NSW police to get expanded powers

[Devil CV8]

The NSW police powers to suspend your drivers license on the spot is set to be expanded to other traffic offences, one of which is exceed the speed limit by 45km/h.
Now
Booked for exceed speed limit by >45km/h. RTA suspend license when found guilty, either by paying fine or going to court.

Soon
Booked for exceed speed limit by >45km/h. Cop suspends license on the spot, which means you already are being punished even if you succeed in court action.

[Fabio's CV8]

How can you not be guilty of doing >45 over the limit? :confused:

[markone2]

The NSW police powers to suspend your drivers license on the spot is set to be expanded to other traffic offences, one of which is exceed the speed limit by 45km/h.
Now
Booked for exceed speed limit by >45km/h. RTA suspend license when found guilty, either by paying fine or going to court.

Soon
Booked for exceed speed limit by >45km/h. Cop suspends license on the spot, which means you already are being punished even if you succeed in court action.


:confused: Guilty until you prove otherwise.....odd take on the law we have in relation to speeding violations compared with all other alleged offences against the law..but I guess the
revenue rakers must be afforded all the protection the Pollies can afford , should some upstart public citizen question the alleged offence of endangering public property and life by travelling 3kph over the posted limit set by same self said pollie.

[mr black]

How can you not be guilty of doing >45 over the limit? :confused:

Radars and Lidars have been proven unreliable time and time again even in the most skilled of hands...and most c0ckroaches I've met don't seem to be skilled at all.

[Devil CV8]

How can you not be guilty of doing >45 over the limit? :confused:
Keep in mind,,, you are not guilty until you admit guilt by paying the fine or being found guilty in court. There have been a number of successful defences against speeding charges before, although under these expanded powers you will have no license, probably lost job all before getting the chance to defend yourself in court........

[Fabio's CV8]

Radars and Lidars have been proven unreliable time and time again even in the most skilled of hands...and most c0ckroaches I've met don't seem to be skilled at all.

If it is proven to be unreliable then it shouldn't be the drivers fault then? I do see your point though.

[flappist]

Isn't there a huge lawsuit cranking up in VIC over a lot of people who lost licence and suffered hardship and then the cameras were shown to be wrong.

Lawyers love this stuff.

[nthnbeachesguy]

F**K F**K F**K

I am so sick of this crap. Do they even realise the power they have to wreck sombodies life completely with this type of law especially when the equipment they use to enforce said law have been proven to faulty on numerous occasions. I lose my licence, i have no job.

Is it better to have somebody ngainfully employed or on the dole whilst they search for something to earn a crust doing. Its beyond a joke this stuff, im over it.

[Devil CV8]

F**K F**K F**K

I am so sick of this crap. Do they even realise the power they have to wreck sombodies life completely with this type of law especially when the equipment they use to enforce said law have been proven to faulty on numerous occasions. I lose my licence, i have no job.
exactly.. the company I work for recently let an employee go after they lost their license for dui (mind you, it was in the company vehicle) and a license is a requirement of the job. No license = probably no job.
It sucks that the cop has the ability to screw your life over even before a magistrate gets the chance to...

[racketsports]

It sucks that the cop has the ability to screw your life over even before a magistrate gets the chance to...

I think if your doing 45kph++++ over the posted limit then you've already made that decision yourself. Getting caught is bad luck, having an accident is worse, killing someone.......... :(

There is a time and place for people to do such speeds, it's called a race track, or some might call it the Northern Territory. I put it in perspective by asking a simpe question. Would you want someone doing 45kph+ over the limit on the same streets that your wife and child(ren) travel on? You can be the best driver in the would and accidents will still happen. The basic principal is the slower your going the less danger there is. Anyway, time to get off my box now. :soap:

[markone2]

I think if your doing 45kph++++ over the posted limit then you've already made that decision yourself. Getting caught is bad luck, having an accident is worse, killing someone.......... :(

There is a time and place for people to do such speeds, it's called a race track, or some might call it the Northern Territory. I put it in perspective by asking a simpe question. Would you want someone doing 45kph+ over the limit on the same streets that your wife and child(ren) travel on? You can be the best driver in the would and accidents will still happen. The basic principal is the slower your going the less danger there is. Anyway, time to get off my box now. :soap:


Speed never killed anyone....it is the collision which does that. A person who drives a vehicle should be able to drive at any speed they and fellow motorists feel safe ,ie: NT and should have a vehicle as perfect mechanically as it can be made. bad steering
brakes, and tyres are more dangerous than speed ever was.A badly maintained vehicle is a menance but most drivers are unaware they are driving a death trap. What is the ratio of defect notices handed out to drivers compared to
speeding fines...SFA because it raises no revenue.

