WA Speed Camera question
fu
I got done the other night by a radar as doing 70kph.Now i thought that
the police give you 2kph error ,taking me to 68kph and no fine nor
points lost?but on the paper it just says... Namely 70 kph... 1 point
and 100 dollars.
Angry
Perth
Robert Hudson
limit, then 16-30, 31-45, and then 45+ (spend the night in gaol).....
I got done for 77km/h once, but they give you 4km/h leeway here, so I only
got fined for 0-15, even though the infringement notice said 77km/h in a 60
zone....
"fu" <uh...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:393276b0$0$28...@echo-01.iinet.net.au...
Shaun Norman
up to 9km/h is 0 points, $50
10-19km/h is 1 point, $100 I think, there's a 2 point category in here
somewhere aswell *shrug*
20-29 is 3 points, $150
30+ is 4points, $250... this category is a real bitch to fall into a few
times
the best thing to do would be to call the MultiNova center and puzzle them
with the question!!
Shaun
--
www.speedfreaks.com.au
Your online performance shop
Shaun Norman - 0403002254
Lindsay
I too am in perth and got flashed by a radar 2 days ago. This was in a
60km/h zone also...I saw the flash and was very shocked, i looked at my
speedo as i was going past and it was under 70, thats pretty harsh!
And to add insult to injury I was driving my sisters 1980 honda civic which
takes like a week to get up to 70km/h!
Maybe in your case they adjusted the fine before it was sent to you, i.e.
you were doing 72km/h when passing the camera, but the fine was for the
adjusted speed of 70, which is 10 over the limit ( 1 point and $100 ).
In WA the fines are as follows:
under 9km/h over: $50 and i think no point loss
over 9 but no more than 19: $100 and 1 point
more than 19 but no more than 29: $150 and 3 points
check this link for more info
http://www.transport.wa.gov.au/safety/penalties/page06.html
Cheers,
Lindsay
Gavin Doolan
killed in a 60 zone by a driver going too fast (he will now be charged with
man-slaughter), and the passenger of a car going too fast in a 70 zone. The
car lost control and hit a tree, and the passenger hit her head on the side
window. The passenger was the pregnant wife of the driver.
Is it really worth it?
Richard Fay
Horrible.
BUT how did you know the circumstances of the accident so soon after the
accident????
Surely the police report wasn't done on the same day.
Richard
Gavin Doolan
Not sure if the reports have been filed, but they told us what would
probablt happen next. The speed of the drivers was reported by a number of
observers. Cause of death is usually pretty easy to identify.
Richard Fay <fa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:3933EA...@ozemail.com.au...
Charlie
>
> The police investigating both accidents seemed to be increadibly efficient.
> Not sure if the reports have been filed, but they told us what would
> probablt happen next. The speed of the drivers was reported by a number of
> observers. Cause of death is usually pretty easy to identify.
cause of death would have been hitting whatever they hit... contributors
to death would have been driving recklessly, but while speeding and
driving recklessly are often done at the same time, they are not
necessarily one and the same...
MonoJoker
you guys serious? They actually round down or some other BS in other
states? If you're done for speeding (and I have been plenty of times) then
I can't see how they can legally change the reading. Must be in the traffic
laws. If I was you I'd pay the fine and stop complaining - and don't expect
any "error compensation" in Qld.
Buckshot
wrote them a letter and made a couple of phone calls, challenging
their equipment, and they dropped it down to 15km over the limit. I
think I could have got more if I had bothered to take them to court
over it.
--
Join AllAdvantage and get PAID to surf the web!
http://au.nz.alladvantage.com/go.asp?refid=ien607
Use referral ID IEN-607
Chris G
Gavin Doolan wrote in message <8guqts$qp6$1...@metro.ucc.usyd.edu.au>...
>Yesterday I saw 2 DOAs (death on arrival) at the hospital. One pedestrian
>killed in a 60 zone by a driver going too fast (he will now be charged with
>man-slaughter),
Unlucky, considering the small % of accidents/deaths caused by speed.
> and the passenger of a car going too fast in a 70 zone. The
>car lost control and hit a tree, and the passenger hit her head on the side
>window. The passenger was the pregnant wife of the driver.
Does not sound like speed was the cause here. "Lost control and hit a
tree". Have to be pretty distracted for that to happen. I bet speed was a
factor in this case, but the cause was probably something else (attention
lapse etc.)
