NEWS: Radar detectors, police speeding fine and laser jammer news 2008.

Radars – lifesavers or revenue makers?

AT&M Magazine April 2008 AT&M April 2008.

On March 1, new penalties for speeding, the non-use of seatbelts and the use of hand-held mobile phones were imposed upon drivers in WA. A new ruling has also been introduced to make drivers responsible for ensuring all passengers are restrained, regardless of age. The increase of fines and demerits is intended to make our roads safer by encouraging drivers to be more aware of their speed and habits on the road. Fines for cars or light vehicles caught speeding by 19km/h to 29km/h over the limit has increased from $250 to $300, while heavy vehicles have increased from $350 to $400. Speeding 29km/h to 40km/h over the limit will now incur a fine of $700 – double the previous amount. Heavy vehicle fines have increased from $500 to $850.Using a hand held mobile phone while driving now means $250 fine and three demerits.

The government and road safety departments put these penalties into place because it’s thought that they will improve driver behaviour, create more cautious drivers and save more lives. However, this is not always the case. At the time of going to press, there had been 38 fatalities on WA roads this year, predominantly in regional areas. Because of the sheer size of Australia and lack of Government funding, driving in regional areas is poorly policed and road quality low. Drivers in regional WA know there is less chance of getting fined so they often take the risk. Legal? Radar detectors have been given a very negative reputation. They are seen as a way for speeding motorists to avoid getting fines by letting them know when to slow down – i.e. when a police radar is coming up.

Many people also believe that radar detectors are illegal. That’s actually untrue. There are no federal laws making them illegal, but there are state laws that ban the use of ‘speed measuring evasion devices’. Western Australia however does not have any bans and WA drivers can still utilise this technology. A safety radar detector will NOT help a speeding motorist to avoid a fine. If you speed, you will get caught. They will NOT warn you of fixed or red light cameras, unmarked police cars or lasers and are not very effective against radar speed cameras in open areas. Safety radar detectors constantly false alert on any radar signal (automatic doors, security alarms, etc). It’s the equivalent of having your driving instructor next to you, regularly reminding you to watch your speed. It is a frequent and sometimes annoying reminder that maybe this alert is actually the police monitoring your speed. Everybody speeds - most often inadvertently, whether it’s overtaking someone, simply keeping up with the traffic flow or missing a change in speed sign. A driver can incur numerous speed limit changes on the same stretch of road through school zones, road construction and built up areas. The safety radar detector alert reminds a driver to check the speed limit and in doing so, avoid a speeding fine.

Safety radar detectors are generally used by drivers who need their licence for work and who are constantly on the road. A few unfortunate speeding tickets and your income is gone. Miss or ignore a 60km work zone limit and you could lose your licence. There is a misconception that hoons use and abuse radar detectors, but the fact is, radar detectors are expensive and most hoons would rather spend their money on making their car go faster than spending their money on a road safety device that will not protect you from a speeding ticket. Revenue The WA state government recently threw out plans to reduce the speed limits across the states due to community disapproval. Reducing the speed limits will only increase the number of people exceeding the speed limit, and therefore greatly increase speeding fine revenue. The driving community wanted the roads fixed and made safer rather than speed limits reduced. Data accumulated from accidents has shown that a higher proportion of accidents are due to driver inattention and misjudgement, than speed alone. Improving our roads is one sure way of reducing the number of fatalities from drivers just making a mistake. Studies also confirm a safety radar detector makes drivers more alert and aware on the roads.

A safety radar detector also acts as a Safety Warning System receiver, allowing the driver to receive warning messages from one kilometre off Emergency Vehicles, accidents ahead, road crews, school zones, school buses and accident black spots. This information can be invaluable to you and will also help the drivers behind you as you slow down on approach to the road hazard. Many John Deere tractors and loaders come equipped with a radar speed-signalling device, which will also provide a one kilometre warning to a safety radar that they are on the road ahead. There are thousands across Australia. Radar, Laser and Fixed Speed Cameras Radar uses radio waves, while a laser transmits a beam of invisible light. A radar beam can be 30 metres wide at a typical target range while the laser will be barely 45 centimetres in diameter, making it very difficult to detect. Police also use the two different types in different ways. Radar can be used from a moving object, such as a police car, while a laser must be used from a stationary position. Laser is very difficult to detect and for that reason, often a detector will not alert you to any threats.

Fixed speed and red light cameras do not use laser or radar. They detect the speed of vehicles by using piezo electronic detectors embedded into the road surface. These piezo detectors deflect slightly when a vehicle is driven over the detectors, which then triggers an electronic device that accurately measures the speed of the vehicle. If the speed of the vehicle exceeds the legal limit then a digital picture is taken of the offending vehicle. What to look for in a safety radar detector…

· Sensitivity – to get the best range and earliest warning, all bands should be as sensitive as possible. Around 60 per cent of police radars use the Ka band. This is the hardest band to detect, so when choosing a radar detector, exceptional Ka performance is the way to go

· Filtering – how effective the filtering is will directly correspond with how effectively the radar will perform. With poor filtering, there is little point in having high sensitivity as it will frequently falsely alert, which could not only be annoying, but lead to the driver ignoring a genuine alert