[racketsports]

If you were in an accident, surely you would want to be going as slowly as possible at the time of impact? Speed doesn't kill, your right but your chances of being killed or seriously injured drastically increase as your speed increases. Accidents are just that, but somethings cannot be avoided no matter what speed your travelling at, such as the old lady coming through a stop sign without stopping. Common sense dictates that you would want to be travelling at a slower speed if such an impact was inevitable? So ergo, the slower the speed the less chance of death and injury (not taking into consideration other factors)

[SSbaby]

racketsports,

I fail to agree with you. Yes, 45km/h, you've made a decision, but probably a conscious decision to avoid fatigue and drive on a relatively safe and usually lonely road that could be as safe as the mostly dual carriage way, Hume Hwy or even Calder Hwy. I can tell you that driving at 150km/h on the Hume would be a whole lot safer than doing the sign-posted limit of 100km/h on some sections of the Great Ocean Rd. In fact, doing 70km/h could prove fatal on the GOR!!! Guess where the speed cameras are located? You guessed it, on the safer roads where there's more traffic and theoretically a higher incidence of people infringing speed laws.

[markone2]

If you were in an accident, surely you would want to be going as slowly as possible at the time of impact? Speed doesn't kill, your right but your chances of being killed or seriously injured drastically increase as your speed increases. Accidents are just that, but somethings cannot be avoided no matter what speed your travelling at, such as the old lady coming through a stop sign without stopping. Common sense dictates that you would want to be travelling at a slower speed if such an impact was inevitable? So ergo, the slower the speed the less chance of death and injury (not taking into consideration other factors)

So in a perfect world we will hence forth drive beige Camry's speed limited to 25kph with a 6 monthly complusary safety check.

Have speed limits increased with the technology of today’s vehicles .?
Master’s Bridgestone and Dunlop no doubt would be mightily offended if it was suggested tyre technology had not greatly reduced braking distances on your average family sedan in the last 30 years or so.

[racketsports]

I'm not arguing the placement of speed camera and the fact that they are revenue raisers, that I agree with you. But speeding 45kph+ over the limit, be it the F3 freeway or a school zone is a bit over the top and surely a conscious decision. So if your willing to take that risk in those circumstances then you must understand the possible consequences of that decision. This now being, if your caught by the police then they can suspend your licence, it's not their fault that you chose to do that speed or break the law.

[SSbaby]

I'm not arguing the placement of speed camera and the fact that they are revenue raisers, that I agree with you. But speeding 45kph+ over the limit, be it the F3 freeway or a school zone is a bit over the top and surely a conscious decision. So if your willing to take that risk in those circumstances then you must understand the possible consequences of that decision. This now being, if your caught by the police then they can suspend your licence, it's not their fault that you chose to do that speed or break the law.

Yes, I'm always willing to take that risk, especially when you're trying to quickly overtake a slower vehicle on a 2-way road with traffic approaching from head on. Usually, if you attempt the same driving only 10km/h over the limit is potentially very, very dangerous. I know I'm not naive enough to overtake that way.

[racketsports]

Yes, I'm always willing to take that risk, especially when you're trying to quickly overtake a slower vehicle on a 2-way road with traffic approaching from head on. Usually, if you attempt the same driving only 10km/h over the limit is potentially very, very dangerous. I know I'm not naive enough to overtake that way.

If we're talking about very specific examples such as yours, then if you had to do over 10kph to overtake and there was on coming traffic then it wasn't safe and prudent to overtake in the first place. :rolleyes:

[SSbaby]

If we're talking about very specific examples such as yours, then if you had to do over 10kph to overtake and there was on coming traffic then it wasn't safe and prudent to overtake in the first place. :rolleyes:

I would argue that it's unsafe to be bunched up behind some slower drivers who frustratingly vary their speed and force you to brake every so often. That's dangerous in my book as it requires greater concentration... watching the traffic ahead, and watching your rear view mirrors incase the driver behind is about to ram into you or about to overtake you.

