Author Topic: Speed camera interview.  (Read 387 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

R3SPCT

  • NZPPCC Paid Member
  • Part of the furniture
  • *****
  • Posts: 5029
Speed camera interview.
« on: 19 March, 2012, 03:35:43 PM »



punkoutnz

  • Cool Sunroof Bro
  • Unpaid Subs Members
  • Part of the furniture
  • *
  • Posts: 7024
  • Gender: Male
  • Did you just spill my drink??
Re: Speed camera interview.
« Reply #1 on: 19 March, 2012, 04:12:18 PM »
Yeah saw that this morning. And it actually stands up to international findings, particularly our own here in good old NZ.

chch_p10

  • Ham
  • Unpaid Subs Members
  • Post Whore
  • *
  • Posts: 1887
  • Gender: Male
  • i neither endorse nor condone illegal activities
Re: Speed camera interview.
« Reply #2 on: 19 March, 2012, 04:48:48 PM »
revenue gathering. they make good points

Calso

  • Guest
Re: Speed camera interview.
« Reply #3 on: 20 March, 2012, 07:49:25 PM »
Very interesting. I agree with the statment, it's not speed that kills, it's distractions that kill.

Tweak

  • Unpaid Subs Members
  • Forum Lurker
  • *
  • Posts: 476
  • Gender: Male
  • P11 SR20DE Sedan
Re: Speed camera interview.
« Reply #4 on: 20 March, 2012, 11:19:02 PM »
Totally.  Nothing is more distracting than trying to make sure you are bang on or below the speed limit, especially in 50 or 80 zones.

Sausager

  • Unpaid Subs Members
  • Forum Lurker
  • *
  • Posts: 422
  • Gender: Male
Re: Speed camera interview.
« Reply #5 on: 21 March, 2012, 11:15:15 AM »
Totally.  Nothing is more distracting than trying to make sure you are bang on or below the speed limit, especially in 50 or 80 zones.

+1

I don't believe 53, 87 or 104 km/h is what kills people.  I think it's more people doing 140+ in a Type R tin can.

NARacer

  • Guest
Re: Speed camera interview.
« Reply #6 on: 21 March, 2012, 01:37:55 PM »
If you had an island with a population that was soley made up of Michael Schumacher(s) then I would suggest that perhaps the crash rates would be less (depending on if a certain Villeneuve was to visit said island).

Perhaps we can focus on some driver training so that people are able to actually
1. Not get into tricky situations as they are aware about what is happening around them
2. Have the skills to get out of a situation if required.

Just my 2c though...

Sausager

  • Unpaid Subs Members
  • Forum Lurker
  • *
  • Posts: 422
  • Gender: Male
Re: Speed camera interview.
« Reply #7 on: 21 March, 2012, 02:03:11 PM »


Perhaps we can focus on some driver training so that people are able to actually
1. Not get into tricky situations as they are aware about what is happening around them
2. Have the skills to get out of a situation if required.


I've heard they do that in Switzerland - ie how to get out of powerslides, etc

Morcs

  • Guest
Re: Speed camera interview.
« Reply #8 on: 21 March, 2012, 03:30:48 PM »
Or stick everyone on motorcycles. you learn much quicker how to read your surroundings and be aware of them at all times.

punkoutnz

  • Cool Sunroof Bro
  • Unpaid Subs Members
  • Part of the furniture
  • *
  • Posts: 7024
  • Gender: Male
  • Did you just spill my drink??
Re: Speed camera interview.
« Reply #9 on: 21 March, 2012, 03:42:46 PM »
All the advertising campaigns focus on speed and alcohol. They need some helpful, short hand advice. Ie: "remember to brake BEFORE the corner", put that sign just coming into dome valley. Or "speed up before you pull out to pass" in random places in country roads. And a sign "holding up traffic? Let them pass here..." At the beginning of a passing lane. I reckon those 3 key factors will save far more lives than "if you go 105kph you will die"

morrisman1

  • NZPPCC Paid Member
  • Post Whore
  • *****
  • Posts: 1786
Re: Speed camera interview.
« Reply #10 on: 21 March, 2012, 10:50:14 PM »
If only we could convince them punkoutnz, I fully agree with you. We should fix stupid driving too. Fixing stupid driving may also help us realise that speeding is not the main factor in crashes

In that video I particularly like the statement "Theres nothing magical about the numbers..." That couldn't be more correct! 50/70/80/100 are just all convenient numbers for people to remember, nothing more nothing less. They probably chose them because there really is no way of calculating a safe speed for every vehicle using the road. Traveling with the flow of traffic not only reduces obstacles on the road but it also reduces stress for all drivers, both in the oddball car and the other cars. I find it quite stressful to sit behind a car which doesn't go with the flow because I don't like when my journey doesn't flow, I actually couldn't care much if I was doing 90 or 110, as long as it is flowing then Im happy. For the people who want to pass, they need to take risk to do so. Some manage that risk well and some are outright idiots as we all have observed from time to time. The person getting passed may become flustered by people passing them and under 'pressure' could make a mistake or lose their confidence and slow down further.

Patrol cars arent so bad for it: if everyone is doing 110km/h then chances are nobody will get a ticket but the speed cameras dont have that discression. When that convoy of nicely flowing traffic goes past the camera, it goes ching ching ching and the government gets a warm fuzzy feeling inside. To add to the insult, anyone who has trained an animal will know that to modify behaviour the consequences need to be applied as soon as possible. You can't growl at your dog 2 weeks after it shat in the laundry because it wont be effective. Well humans are animals too, we have the same needs for behaviour modification. If you receive a ticket from a camera in the mail, chances are you will say "oh I don't even remember being there let alone speeding" and hence the 'safety' benefit of the ticket is null and void. Patrol cars issue the consequence immediately and hence will be more effective, especially with demerits being stuck to the tickets.

This is my rant over, it is just my opinion on speed cameras and why I don't agree with their use. For the record I have never received a ticket from a speed camera but have had a couple minor tickets from patrol cars for being 13 km/h over the limit each time. I must say the patrol car tickets have modified my behaviour too, I don't push more than about 105 when I am on the main highways. Back roads are a bit different but if I am travelling on a main road then I keep it sensible now because you never know when a cops gunna pop over the hill. I cant justify spending $600 on a radar detector to burn more gas!

chch_p10

  • Ham
  • Unpaid Subs Members
  • Post Whore
  • *
  • Posts: 1887
  • Gender: Male
  • i neither endorse nor condone illegal activities
Re: Speed camera interview.
« Reply #11 on: 21 March, 2012, 10:51:32 PM »
All the advertising campaigns focus on speed and alcohol. They need some helpful, short hand advice. Ie: "remember to brake BEFORE the corner", put that sign just coming into dome valley. Or "speed up before you pull out to pass" in random places in country roads. And a sign "holding up traffic? Let them pass here..." At the beginning of a passing lane. I reckon those 3 key factors will save far more lives than "if you go 105kph you will die"

they already have those signs lol