· Easy to understand and audible alerts are essential. You will soon familiarise yourself with separate tones that are needed. Voice alerts are often an even better idea as they can be understood without any confusion or mistakes being made

· Mounting – a strong, quality mounting should be included with the produce so as not to cause any damage. As many radar detectors are only made for the US market, their displays are angled towards the left hand side. Make sure you can securely fasten the radar detector so it is easy to read from your driving position

· Selectable bands – as different areas rely on different bands – X or K for example – you need to be able to switch to the correct band for your positioning, otherwise you will end up with false alerts

· Safety Warning System – also referred to as a Driver Warning System, a radar detector with a Safety Warning System will alert drivers to dangers such as emergency vehicles in transit, rest area ahead and train approaching. As the use of SWS becomes more frequent, it’s best to make sure your detector is equipped with this life saving technology

Strong support The Australian Drivers Association has been supporting the implementation and use of the Safety Warning System on Western Australian roads since 2002. Users of SWS will be warned of a potential hazard up to one kilometre away. More than 70,000 drivers in WA now receive this warning through their safety radar detectors.

There are over 120 Safety Warning Systems being used in Western Australia. Since 2002, all new St John’s Ambulance vehicles have been fitted with a transmitter warning of ‘emergency vehicle ahead’, plus some FESA vehicles, tow trucks, road crews and traffic management vehicles. SWS transmitters have even been installed in WA accident blackspot areas, which warn of ‘speed limit enforced’ and in regional areas - ‘rest area ahead’. Safety Warning Systems are currently in place to protect many of the state’s ‘at risk’ workers. They have gained strong support from Unions, workers and Western Australian motorists and the Construction Forestry Mining Energy Union has recommended SWS be utilised Australia-wide. The Australian Driver’s Association (ADRA) has carefully evaluated the effectiveness of the SWS utilising Driver Warning Systems. Research was carried out by Monash University into any adverse effects of the use of radar detectors around the world. The University’s findings showed that there were no credible reports that proved radar detectors allowed drivers to speed or drivers with radar detectors had more accidents or that there was any negative impact on road safety. Available research actually supported the conclusion that drivers using a safety radar detector have fewer accidents, are more alert and more aware of the posted speed limit. Using a radar detector cannot be deemed as unsafe and there is no evidence or correlation between detector use and speeding or bad driver behaviour.

The banning of radar detectors in the Eastern States did not have any measurable impact on road safety, according to the Transport Safety Bureau. In 1995, the federal courts in the USA overturned a ban on radar detectors, as they found no evidence to support the idea that radar detectors were a road safety hazard. The appeals court upheld the decision and radar detectors are still legal in the USA today. In 1998 the WA Independent Speed Management Task Force also concluded that there was no evidence to support a ban on radar detectors. ADRA undertook testing of radar detectors on WA roads and came to the same conclusion.

Advocate. One advocate of using SWS is Glenn Secco President of ADRA: “We use safety radars which are in common use in WA, to be a road hazard warning system inside their cars. As drivers have already paid to use this technology, they are more likely to respond to the safety warning they pick up. “This flows on to the traffic behind these vehicles making it an effective and successful system. With a one kilometre warning, Ambulance and Emergency vehicles can get to an accident or emergency safer and more quickly. Drivers are also given a one kilometre warning that there is an accident ahead which could be around a corner or over a rise. “There is no doubt, the safety warning system saves lives. We hope to introduce an inexpensive safety-warning receiver by 2009. SWS combined with the thousands of radar speed signalling devices on John Deere tractors, makes this one of the most extensive safety technology systems in the country.

“So we now utilise this widespread radar technology to make the roads safer in WA, all without fining or penalising drivers and without costing the government a cent.”

New plans to treble speed cameras
From The West Australian
April 23, 2008

The State Government is considering plans to treble the number of speed cameras on WA roads, sparking warnings that the flood of extra speeding tickets will put severe pressure on police who have to process infringement notices and are already months behind.

Leaked police documents show plans to increase the number of speed cameras by 350 per cent.

In a report by PA Consulting Group, the Government has been warned that a big increase in the number of cameras and subsequent fines would push the police infringement processing department to breaking point.

The police-commissioned report, which was leaked to the state Opposition and passed to The West Australian, said there was a six-month delay between a driving offence and issuing an infringement.

But police say the delay has been reduced to 7.6 weeks.

“WA police is facing a challenge in delivering on its road safety objectives as a result of constraints being experienced in its speeding and red light camera and traffic infringement operations,” the report said.

“Further, additional cameras are planned (an increase of 350 per cent) to achieve targeted reduction in speed and red light violations, and hence road-related deaths, placing further strain on the current operation.”

The report suggested a move to digital processing and automated back-office processes and that “involving the private sector in part or all of the service provision” could provide the required level of service at a lower cost.

Opposition Leader Troy Buswell urged the Government to spell out its intentions with speed cameras.

“The Government needs to come over a) the outsourcing of speed cameras and b) will that outsourcing require an increase in the number of speed cameras to make the outsourcing commercially attractive?” he said.

“If that is the case, it will confirm what a lot of people have suspected for a long time and that is that speed cameras are about revenue as much, if not more, than they are about safety.”