Chris
Dennis Jensen
Standard, to which all states and territories are signatory. This
specifies that for direct radar devices (as in hand held radar), the
tolerance that must be allowed for is 2km/h below 100km/h, and 2% above.
For slant radar devices (such as moving mode and speed cameras), the
tolerance is 3km/h to 100km/h and 3% above that.
Seems these cowboy cops in Qld don't even know the law. That error
compensation is mandatory. Suggest you get a copy from Australian
Standards office.
Dennis
Jamie A. Howell
is no longer safe.
Lindsay <lja...@student.ecu.edu.au> wrote:
> Hey there,
>
> I too am in perth and got flashed by a radar 2 days ago. This was in a
> 60km/h zone also...I saw the flash and was very shocked, i looked at my
> speedo as i was going past and it was under 70, thats pretty harsh!
>
> And to add insult to injury I was driving my sisters 1980 honda civic which
> takes like a week to get up to 70km/h!
>
> Maybe in your case they adjusted the fine before it was sent to you, i.e.
> you were doing 72km/h when passing the camera, but the fine was for the
> adjusted speed of 70, which is 10 over the limit ( 1 point and $100 ).
>
> In WA the fines are as follows:
>
> under 9km/h over: $50 and i think no point loss
> over 9 but no more than 19: $100 and 1 point
> more than 19 but no more than 29: $150 and 3 points
>
> check this link for more info
>
> http://www.transport.wa.gov.au/safety/penalties/page06.html
>
> Cheers,
>
> Lindsay
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
G!
Shaun Norman wrote in message <39328092$0$14...@motown.iinet.net.au>...
>up to 9km/h is 0 points, $50
>10-19km/h is 1 point, $100 I think, there's a 2 point category in here
>somewhere aswell *shrug*
Nope, no 2 point cagetory in WA.
It's funny how the law has slackened up a bit in WA, adding a larger margin
to the 1 point cagetory, and reducing the 3-point cagetory.
In the old system, if you were caught doing 15-19 over, you'd lose 3 points
and $150. Nowadays you'd lose 1 point and $100!
G!
Buckshot
This is absolute rubbish, and shows you have no knowledge of simple
basic physics let alone road safety. To make a blanket statement like
that is stupid, you don't know what type of car he is driving, in what
conditions on what road etc etc.
In many cases driving at 60 in a 60 zone is not safe!, it depends on a
hell of a lot more factors than just the speed of a vehicle.
--
Join AllAdvantage and get PAID to surf the web!
http://au.nz.alladvantage.com/go.asp?refid=ien607
Use referral ID IEN-607
On 30 May 2000 09:31:20 GMT, "Jamie A. Howell" <ja...@it.net.au>
wrote:
PigDog
>
>This is absolute rubbish, and shows you have no knowledge of simple
>basic physics let alone road safety. To make a blanket statement like
>that is stupid, you don't know what type of car he is driving, in what
>conditions on what road etc etc.
>
>In many cases driving at 60 in a 60 zone is not safe!, it depends on a
>hell of a lot more factors than just the speed of a vehicle.
I thought he meant that you're not safe from speed cameras :)
Christopher Smith
"Gavin Doolan" <gdo...@gmp.usyd.edu.au> wrote in message
news:8guqts$qp6$1...@metro.ucc.usyd.edu.au...
> Yesterday I saw 2 DOAs (death on arrival) at the hospital. One pedestrian
> killed in a 60 zone by a driver going too fast (he will now be charged
with
The
> car lost control and hit a tree, and the passenger hit her head on the
side
> window. The passenger was the pregnant wife of the driver.
>
One wonders how you know enough details of the accidents to be able to lay
blame.....
Matthew McDonald
He told you he works at the hospital.
This is why the Police use hospital workers in their ads against
speeding, drink driving and everything else.
Regards
Matthew
--
____________________________________________________________
Matthew McDonald http://www.matthewmcdonald.com/
MobileWorld Phone Information http://www.mobileworld.org/
Gold Coast, Australia_______________________________________
John Fisher
Charlie <blo...@powerup.com.au> wrote:
> Gavin Doolan wrote:
> >
> > The police investigating both accidents seemed to be increadibly
> > efficient.
> > Not sure if the reports have been filed, but they told us what would
> > probablt happen next. The speed of the drivers was reported by a
> > number of observers.
You mean they didn't need radars to work out the vehicles were going too
fast for the conditions?? Wow I wonder if radars are used for revenue
raising.