No need to roll your eyes at me. I'm providing you with real experiences. You however are being totally hypothetical, making blanket statements. :D

[glen III]

exactly.. the company I work for recently let an employee go after they lost their license for dui (mind you, it was in the company vehicle) and a license is a requirement of the job. No license = probably no job.
It sucks that the cop has the ability to screw your life over even before a magistrate gets the chance to...

Yep, that cop's discretion in issuing the DUI was really him just being heartless, wasn't it? My job requires my car, so I should be expempt from 45+ over the limit, DUI, shouldn't I? What drivel, even more than usual from you.


I fail to agree with you. Yes, 45km/h, you've made a decision, but probably a conscious decision to avoid fatigue and drive on a relatively safe and usually lonely road that could be as safe as the mostly dual carriage way, Hume Hwy or even Calder Hwy.

Make the decision, suffer the ramifications. You know it's the law, no use bleating about it when/if you get caught.


F**K F**K F**K

I am so sick of this crap. Do they even realise the power they have to wreck sombodies life completely with this type of law especially when the equipment they use to enforce said law have been proven to faulty on numerous occasions. I lose my licence, i have no job.

Is it better to have somebody ngainfully employed or on the dole whilst they search for something to earn a crust doing. Its beyond a joke this stuff, im over it.

Simple- don't drive 45km/h over the limit, don't drink and drive. It's simple, so why can't this be understood? And seeing as you get your information from that bastion of unbiased reporting, A Current Affair, how faulty is this equipment? We're talking about 45km/h over the limit, not 5, not 10. If you're on the highway doing 110, and you get pinged for 155+, do you really think the equipment is 40% out of correct? Wake up. Do the crime, do the time.

[SSbaby]

Glen III, from your avatar, I gather you're a cop :D.

Don't tell me you haven't driven 45+ km/h over the limit, chasing after some motorist who crept 3-10km/h over the limit. The difference is that you can get away with it whereas I legally can't. Is the pot calling the kettle black, here?

[markone2]

[QUOTE=glen III]

Make the decision, suffer the ramifications. You know it's the law, no use bleating about it when/if you get caught.



QUOTE]


So out with it :hmmm: . Do you support these draconian speed limits and the extensive use of speed camera’s set to catch the highest majority of unsuspecting motorist’s committing mostly inadvertent offences.?
Are you too a Lackey for the Bureaucrats?

[SchrgdVSV6]

Perhaps a reminder of the Western Ring Rd fiasco is in order? Or maybe get the police to make public the manual on how to operate a speed gun (and the consequences when its not done right).

I dont like the idea of guilty until proven innocent. Mistakes can be made with regards to the exact speed an individual is driving. Get it wrong and someone passing a fully loaded semi on a 110kph section will lose their licence, instead of copping a fine. No ifs, no buts. (Maybe we should judge speeding based on a % over the posted speed limit, rather than static 3-9, 10-15kph type figures). As for speeding 45kph over in a local 60kph zone (thats 75% more than the posted limit), there should be no reason to go anywhere near these speeds in such areas, and yes you must pay the price.

More police powers seem to be the norm, to the point where they dont even have to get off their asses, all they do is take your plate and you wait for the pleasant surprise in the mail.

[glen III]

Glen III, from your avatar, I gather you're a cop :D.

Don't tell me you haven't driven 45+ km/h over the limit, chasing after some motorist who crept 3-10km/h over the limit. The difference is that you can get away with it whereas I legally can't. Is the pot calling the kettle black, here?

Yes, but you don't have the warning devices (lightbar, sirens), same level of training, and the legal charter to do it. I think everyone thinks that urgo runs are all cops want to do, balls to the wall running is tons of fun, when it really isn't, it's fraught with sphincter-puckering moments. And everyone seems to think cops have no accountability, but they're responsible for the entire situation, ie themselves,any car they may be in pursuit of, and John Public who dawdles out in front of them. Hell hath no fury like police middle- and upper- management, either. Don't believe it? Ever seen IA cops run lidar on other cops to see that they aren't breaking the speed without a valid reason? It happens.