Last September, The West Australian reported that WA Police were investigating handing over speed camera operations to a private company, with police saying there had been problems with infringement management that it was not “the core business of the police”.

This month it also emerged that the Office of Road Safety was considering a 2006 Government-commissioned report that recommended an increase ins peed camera infringements from about 440,000 to more than two million a year from new speed cameras.

Police Minister John Kobelke said the final evaluation was part of information being considered by the Office of Road Safety’s Enhanced Speed Enforcement Steering Committee.

A draft report is due mid-year.

New plans to treble speed cameras

From The West Australian April 23, 2008

The State Government is considering plans to treble the number of speed cameras on WA roads, sparking warnings that the flood of extra speeding tickets will put severe pressure on police who have to process infringement notices and are already months behind.

Leaked police documents show plans to increase the number of speed cameras by 350 per cent.

In a report by PA Consulting Group, the Government has been warned that a big increase in the number of cameras and subsequent fines would push the police infringement processing department to breaking point.

The police-commissioned report, which was leaked to the state Opposition and passed to The West Australian, said there was a six-month delay between a driving offence and issuing an infringement.

But police say the delay has been reduced to 7.6 weeks.

“WA police is facing a challenge in delivering on its road safety objectives as a result of constraints being experienced in its speeding and red light camera and traffic infringement operations,” the report said.

“Further, additional cameras are planned (an increase of 350 per cent) to achieve targeted reduction in speed and red light violations, and hence road-related deaths, placing further strain on the current operation.”

The report suggested a move to digital processing and automated back-office processes and that “involving the private sector in part or all of the service provision” could provide the required level of service at a lower cost.

Opposition Leader Troy Buswell urged the Government to spell out its intentions with speed cameras.

“The Government needs to come over a) the outsourcing of speed cameras and b) will that outsourcing require an increase in the number of speed cameras to make the outsourcing commercially attractive?” he said.

“If that is the case, it will confirm what a lot of people have suspected for a long time and that is that speed cameras are about revenue as much, if not more, than they are about safety.”

Last September, The West Australian reported that WA Police were investigating handing over speed camera operations to a private company, with police saying there had been problems with infringement management that it was not “the core business of the police”.

This month it also emerged that the Office of Road Safety was considering a 2006 Government-commissioned report that recommended an increase ins peed camera infringements from about 440,000 to more than two million a year from new speed cameras.

Police Minister John Kobelke said the final evaluation was part of information being considered by the Office of Road Safety’s Enhanced Speed Enforcement Steering Committee.

A draft report is due mid-year.

Don't put too much faith in Multanovas

From The West Australian April 08 , 2008

The WA office of Road Safety must take seriously new evidence questioning the effectiveness of Multanovas on reducing WA’s road toll. Figures obtained by this newspaper show that more drivers are caught by Multanovas in WA than in any other State, yet the number of deaths on WA roads per 10,000 drivers is second only to the Northern Territory.

At best, this suggests a limited correlation between the Multanovas catching speeding drivers and road deaths. At worst, it supports what many have believed, that Multanovas are better at raising revenue than changing driver behaviour.

If one of the most significant causes of road death is excessive speed, then certainly Multanovas are helpful in imposing a financial penalty on those who drive too fast and endanger others. But speed is only one aspect of driver behaviour which contributes to the bleak pattern of road carnage in this State.

In fact, there is research to suggest that two-thirds of road deaths happen at or below the speed limit.

The RAC says that WA’s strategy for both fixed speed cameras and Multanovas has not been reviewed for 10 years. The organisation supports the use of more fixed cameras in known black spots. This certainly would deflect some of the criticism of police for positioning Multanovas on straight roads with no history of major accident.

Regardless of the effect of Multanovas on the road toll, it is clear that WA drivers break road rules with an appalling indifference. Each WA motorist pays $12 a year to WA’s $17 million Multanova infringement revenue. In the end, however, it is what happens on the road which is the most effective test of the success or failure of a particular strategy. WA’s road toll last year was an appalling 236, the fourth highest in the country.

The State is still waiting its next five year road safety strategy, due last December and now expected mid-year. Its late arrival will not matter much if there is clear evidence of a change in thinking about how best to influence driver behaviour.

State's camera fines top in nation

From The West Australian April 07 , 2008

WA motorists get the highest number of speed-camera infringements in the nation while the rate of road fatalities is second only to the Northern Territory, according to new figure that raise new questions about the effectiveness of cameras as a speed deterrent.

The analysis by The West Australian found 494,934 Multanova-generated infringements were issued to WA’s 1.42 million drivers last financial year – the equivalent of 350 for every 1000 drivers.

The next highest in fines per motorist was the Northern Territory, with 27,113 fines issued to 127,602 licensed drives at a rate of 210 fines per 1000.

Tasmania has a rate of 190 fines per 1000 motorists; Victoria has 170 and in Queensland an average of 80 fines were issued for every 1000 drivers.

NSW’s 145 speed cameras are all fixed units. They generate 90 fines per 1000 motorists last year.

In WA, the $17 million in Multanova infringement revenue equated to just under $12 per motorist.