> > Cause of death is usually pretty easy to identify.
>
> cause of death would have been hitting whatever they hit...
> contributors to death would have been driving recklessly, but while
> speeding and driving recklessly are often done at the same time, they
> are not necessarily one and the same...
True but the police investigating are primarily interested in the speed
of the vehicle. They'll always look for skid marks etc. Starting from a
more general perspective to determine the most relevant factors is not
the approach they have been trained to take. Finding speed as a
contributing factor has political value.
John
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
John Fisher
"Chris G" <ga...@primus.com.au> wrote:
>
> Gavin Doolan wrote in message <8guqts$qp6$1...@metro.ucc.usyd.edu.au>...
> >pedestrian killed in a 60 zone by a driver going too fast (he will
> >now be charged with man-slaughter),
>
>
> >car lost control and hit a tree, and the passenger hit her head on
> >the side window. The passenger was the pregnant wife of the driver.
>
> tree". Have to be pretty distracted for that to happen. I bet speed
> was a factor in this case, but the cause was probably something else
> (attention lapse etc.)
True but unlikely to be an attention lapse when they're going fast. More
likely poor skills or reckless manner of driving.
John Fisher
mat...@matthewREMOVEmcdonald.com wrote:
> On Wed, 31 May 2000 01:33:50 +1000, "Christopher Smith"
> <drsm...@usa.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Gavin Doolan" <gdo...@gmp.usyd.edu.au> wrote in message
> >news:8guqts$qp6$1...@metro.ucc.usyd.edu.au...
> >> Is it really worth it?
> >
> >One wonders how you know enough details of the accidents to be able
> >to lay blame.....
>
> He told you he works at the hospital.
>
> This is why the Police use hospital workers in their ads against
> speeding, drink driving and everything else.
Yeah because they see the gore and get emotional and are happy to fire
off their mouth with ignorant comments that harm rather than help. Its
very useful for propaganda and dumb fucks think that they are some kind
of expert.
John Fisher
"Gavin Doolan" <gdo...@gmp.usyd.edu.au> wrote:
> Yesterday I saw 2 DOAs (death on arrival) at the hospital. One
> pedestrian killed in a 60 zone by a driver going too fast (he will now
> fast in a 70 zone. The car lost control and hit a tree, and the
> passenger hit her head on the side window. The passenger was the
> pregnant wife of the driver.
>
Driving unsafely is not worth it but what a stupid question. Is there
any indication that anyone here drives unsafely (other than roadwatch)?
In between the lines your comment screams out that you are
intellectually challenged enough to swallow propaganda used as an excuse
to bleed drivers for money when they safely exceed the speed limit. Wake
up to yourself!!!!!
Michael S.
----------
In article <8h01p8$jht$1...@enyo.uwa.edu.au>, "Jamie A. Howell"
<ja...@it.net.au> wrote:
>Perhaps, you need to alter your driving style... crusing at 70 in a 60 zone
>is no longer safe.
In some areas like shopping malls, yes. But in some areas it is more than
safe to be doing 80 or so.
Chris G
John Fisher wrote in message <8h1v3p$cnn$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>
>> Does not sound like speed was the cause here. "Lost control and hit a
>> tree". Have to be pretty distracted for that to happen. I bet speed
>> was a factor in this case, but the cause was probably something else
>> (attention lapse etc.)
>
>True but unlikely to be an attention lapse when they're going fast. More
>likely poor skills or reckless manner of driving.
Or the mobile rang :)
Chris
Christopher Smith
"Matthew McDonald" <mat...@matthewREMOVEmcdonald.com> wrote in message
news:kkq8js002ssmohnum...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 31 May 2000 01:33:50 +1000, "Christopher Smith"
> <drsm...@usa.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Gavin Doolan" <gdo...@gmp.usyd.edu.au> wrote in message
> >news:8guqts$qp6$1...@metro.ucc.usyd.edu.au...
pedestrian
> >> killed in a 60 zone by a driver going too fast (he will now be charged
> >with
> >> man-slaughter), and the passenger of a car going too fast in a 70 zone.
> >The
> >> car lost control and hit a tree, and the passenger hit her head on the
> >side
> >> window. The passenger was the pregnant wife of the driver.
> >>
> >> Is it really worth it?
> >
lay
> >blame.....
>
> He told you he works at the hospital.
So hospital workers get to interview eyewitnesses and read police reports ?