[SSbaby]

So you are driving the car at high speed in far potentially more dangerous conditions. Thus you have had the training to constantly drive at high speeds with regard to the prevailing conditions. The warning devices are not really that significant, IMHO. I have lights and foggies too! The main problem that I see on our roads are inattentive drivers not watching their mirrors and keeping left to allow vehicles such as yours to speed past.

YOU also assume that I have no training. With all due repect, I could be a more capable driver than your good self :D You also suggest that I deserve the maximum penalty thrown at me for driving at high speed. But your argument doesn't seem very logical though, does it?

In summary, if we all had your training, we could potentially drive SAFELY at high speed with similar capability as your training has provided you. Wouldn't you agree?
:cheers:
PS I appreciate your honesty here. Not wanting to flame you, just wanting to know what your thoughts to the current 'draconian' laws are, as markone2 has already asked.

[glen III]

[QUOTE=glen III]

Make the decision, suffer the ramifications. You know it's the law, no use bleating about it when/if you get caught.



QUOTE]


So out with it :hmmm: . Do you support these draconian speed limits and the extensive use of speed camera’s set to catch the highest majority of unsuspecting motorist’s committing mostly inadvertent offences.?
Are you too a Lackey for the Bureaucrats?

Whilst my opinion is irrelevant, here goes:- The Hume and Pacific in certain sections, M2 motorway, etc, could easily handle 130km/h running, maybe 140. 110km/h is slow, but I don't buy people's argument that the faster you go, the less fatigued you will get, as an increased level of attentiveness will bring on mental fatigue faster. Also, however, if the limit is 130, people will stil ldrive 140 anyway. Some sections of road are inadequately signposted. These individual sections need to be brought to the attention of the traffic authority in your state instead of the blanket calls for speeds to be upped, which get the due consideration they deserve:- none.

Registration and vehiccle checks are a joke. Anyone's best mates cousin's former roommate seems to be able to pink slip a car. Tighter controls will see some of the absolute shitboxes off the road, no conderation given for hardship. They're a danger.

In inclement weather, speed limits should be reduced slightly (10-20km, depending on road), but there's no possible way for a legal definition of inclement weather to ever be written.

I think that magistrates should never let someone off a DUI or high PCA charge just because they require the licence for their job. Again, do the crime, do the time.

Fixed speed cameras are a joke, but if you get caught by a fixed camera, what with the fact their locations are available in street directories and at least 3 signs in the approaching kilometre or so, you are too stupid to be driving.

Contrary to popular opinion, copping a exceed speed 15km/h or less pill for the 3-5 over everyone loves to quote is quite unlikely. The effort required to estiamte the speed, back that up with a radar/lidar reading, slow, light up the top, turn-and-burn, accelerate, catch up, pull over, set up safe corridor, grab your hat and vest, walk up, banter with aggressive know it all, write up TIN then go back to car is a lot , really. There's plenty off jackasses around going a lot faster to bother with.

That's some of my opinions.

[Ricko]

The warning devices are not really that significant, IMHO.

.


I find that comment rather scary SSbaby. Warning lights let people around me know im in a hurry, they give me a wide berth when they see em, and anyone with half a brain thats sees red and blue beacons flashing ahead or behind them slows down and is well aware that its signals a reson to slow down, or give way.

[SSbaby]

Ricko, you've taken it out of context. I was referring to my statement where I said that given proper training, we can all drive at 140-150km/h on the Hume Hwy, just like the copper who pulls the guy over doing 110km/h.

Yes, warning lights and sirens do warn drivers of emerging emergency vehicles. But in the context I have raised it, it has nothing to do with safe speeding and speed law enforcement.

Motorists in general should be giving those travelling faster a wider berth in any case by keeping left, especially Emergency vehicles.

[SSbaby]

There's plenty off jackasses around going a lot faster to bother with.


Yeah, like those same ar$eholes in their white Nissan GTS/GTRs in my residential street. I'd rather they be caught doing 100km/h in 50 zones than those doing 15 km/h over on the multi-lane freeways.

My 2c.

[IH8WRX]

After working for ten years in a very closely with the N.S.W. Police Service I can honestly say they need to review training methods and get more things right.