Opposition road safety spokesman John McGrath said the figures showed WA had a fixation with Multanovas. He believed the State should take the NSW lead and look at installing more fixed cameras in known black spots. “I’m disappointed that we stand out in that statistic because it either means that our drivers are the most irresponsible in Australia or we have a greater fixation on Multanovas than other States,” he said.

WA’s road toll for 2007 was fourth nationally at 236 deaths behind Victoria (332), Queensland (360) and NSW (445). In deaths per 10,000 drivers it was second with 1.66 behind the NT.

An Office of Road Safety committee is reviewing the effectiveness of Multanova and fixed speed cameras among various speed enforcement strategies.

An RAC spokesman said the motoring group had called for the State’s speed camera program to be evaluated more than two years ago, arguing it had been 10 years since the last comprehensive review.

“If WA’s rate of offending is so high, it calls into question just how effective the current speed-camera program is in reducing speeds on our road,” he said. “We support the use of speed cameras but they should be positioned at black-spot locations where there is a history of speed related crashes.”

Police Minister John Kobelke backed the use of speed cameras as a “vital component” of the road safety strategy and said he was waiting for the committee’s report to determine the future of speed enforcement in WA.

“Credible international and national research has shown that speed cameras are a highly effective tool in slowing motorists down and reducing crashes,” he said. “The use of speed cameras as a speed deterrent is just one part of a much bigger mix.”

State driving normal motorists off roads

From The West Australian. By Bill Hassell May 19, 2008

It’s time someone spoke out on behalf of car drivers – the 95 per cent-plus of everyday, normal, ordinary drivers who use their vehicles for a variety of legitimate purposes. Such people drive with varying degrees of skill and are unlikely ever to be involved in a serious accident of any kind.

The question has to be posed – why do governments at all levels continue their campaign of persecution of the 95 per cent because of the wrongdoing of the 5 per cent?

It is clear that no motoring organization in A is raising the issue and that the state Government and its agencies, and some local governments, continue to treat the vast majority of decent, law-abiding, responsible drivers as if everyone is both a cash cow for government and a potential criminal.

The front page of The West Australian on May 5 was significant. It told us in one article that a number of people died as a result of waiting lists in public hospitals. In another it told us that almost the same number of people died in WA roads this year.

For the deceased from the hospital system, there will be no penalty and no consequence except the pain felt by their families.

But for road deaths there are expressions of shock and horror and a whole new regime of penalties which will hit, in the main, the 95 per cent of law-abiding and responsible drivers.

We can all be confident the new penalties will not stop:

Juvenile car thieves who steal cars and drive at breakneck speeds on the wrong side of carriageways.
Prison escapees who use vehicles to injure policemen.
Young tearaways who use the roads as racetracks in the middle of the night.
The lunatic-fringe drivers who regard every country road as an opportunity for excessive speed.
Even if such drivers are caught, they will not be likely to pay the increased penalties.

What the new penalties will do is … raise more revenue without contributing one jot to road safety.

In many ways the motorist is being made the enemy of government and to feel guilty.

Every proposal, no matter how bizarre or extreme or whatever its origin, to curb or restrict motorists from driving along the roads without harassment appears to receive the immediate, enthusiastic support of the Road Safety Council and its zealous chief, Grant Dorrington.

Having just achieved the badly implemented imposition of 50kmh speed limits on suburban roads, we are now being told it is inevitable that it will eventually be reduced to 40kmh.

We are constantly lectured that “all speed is dangerous” or “there is no safe speeding” when manifestly that is not true. At times and in appropriate conditions some speed limits are absurdly low, while in other situations the speed limits are too high for the conditions. No wonder Mr Dorrington lacks credibility with people who should be natural supporters of his sterling efforts to reduce the road toll.

It is time for the vast majority to demand of government that it stop trying to kid us that its financial persecution of ordinary motorists is anything to do with road safety.

It is obvious to all that stationing a police prominently beside any road, as is done extensively in Britain, is as effective in slowing speeds as posting a small yellow notice in position past the point at which motorists pass a speed camera. Of course it pays much better, and that is why so often it is done. (I am not suggesting there is not a place for speed cameras in some situations).

It is time to demand that strategies be developed to deal with the reckless lawlessness that ordinary drivers observe on the road every day which goes unpunished as they cough up ever increasing penalties for minor, inconsequential infringements.

It is time that the standards for driver education for those getting licenses were raised to a point that a real increase in the standard of driving is achieved. Driving in Perth is truly awful when compared with cities such as Melbourne and Sydney where population pressured are much greater.

Mr Dorrington and the Road Safety Council need to reassess their approach, because all their extremist scaremongering and demands for ever increasing penalties and restrictions are doing at present is turning off the very people to whom they should be successfully appealing.

The Government needs to demonstrate that it is not anti-motorist, anti-car and anti the vast majority of ordinary drivers who deserve a fairer go than they are getting now.

The obsessions of some ministers – who never use the public transport themselves – and some local authorities to restrict the legitimate ownership and use of motor vehicles and force the use of public transport is creating driver rage, if not road rage.

It might well be remembered by governments at all levels that all those who have motor vehicles pay vast taxes to buy and own cars and certainly for their use through the taxes applied at the bowsers.

Every facility provided to motorists is covered well and truly by the taxes paid by motorists.