Wow, I never knew that.
P & D Marr
> > >The car lost control and hit a tree,
Isn't it funny how it's quiet often the car that loses control. You read and
hear this in the media on a regular basis. Never hear of the car being
charged with neg controlling or something like that.
Maybe I'm being pedantic.
regards
peter marr
concerned parent
(i think)
I agree with your comments on what a "safe" speed is
la di dah
Buckshot <jul...@bigpond.net.au> wrote in article
<1347jscun3017psoc...@4ax.com>...
>
> This is absolute rubbish, and shows you have no knowledge of simple
> basic physics let alone road safety. To make a blanket statement like
> that is stupid, you don't know what type of car he is driving, in what
> conditions on what road etc etc.
>
> In many cases driving at 60 in a 60 zone is not safe!, it depends on a
> hell of a lot more factors than just the speed of a vehicle.
>
> --
> Join AllAdvantage and get PAID to surf the web!
> http://au.nz.alladvantage.com/go.asp?refid=ien607
> Use referral ID IEN-607
>
>
>
>
> On 30 May 2000 09:31:20 GMT, "Jamie A. Howell" <ja...@it.net.au>
roadhog
>In article <kkq8js002ssmohnum...@4ax.com>,
> mat...@matthewREMOVEmcdonald.com wrote:
>> On Wed, 31 May 2000 01:33:50 +1000, "Christopher Smith"
>> <drsm...@usa.net> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"Gavin Doolan" <gdo...@gmp.usyd.edu.au> wrote in message
>> >news:8guqts$qp6$1...@metro.ucc.usyd.edu.au...
>
>> >> Is it really worth it?
>> >
>> >One wonders how you know enough details of the accidents to be able
>> >to lay blame.....
>>
>> He told you he works at the hospital.
>>
>> This is why the Police use hospital workers in their ads against
>> speeding, drink driving and everything else.
>
>Yeah because they see the gore and get emotional and are happy to fire
>off their mouth with ignorant comments that harm rather than help. Its
>very useful for propaganda and dumb fucks think that they are some kind
>of expert.
Then there's the 18,000pa or so killed by medical mistakes!!!
Sure beats speeding!
--
Piggy
A closed mouth gathers no feet
Adam
P & D Marr wrote in message <3934f...@news.acay.com.au>...
>snip
>> > >The car lost control and hit a tree,
>snip
>
>Isn't it funny how it's quiet often the car that loses control. You read
and
>hear this in the media on a regular basis. Never hear of the car being
>charged with neg controlling or something like that.
Would you prefer "The dead guy fucked up and hit a tree"?
No, you are not being pedantic.
Cheers,
Adam
P & D Marr
Maybe not the exact choice of words you have used, but basically yes. After
all its not the cars fault is it. Maybe, if the media did say that the
driver made a mistake or did the wrong thing and ended up killing
themselves/whoever, the people who have no real idea about driving (I'm sure
you know the type) would think a bit more about the way they drive. Then
again maybe I'm dreaming of Utopia
regards
Peter Marr
John Fisher
t...@king.the.mickey (roadhog) wrote:
> John Fisher writes:
>
> >In article <kkq8js002ssmohnum...@4ax.com>,
> > mat...@matthewREMOVEmcdonald.com wrote:
> >> On Wed, 31 May 2000 01:33:50 +1000, "Christopher Smith"
> >> <drsm...@usa.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >"Gavin Doolan" <gdo...@gmp.usyd.edu.au> wrote in message
> >> >news:8guqts$qp6$1...@metro.ucc.usyd.edu.au...
> >> >One wonders how you know enough details of the accidents to be
> >> >able to lay blame.....
> >>
> >> He told you he works at the hospital.
> >>
> >> This is why the Police use hospital workers in their ads against
> >> speeding, drink driving and everything else.
>
> >
> >Yeah because they see the gore and get emotional and are happy to
> >fire off their mouth with ignorant comments that harm rather than
> >help. Its very useful for propaganda and dumb fucks think that they
> >are some kind of expert.
>
> Then there's the 18,000pa or so killed by medical mistakes!!!
> Sure beats speeding!
Yeah fuck that! It eclipses road deaths in general let alone the
microscopic number caused by speeding. However I doubt we'll have
people patrolling hospitals 24 hours a day looking over doctors'
shoulders with cameras. The tradition is to pick on motorists more than
any other segment of society.