Before glen III has a go at me I speak from experience here and it's one thing that still makes me livid. Time and time again you get asked to cover for them in mistakes made on the job, I was even asked to come in and see the superintendant of the local area command after numerous officers under his command made multiple stuff ups and the channel 9's "A Current Affair" turns up to do a story on how badly they all screwed up. You get a call to come in and see him and then he puts on the water works and begs you not to help or speak to the reporters over it as it will not only destroy his carrer but those under his command and their families. Then inernal memo's get passed around in urgency telling everyone to make sure they are in full uniform and that's including their hats (surely Police Officers can dress themselves can't they? I mean after all they enforce the law). I have seen many police lie in statements tendered to the courts, even was asked to "forget" one incident altogether after I was subpenoied due to a couple of officers handing out their own punishment after one of them was assaulted. Time and time again I watched them make mistakes that even I a civilian knew were wrong. In the end I was severly shafted by them to silience me but it has backfired and when I go public trust me it will do some damage.

I just hope where ever you're stationed at glen III you guys do things by the book and do it because it's your job. Maybe some of you guys need to have transfers to the country and show some of these clowns in regional areas how it's done. I supported the N.S.W. Police Service for just on 10 years, I have about 10 cousins alone in there.

From my experience, and based on my persoanl opinion alone, leave the law making to the citizens and politicians, leave the law enforcement to the Police and leave the decissions of guilt or innocents and punishment to the courts. After all isn't that what's the Westminster system of law all about?

[markone2]

Fixed speed cameras are a joke, but if you get caught by a fixed camera, what with the fact their locations are available in street directories and at least 3 signs in the approaching kilometre or so, you are too stupid to be driving.


That's some of my opinions.

Good call :) glen 111, thanx for sharing your opinions. The only problem I have is the above bit concerning fixed camera's...while in QLD there loction can
indeed be found on a certain radio station the only warning sign we recieve
is one small notice strategicaly placed facing the off side passeger door of the Police Van or 4x4 they are prone to use in this neck of the woods....
I hereby withdraw my Lackey comment earlier :)

[Rt!]

I dont think increasing the speed limit will drop fatigue. People are not sensitive to velocity but acceleration. The only way to prevent fatigue accidents (for the general population) is to stop and revive..

I tend to agree with glen3's points.. I still think speed cameras are crap (but speed limit is there for the LCD :/)

[SSbaby]

RT!

I dont think increasing the speed limit will drop fatigue.

Interesting. Wonder why Italy and states in the US are increasing speed limits on hwys, after an increase in road tolls after lowering speed limits.

[Rt!]

It will raise awareness, to an extent, but after sitting on 160kmph for an hour or so it feels just like 60kmph..
its like when you drive up/down the coast, after sitting on 120 for ages, going into a town and doing 60km/ph feels like you're walking.

[SSbaby]

It will raise awareness, to an extent, but after sitting on 160kmph for an hour or so it feels just like 60kmph..
its like when you drive up/down the coast, after sitting on 120 for ages, going into a town and doing 60km/ph feels like you're walking.

What you are overlooking is the fact that speed helps traffic flow. The more space around you (i.e. less traffic) the more relaxed you feel. The fatigue sets in quicker if there's greater congestion on our roads. That's where a revision to speed enforcement would go a long way towards alleviating some of those problems. i.e. allow a tolerance of 10-15% above sign posted limit.

[glen III]

Before glen III has a go at me I speak from experience here

I'm not here to have a go at anyone where they have individual bad experiences. To suggest that the police force si perfect is risiculous.I get a bit narky at times when there's blanket "all cops are rude/corrupt/incompetent/fat/lazy/assholes/insert description here". That's ridiculous, and gets the contempt it deserves.

We're getting off the topic, suprise, suprise.


Interesting. Wonder why Italy and states in the US are increasing speed limits on hwys, after an increase in road tolls after lowering speed limits.

I don't have an answer for that. Statistical anomoly, massive capital works on roads, I for one wasn't aware of speed limits being raised anywhere. i have my **** in my hands on this one. I'll do a little research, and see how the stats are interpreted.

[onezero]

This is a bit off-topic (and kinda obscure), but when I was watching the Mischief 3000 Gumball DVD some bloke copped a 75mph in a 70 zone fine (~8km/h over) and said he was going to get it framed... meanwhile people are getting pinged for 3km/h over here everyday.