It is high time the Government sought a fair partnership with the majority and aligned its policies to the real need to identify serious road wrong-doers and deal appropriately with them.

No Cameras, More Cops!

It’s time to scrap revenue-raising speed cameras and replace them with a new road safety strategy based on a more visible Police presence on our roads and better driver training, according to WAFAMILYFIRST leader. Dan Sullivan.

“The Government of British Columbia in Canada replaced speed cameras with more visible Policing and serious accidents were reduced by 5.8% and fatalities fell by 10.9%. “An official UK government report was covered up until a whistleblower leaked it because it showed conclusively that Police patrols cut accidents significantly while the use of speed cameras actually led to an increase in serious and fatal accidents. “Here in WA the road toll continues to climb and all the major political parties do is offer more of the same – more speed cameras and bigger fines.” Mr Sullivan said the government would have us believe speeding is the main cause of road accidents but secret Police statistics uncovered recently proved that speed was not the main cause. Mr Sullivan said an effective road safety strategy should target the main causes of the road toll but the major parties liked speed cameras because they earned more than $40 million a year for the government’s coffers. WA FAMILY FIRST has released a carefully researched strategy that replaced speed cameras altogether with more visible Police patrols, better driver education and a range of innovative policies. The full plan is available now at WAFAMILYFIRST.COM or call the Hotline 97241136.

Australia: 650 Bogus Toll Road Photo Tickets Refunded

Australian toll road operator admits 650 were wrongly fined by photo ticketing cameras.

The operators of an Australian toll road have admitted to falsely accusing 650 motorists of skipping tolls and agreed to cancel fines and provide full refunds. Connector Motorways admitted to problems with the automated ticketing machines used to catch those eluding the toll gates in Sydney's Lane Cove Tunnel between March and August. In a statement issued Wednesday by the toll operator, thousands of license plate misreads were blamed on drivers.

"Misreads during this process can be attributed to non-standard registration plate frames and obstructions such as tow bars and non-standard numbers," the statement read. "Misreads were an isolated incident and confined to (almost 2000) of the 1.7 million motorists who used the Lane Cove Tunnel in August."

The struggling Lane Cove Tunnel depends on the pricey citations for revenue as the project is nearly bankrupt. In May, Moody's reduced its assessment of investments in the Lane Cove Tunnel to junk bond status. The tunnel had relied upon measures to create congestion on Epping Road, a nearby free route, to generate paying traffic. When these efforts failed to generate the expected traffic, operators needed to look to other sources to boost the road's cash flow.

Despite recent efforts of the New South Wales government to make ticket photographs available online, recipients of the bogus Lane Cove citations had no access to the alleged evidence. Those who receive such citations are presumed guilty unless they are able to prove their own innocence.

Source: Lane Cove Tunnel bungle as thousands fined (Sydney Daily Telegraph (Australia), 9/3/2008)

Alcopop and Multanova slugs just a futile excise

WA NEWS.  Paul Murray 1st May 2008, 14:15 WST

It used to be that the two absolutes in life were death and taxes. These days it seems more about death by taxes: the new certainty of government. There is a belief among some politicians that you can change adverse public behaviour by taxing it out of existence.

Not only is this myth unsubstantiated, but it is cynically manipulated to enrich governments while giving the appearance of acting in the public good.

There are two current examples on the Federal and State levels. From Canberra we have the ramping up of excise in a bid to stop the abuse by young people of so-called alcopop drinks. From the Carpenter Government there are plans for a massive increase in the deployment of speed cameras and therefore the amount of money they bleed from drivers.

We hear endless complaints that interest rates are a blunt instrument to dampen consumption, causing much pain for little gain. In these two cases, taxation is even blunter and success more illusory.

Both these initiatives call into question the level of our stupidity. Any analysis of the scant figures available shows that to achieve their revenue aims there has to be virtually no change in the human behaviour they are designed to affect.

On Saturday, the Rudd Government increased the excise on alcopops from $39 a litre of pure alcohol to $67. The effect was to increase the price of drinks like Bacardi Breezers and Vodka Cruisers by between 30¢ and $1.30 a bottle.

Health Minister Nicola Roxon has declined to release the modelling that would show how such a price increase is likely to affect consumption.

But the Distilled Spirits Industry Council of Australia says consumption would need to hold up at present rates for the Government to reap the extra $500 million a year for four years that it is predicting.

“They must be making the assumption that there’s no reduction in the volume despite the price going up,” council spokesman Stephen Riden said. “They’ve either got bad maths or the health prevention goal is out the window.”

Ms Roxon’s office has continued to mouth that increasing the price of alcopops will decrease their attractiveness to teenagers without providing any evidence.

Common sense tells me a 30¢ increase will not have any effect —and if it does it will probably only shift them to a cheaper form of booze.

Probably the best that can be hoped for is that the extra cash will be used in a feasible preventive health strategy, to be announced in this month’s Budget.

The parallel with the Carpenter Government’s approach to speed cameras is interesting. I have no compunction in calling speeding fines a form of taxation because any examination of how they work leads to that conclusion.

There is no victim other than the driver when you are snapped for doing something like 5kmh over the speed limit. So it is hard to see the fine as a punishment when there’s been no offence against anyone.

