victoria Police to be used in such a way is unethical.

(c) The instruction is of questionable legality:

Much of our legislation, particularly the less serious summary offences were never intended to be policed to an absolute degree or at all times. There are many instances where police “turn a blind eye” to offences occurring in our immediate presence because of their trivial nature or because the circumstances in which they occur make rigid policing inappropriate.

If this were not the case we would create a huge backlog in the courts as the majority of people “booked” would opt to take the matter before a magistrate who would, in most if not all cases, dismiss the charges as “trifling”.

Policing in this way would have the effect of turning the public away from the police and the ramifications of that would be horrendous for all.

(d) The instruction is unfair:

Vehicle speedometers, even in brand-new vehicles, are not calibrated to be 100 per cent accurate. There have also been instances where speed measuring devices used by enforcement agencies have been shown to be inaccurate. Any driver, even the most prudent, can find his vehicle speed to have increased without his being aware of it simply by virtue of him coming to a slight dip in the road.

He will correct his speed immediately upon becoming aware of the fact but may well have been photographed or clocked in that brief moment. That small increase in speed on a straight stretch of road over such a short period does not represent any significant threat to road safety. That, in my view is an irrefutable fact.

When I joined Victoria Police in 1972 I took an oath to serve the people of Victoria. Nowhere in that oath did it say that I had the right to persecute the public or to encourage my junior members to do so.

I have written to Road Policing Command and expressed my concerns to them. In a series of emails and a face-to-face meeting with the Assistant Commissioner, I have outlined my views on the likely consequences of their policy and urged them to reconsider their position.

I have also asked for their advice on what I can do about this matter. They have offered no advice other than to try to convince me that their actions are appropriate.

On January 29th I wrote, and hand delivered, to the Office of the Chief Commissioner (Ken Lay) a detailed letter in regard to this issue.

I asked that he advise me as to what avenues are open to me, as I do not wish to retire at some time in the future knowing that I could have done something further to ward off a lessening of the community’s respect and confidence in its police.

The Chief Commissioner did not reply.

The consequences of this flawed and unfair policy will be felt by the mostly law-abiding members of the motoring public, the mums and dads who are struggling to make ends meet whilst feeding and educating their children and wondering whether they will still have a job when their employment contract expires in the next few months.

They are not, however, the only ones who will suffer. My junior members, the constables and senior constables at the frontline of policing will also suffer when the respect and confidence of the public dries up.

As Chief Commissioner Lay has stated often enough, we (the police) need to have the public “on side”.

Otherwise, a very difficult job will perhaps become nigh on impossible.

There is no doubt that compliance with this instruction will have the affect of swelling the government coffers and that in turn may enhance the promotional prospects of the programs authors and/or those who champion it.

The long-term effects however will be sorely felt by the general public and our members alike.

The Victoria Police manual, under the section covering professional standards and conduct, lists the organisational values of the Force. Under the subheading ‘Integrity’ the manual advises us that we are, among other things:

(i) required to act with honesty, respecting the right of fair process for all;

(ii) demonstrate moral strength and courage; and,

(iii) behave with honour and impartiality.

In the absence of any meaningful instruction or advice from the hierarchy of my department, I see no other avenue open to me but to voice my concerns via this public forum.

Phil Wild, Sergeant 17312

He is correct on all accounts.

[new2ford]

Good on him.

In the time-honoured public service tradition they will of course turn on him instead of addressing the actual issue.

It would be nice if they could have a discussion with the Czech Republic police head who recently said that his officers don't have a problem with motorists exceeding the 130 km/h motorway speed limit by up to 20 km/h (150 km/h) unless they were driving dangerously. And I always thought earth was one planet.

[Franco Cozzo]

Everyone hates them already, so there won't be much change.

[noflac52]

Sgt Wilks is a legend but I'm afraid he will pay a big price for this!

[Silver Ghia]

Originally Posted by noflac52

Sgt Wilks is a legend but I'm afraid he will pay a big price for this!

Judging by the massive support that Sgt. Wild is getting in that newspaper in the comments section (nearly 100% of the comments support him), there would probably be a big public backlash if the Commissioners and govt do take action against him.

The credibility of the senior police and government for this whole stupid campaign is in tatters, and it will be interesting to see how they worm out of this situation. At least Sgt Wild is of the retirement age so it shouldn't affect his career much if they do sack him.

[Bossxr8]

Obviously he is at retirement age, so he would have done it knowing he had that option if the flack was bad enough. But he is exactly right.

But i'm sure the government will peddle the saving lives crap, in the protection of keeping the revenue raising filling the state coffers.

[tweeked]

Originally Posted by jpblue1000

Irrespective of the complexity of the issue the onus is on the driver to ensure they have a roadworthy vehicle at all times when on the national highways. A correctly operating spedometer is a roadworthy item and as such an erroroneous metering device should be no defence against a speeding fine.

JP

I drive a hire car about 25 times a year for work

So you are seriously saying I should be taking each one in to be tested?

[tweeked]

Originally Posted by xxx000

1. not if people don't comply

2. it's maths

did you lot complain in the same manner using the same 'logic' on the intro of RBT? The same arguments put forward here could be said about RBT but we now agree it's intro was worthwhile, what's different about speeding?

I really hope that you are not in charge of enforcing these laws.

Here is the difference - the RBT has a reasonable allowance for full license holders before prosecution - .05

1-2 kms is not reasonable. It is moronic.

[cheap]

Proposed vision for safe automotive transportation , GOVCO see's this as a winner too, refreshing the 1878 red flag act.

[castellan]

Our idiot QLD gov has been told to target low-level speeding as well and lowered the margin, they have been a suckess with generating money.

Just remember every K over is a killer, it's true you know, yes it is

One K over ? thank you for the fine you f#@!& #^*! no wonder the poor cops are looked down on today. it's just stupid and wrong for the law to have to deal with people like that. but hey that's the robot mentality of today's more evolved Politically Correct drongo drop kicks we have running around with all their backward letter of the Law foolish pharisee type of rubbish and trying to brainwash all of us with the filth..

[joolz]

TOG's will soon have to travel in pairs just to provide back up when there is an assult against the officer for having to throw the book at a driver doing 1km/h over the limit.. This is just one of the reasons why my cousin cant wait to retire from the force...

[lucas2]

Good on him! All the claims by Mr Hill about speed and deaths are largely unsubstantiated, I still haven't seen any studies determining causation yet.