I think there should possibly be more of a sensible approach to tolerances; such as percentages, where you have to be conciously speeding to get done - i.e. 20+ - I sometimes drift over the limit 10km/h and don't even know it, and if I were to go past a camera, that'd be a point off my licence...

On the topic of raising speed limits - I get scared when I see some rust-bucket shit-box fly past me on the freeway doing 140... I really don't want them to legally be permitted to do that type of speed. Especially when it's pouring down in rain, and you just know it's got drum brakes, or brake pads that haven't been replaced in 10 years, skinny-ass cheapo re-treads and 25 year old suspension.

[Wazza]

I dont think increasing the speed limit will drop fatigue. People are not sensitive to velocity but acceleration.

I dont think its so much the fact that the speed limit is increased that drops the fatigue, its more the fact that if youre doing what you consider a "comfortable" speed, you'll not get as tired. I find doing long country trips (which i do a fair few of) i get tired of driving at 100km/h constantly because i keep looking at the speedo, making sure im not speeding.... Whereas take that speed up to between 115-120km/h and i dont even bother looking at the speedo... Its a speed i feel comfortable with, so im not constantly speeding up or slowing down to keep at the speed limit, and dont need to watch the speedo.

[Rt!]

I dont think its so much the fact that the speed limit is increased that drops the fatigue, its more the fact that if youre doing what you consider a "comfortable" speed, you'll not get as tired. I find doing long country trips (which i do a fair few of) i get tired of driving at 100km/h constantly because i keep looking at the speedo, making sure im not speeding.... Whereas take that speed up to between 115-120km/h and i dont even bother looking at the speedo... Its a speed i feel comfortable with, so im not constantly speeding up or slowing down to keep at the speed limit, and dont need to watch the speedo.

But then you got the knobs who dont understand what the concept of a limit is, and highbeam you because you're doing 130 in a 140 zone.
They are the ones to watch out for imho..

[markone2]

But then you got the knobs who dont understand what the concept of a limit is, and highbeam you because you're doing 130 in a 140 zone.
They are the ones to watch out for imho..


And then of course there’s the knob’s sitting at 70Kph in a 100kph zone on a busy 2 lane highway (read that as a major Brisbane arterial highway)…which is possibly the most disruptive and frustrating impediment to smooth flowing traffic ever. and something we encounter everyday on the states highways, especially so when said knob pulls to the outside lane to overtake the apprentice knob travelling at 60kph…the concertina effort has cars hauling on the anchors up to a kilometre and more back …..and yep..you guessed it..
many a rear ender

[Ricko]

Ricko, you've taken it out of context. I was referring to my statement where I said that given proper training, we can all drive at 140-150km/h on the Hume Hwy, just like the copper who pulls the guy over doing 110km/h.

Yes, warning lights and sirens do warn drivers of emerging emergency vehicles. But in the context I have raised it, it has nothing to do with safe speeding and speed law enforcement.

Motorists in general should be giving those travelling faster a wider berth in any case by keeping left, especially Emergency vehicles.

My mistake, and although i do speed in my profession, as (within reason) im am allowed to do, i do find it that a police officer will nab you with his radar for doing say 140km/hr with radar, then he/she will drop a U turn and speed up to OVER that speed to catch you, and then book you for speeding. :eek:

[SSbaby]

I'll do a little research, and see how the stats are interpreted.

Allow me to gather some information which might counter your research...

http://www.roadsense.com.au/factsandfigures.html
http://www.sense.bc.ca/research.htm
http://www.houlihane.co.uk/safety.htm
http://www.ibiblio.org/rdu/sl-irrel.html
http://www.politics.ie/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=4898

[glen III]

Allow me to gather some information which might counter your research...

http://www.roadsense.com.au/factsandfigures.html


http://www.hwysafety.com/hwy_montana_2001.htm (linked from above)

Using these figures, there doesn't seem to be any reason they could justify that there is a distinct trend. There's as many months within enforced times that there are less fatals per month than unenforced times and vice versa. ie June, July, Oct (tied), Nov, Dec 1999, Jan 200, May,Aug, Oct (tied). There's a couple of bad months, and any statistician worth his salt would thrown out the worst and best figures as anomalies. This data doesn't also show the amount of crashes, just the deaths. Who's to say that 5 people didn't perish in one accident? When you're only talking 70-85 deaths/year, 5 deaths instead of 1 will skew stats. Another point is they say that they took stats for 6 years, yet only 18 months of no limits and 18 months of limits are shown. That's what I can draw out after 5 minutes looking at them, I'm sure there's more of them, I'll have a more serious look tomorrow arvo when Inext sit in front of a PC.