The majority of speed camera fines are for low-speed offences. They are therefore such a small relative penalty as to be useless in changing behaviour.

So, in my view at least, speeding penalties have more in common with a road use fee than a punishment. They are more of a tax than a fine.

Independent MP Dan Sullivan used Freedom of Information laws to uncover a report to the Carpenter Government recommending an increase in the use of speed cameras to increase revenue from speeding fines by some $200 million a year.

There would be a six-fold increase in speeding fines to more than two million each year.

But, just like the alcopops strategy, the report by Monash University academic Max Cameron indicates that for the associated revenue targets to be reached there is the assumption of very little change in driver behaviour.

“This report is conclusive proof that the State Government is more interested in using speed cameras to raise revenue rather than reduce the road toll,” Mr Sullivan concluded.

“It is clear that the Government’s only new speed enforcement strategy involves increasing the number of speed cameras in a way that maximises its revenue from speeding fines.

“The report contains no analysis of the benefits of increasing the visible presence of police on our roads or providing better driver education instead of increasing the reliance on speed cameras, probably because these strategies cost money rather than raise it.”

Mr Sullivan noted that the 2006 Monash report stated: “No crash-based evaluation of WA’s Multanova speed camera program could be found.”

The report showed the Government was considering installing 24 speed cameras on the Mitchell and Kwinana freeways, even though it found a low rate of accidents on those roads.

“Despite not knowing what effect speed cameras have had and in the face of a worsening road toll the Government remains hell-bent on introducing more of the same,” Mr Sullivan said.

A subsequent report by PA Consulting Group warned the Government that a big increase in the number of speed cameras and fines would push the police infringement processing department to breaking point.

lantes destroy or damage speed cameras in Maryland and Somerset, UK.

Maryland, UK Speed Cameras Vandalized, Destroyed

Vigilantes destroy or damage speed cameras in Maryland and Somerset, UK.

Vigilantes have taken action against speed cameras in Maryland and the UK this month. According to the Gaithersburg, Maryland Gazette, four Montgomery County speed cameras have been vandalized in the past several weeks. Officials would only confirm that a camera stationed at Georgia Avenue the between King William Drive and Queen Mary Drive in Olney had suffered damage. Police learned of the attack on the morning of August 1.

County police prefer to withhold all other facts regarding the damaged cameras, even going so far as to refuse to identify the locations of the attacks. Although media reports of damaged cameras in the US are rare, at least fourteen attacks have taken place in the county in the fifteen months since the photo radar program began.

In June, a red light camera in Santa Maria, California was attacked. Other recent, reported incidents involved the shooting of a camera in Tennessee in November and the smashing of a control box in California last August. In 2006, the German company Traffipax had to lock down its speed cameras with chains after one of the devices was stolen in Girard, Ohio. The only other reported incident of a camera being bent happened this January in New South Wales, Australia. According to a witness, the device had been used "to do chin ups."

In the UK, Avon and Somerset Police reported vigilantes burned a speed camera on the A37 Ilchester Road near Yeovil last Thursday. A burning tire was used to destroy the £45,000 (US $90,000) automated ticketing machine.

Source: Four speed cameras vandalized in county (8/21/2008)

Police grapple with defective detectors

Asher Moses Sydney Morning Herald.

Supposedly high-tech scanners bought by NSW Police this year to catch motorists with speed radar detectors installed in their cars are unable to detect models that are more than two years old, tests have shown.

Earlier this year Police Minister David Campbell announced 50 highway patrol cars in NSW would be fitted out with the scanner devices, confusingly dubbed radar detector detectors (RDDs).

Mr Campbell said the scanners - made by Queensland company Stealth Micro Systems with the model name Spectre - would cost police $4000 each.

Motorists caught with a radar detector could be fined more than $1200 and lose nine demerit points.

However, tests performed by radar detector sellers and an independent testing body have found that the Spectre scanners are useless at detecting at least two models, the Beltronics STI Driver and the newer Escort Passport 9500ci, which are freely available to buy in Australia.

Radar detectors were banned from being sold or used in NSW 21 years ago, but they are still legal for sale in other states such as Western Australia. That means police are powerless to stop people from buying them from online stores interstate, such as radars.com.au.

Police say the use of the detectors encourages dangerous driving as people could speed without fear of being caught.

Nick Balgowan, owner of radars.com.au, said the number of undetectable radar detectors was growing and even a budget radar detector was electronically much quieter than models from several years ago.

"All the radar detector manufacturers have the police scanners so they're working on ways around it all the time," he said.

Balgowan, who has worked in the industry for 10 years and has first-hand experience testing the technology, said the police scanners were designed to detect electronic noise emitted by the devices. However, the $800 Beltronics and $2500 Escort models include metal plates that prevent the noise from leaking out.

Tests conducted by Speed Measurement Laboratories, which tests radar detectors and related technologies for manufacturers and law enforcement agencies around the world, also found that the Beltronics model was undetectable by the Spectre police scanners.

The Escort 9500ci is based on the same design as the Beltronics model but includes a built-in police laser jammer.

The US distributor of the Spectre scanners, Stalker Radar, admits on its website that the devices are capable of detecting "all but two" radar detectors.

Further, even non-stealth radar detector models, such as the $495 Whistler XTR690, could detect the police scanner long before the motorist was caught because even the RDDs - which are essentially modified radar detectors - produced noise, Balgowan said.

The Herald asked NSW Police if it was aware that the RDDs it uses were not completely effective, and whether the revelations would undermine its efforts to catch radar detector users.

The traffic services commander, Chief Superintendent John Hartley, said: "Our RDD are state of the art and the software is immediately upgradeable by our supplier to combat any new radar detectors that are introduced on the market."

Balgowan, who said he had not received a single report of a customer being caught by police in more than two years, dismissed the response as nothing more than "scare tactics".

"They can upgrade their RDD software to scan more or wider frequencies when radar detector manufacturers bring out new radar detectors with mixers on different frequencies," he said.

"But as some of these designs have either no detectable emission (microwave or radio waves essentially) or extremely low emissions, then there is simply nothing for the police RDD to even look for."

Tuckey loses court speeding challenge

The Western Australian News Paper. 5th July 2008, 6:45 WST

MICHAEL BENNETT

Controversial Federal MP Wilson Tuckey has lost his fight to beat a $150 speeding fine after nearly three hours arguing his case in Narrogin Magistrate’s Court yesterday.

Tuckey, representing himself, tried to persuade the court that there was no evidence the speed picked up by a police radar was his.

He was caught travelling in his Holden Commodore SSV8 at 123kmh in a 110kmh zone on Albany Highway near Williams last September on his way to Frankland with his wife.

He told the court there was no evidence that the radar equipment was trained on his vehicle.

But Magistrate Elizabeth Hamilton said the only logical inference was that the radar was trained on Tuckey’s vehicle.

“Being that no other vehicle was on the road at the time,” she said. The police officer who issued the fine told the court that Tuckey became angry and agitated when she told him he had been pulled over for speeding.

“He said, ‘I’m a member of Parliament’,” Const. Jordana Leavesley told the court.

She said Tuckey told her his cruise control was set at “around 110”.

“He evaded the question of what the cruise control was set at when I asked him later,” she said.

Magistrate Hamilton repeatedly told Tuckey that he had presented no evidence to the court to prove his assertion that the radar device was deficient. She said he must present expert evidence.

“You are in a court of law, not standing in Parliament making a parliamentary speech,” she said.

Tuckey said his main motivation for bringing the case was the fact that speeding fines from radars meant the average person had to prove innocence rather than the prosecution proving their guilt.

At one stage, he produced a tuning fork and banged it on the lectern to show how flimsy the testing procedures were for police radars.

Magistrate Hamilton told him he needed an expert to prove this.

Tuckey was ordered to pay the $150 fine as well as $110.20 in court costs. He said he would consider appealing against the decision.

Outside court, Tuckey said there was more protection in the law for terrorists than there was for motorists.

“I am very passionate about this and there is absolutely no doubt that the easiest thing for me to have done was to pay the fine,” he said.

Multanovas soon to be 24/7 !!

6PR Radio Perth, 26/6/08

Confirmation that the revenue raising Multanova speed cameras will soon be deployed 24/7. Undoubtedly near poorly signed speed changes, on hills, bends and other inappropriate areas.

Hand-held speed detector may not be legal, says solicitor. Call for police to stop using device

Published: 18/06/2008. The Press and Journal UK

ANOTHER Scottish solicitor and road-traffic expert has claimed that a speed detection device which has caught thousands of Scotland’s motorists might not be legal.

Road Traffic Law’s Graham Walker is calling for police to stop using the Pro Laser III handheld speed meter as it is not covered by the law for use in Scotland.

Already there have been several challenges to the device, including an unsuccessful one at Portree District Court and at Inverness and Fort William sheriff courts.

According to Mr Walker, the Pro Laser III is not covered by current legislation allowing speed guns as it has never been approved by statutory instrument as required by the current law.

He claims that an approval order was granted, but that this is not the correct type of secondary legislation required in law – it is only effective in England – and therefore evidence from the devices cannot be used to prosecute drivers in Scotland.

The American-made Pro Laser III works by bouncing a laser off a vehicle to determine its speed, as opposed to devices which work by having the car go through an induction loop or radar beam, the so-called GATSO cameras.

Glasgow-based lawyer Mr Walker said: “In 1993 legislation was granted that allowed evidence from GATSO cameras and other fixed devices to be used in evidence.

“However the Pro Laser III works by bouncing a laser off the vehicle, so first of all there is confusion over devices like the Pro Laser III being valid – because the car does not pass through it.

“That may sound like a minor matter, but there’s quite a distinction.”

Drivers who have lost jobs, mortgages, and even relationships after convictions that caused them to lose their licence might have an appeal point and should seek legal advice as soon as possible said Mr Walker.

A spokesman for the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland said: “It’s a reserved matter. If it’s passed by the UK Parliament it applies to Scotland, so when such a statutory instrument is signed it applies to England, Wales and Scotland.

“We’ve had a lawyer look into this. This claim by Mr Walker is without base.

“I think what’s happening is that he’s confusing the two levels of government.

“Mr Walker’s concern is that a statutory instrument has not been passed in Scotland. It doesn’t have to be when it’s reserved matters.”