Cheers.

[Devil CV8]

jeez there's been some replies in this thread. I'll pick a few to repond to as a lot have been responded to already by others.


I think if your doing 45kph++++ over the posted limit then you've already made that decision yourself. Getting caught is bad luck, having an accident is worse, killing someone.......... :( You may have taken the decision to drive at that speed, but having your friendly HWP officer being judge jury and executioner is a touch over the top. There could be a perfectly legal reason for doing the speed, such as driving a vehicle that is made to do those speeds safely.(used by Singleton in his Bentley, speed was 160km/h IIRC)


Would you want someone doing 45kph+ over the limit on the same streets that your wife and child(ren) travel on? Of course not, but certain roads in certain conditions are perfectly safe for a higher than usual speed.... And I am not including ANY school zone or other residential area.


If we're talking about very specific examples such as yours, then if you had to do over 10kph to overtake and there was on coming traffic then it wasn't safe and prudent to overtake in the first place. :rolleyes: If someone is driving under the prevailing limit and only speeding up to the limit when it is possible to overtake, then exceeding the limit is IMHO the safest thing to do as it avoids further frustation and the risks involved in overtaking at the speed limit. When I overtake, all around know I'm driving a V8, and I am on the dead side of the road for as short a timeframe as possible which in my experience NSW HWP seem to leave you alone.

Yep, that cop's discretion in issuing the DUI was really him just being heartless, wasn't it? My job requires my car, so I should be expempt from 45+ over the limit, DUI, shouldn't I? What drivel, even more than usual from you. No, I find it perfectly ok for him to get the DUI. He drank, drove, got caught and lost his job....


Registration and vehiccle checks are a joke. Anyone's best mates cousin's former roommate seems to be able to pink slip a car. Tighter controls will see some of the absolute shitboxes off the road, no conderation given for hardship. They're a danger. Agreed. Tougher checks are the way to go, but maybe you can answer this question... In the defecting blitzes that occur, why aren't mum and dads rustbuckets with no brakes targeted....


I have seen many police lie in statements tendered to the courts, And their word is always taken, even over photographic evidence... Been on the wrong end of a cops "truth" and I suppose that has coloured my judgement on cops...

From my experience, and based on my persoanl opinion alone, leave the law making to the citizens and politicians, leave the law enforcement to the Police and leave the decissions of guilt or innocents and punishment to the courts. After all isn't that what's the Westminster system of law all about? Best statement ever, and so it should be.....

[Devil CV8]

I'm not here to have a go at anyone where they have individual bad experiences. To suggest that the police force si perfect is risiculous.I get a bit narky at times when there's blanket "all cops are rude/corrupt/incompetent/fat/lazy/assholes/insert description here". That's ridiculous, and gets the contempt it deserves.
I've had both bad and good experiences, and it was the good experiences that have nearly erased my coloured view of police.. There are good ones, and there are "insert your favourite description here" ones, and that is spread throughout GD and HWP, much the same as any group of people.

[IH8WRX]

I'm the same as you Devil. I have had bad experiences with the N.S.W. Constabulary as well as good ones. It's just unfortunite that the bad ones give the good ones a bad reputation as well. Cuffing P.O.I's and and dishing out their own punishment and then asking you to cover for them was probably the lesser nasty incidents I have experienced in my dealings with them. In saying that tho I know most of them are by the book, it's just that for some reason when they are posted to regional areas they seem to think it's "Club Med" and have a lack lustre attitude. At least the city guys are better.

glen III seems to be one of the better ones by his answers. Lets hope we meet more of them if we ever have to call upon the Police, and less that have the attitudes of detectives. I'm presuming by glen III's comments and his actions that he might be a GD Officer? Those guys know what front line Policing is all about!