Australia: 1500 Police Officers Believe Main Job is Revenue Generation

Herald Sun (Australia), 4/11/2008

Survey shows two-thirds of Victoria, Australia police believe speed cameras are installed only for profit.

A landmark survey of 3459 police officers in Victoria, Australia today exposed a disturbing shift in law enforcement priorities. A total of 42 percent of the police surveyed by the Herald Sun newspaper believed their primary mission has become revenue generation.

The shift is seen even more clearly in the attitude of police toward speed cameras. A mere six percent believed the government’s assertion that the purpose of photo enforcement was to reduce traffic fatalities. More than 70 percent of respondents insisted profit, not safety, was the true motivation. The state earned A$147 million with 671,063 mobile speed camera fines in the last fiscal year.

A spokesman for the chief commissioner dismissed the revenue raising claims by pointing to a government report that showed significant reductions in the number of accidents and injuries where speed cameras are used. In the Herald Sun survey, front line officers criticized high-ranking police officials for manipulating certain types of statistics to achieve a public perception of success.

“Everyone knows that the current crime figures are incorrect and tweaked by command to ensure the force looks good,” one officer wrote.

In 2006, the British Medical Journal compared hospital admission records to UK police statistics to conclude the police were underreporting the number of serious injuries from traffic accidents. Experts suggested that police officers were being coerced to do this to create the appearance that speed cameras were responsible for a reduction in serious injuries. The Herald Sun survey showed officers in Victoria were told to implement similar practices with respect to major crimes in Victoria.

“They tell us not to report certain crimes as what they actually are instead telling us to report them as lesser crime, so it shows the stats for serious crime are down,” another officer wrote.

ED: Nothing we haven't all known for a long time!

Story Radar ban plan may scupper 'lifesaver'

By MATT CALMAN - The Dominion Post | Monday, 16 June 2008

A new device that alerts drivers to road hazards has caught the eye of the Fire Service, but it may be scuppered by government plans to ban radar detectors.


The Australian Drivers Association intends to roll out the transmitter in New Zealand. It is compatible with the 100,000 radar detectors already on the market, after success with it in Western Australia.

But the benefits of the system could be lost if a proposal to ban radar detectors proceeds.

The Safety Warning System, a small portable transmitter, works by sending specific alerts, such as "Emergency Vehicle Ahead" or "Highway Work Crews Ahead", to any radar detector that comes within one kilometre.

Transport Safety Minister Harry Duynhoven announced in December a proposal to ban radar detectors, which could eventually see drivers fined $150 and slapped with 75 demerit points for using the device.

Mr Duynhoven said the sole reason for radar detectors was to help drivers "avoid being caught for speeding so therefore they can speed with confidence".

Australian Drivers Association president Glenn Secco said the safety warning system could be set up at schools, in emergency vehicles and at known black spots.

Research and Development team member Keith Whale, of the Fire Service, said they were interested in the device, after an approach from Mr Secco, but would wait to see if the Government banned radar detectors.

They were also testing the device to see if it affected any of the electrical equipment on their fire engines.

"There's no doubt that the idea offers considerable value," Mr Whale said. "Anything ... that raises awareness, makes our passage to the incident safer and faster."

Mr Secco said radar detectors emitted a mixture of warnings about speed cameras and a large proportion of false alarms, which had the effect of slowing drivers down.

"They tried to ban them in the US with the same premise that it aids speeding drivers but they couldn't prove it." A ban on radar detectors would render the safety warning system useless, he said.

"They're throwing out this technology that slows down the traffic and saves lives [and is] a privately funded road safety project.

"There's no doubt this technology saves people's lives."

The implementation of the safety alert system was being funded by a 5 per cent levy on radar detector sales.

Once transmitters were widespread, the 100,000 people who used radar detectors in New Zealand would automatically start getting alerts, he said.

"It basically screams at you to slow down."

Mr Duynhoven said the argument that warning systems relied on existing radar detectors, was a "justification" used around the world whenever a country tried to ban them.

A simple device could be introduced to work with any warning system at a fraction of the cost of some of the sophisticated radar detectors on the market, he said.

ED: The police continual spill rhetoric claiming radar detectors "cause deaths" yet there is no evidence to support this blatantly false statement. it is a simple matter to validate how vehicles in a fatal car accident have been fitted with a radar detector, probably none or very few. Why? Because radar detector owners are SAFER drivers. Surely if radar detectors did actually cause accidents, the police would love to publish this information, but its not published nor even recorded by the police as it would expose their own ignorance.

Road safety group criticises radar detector motion

ABC News. 15/6/08.

The chairman of the Road Safety Council, Grant Dorrington, says he is disappointed that a company which profits from the sale of radar detectors can employ someone to write a Parliamentary motion espousing their benefits.

A Corruption and Crime Commission (CCC) report tabled during the week revealed that Liberal MP John McGrath put up a motion that had been written by the lobbyist Brian Burke designed to sideline plans to ban radar detectors.

Mr McGrath was cleared of misconduct by the CCC.

Mr Dorrington says the first priority of everyone in Parliament should be to save lives on the roads.

"The people that are bringing these detectors into our state are actually paying for people to make comments in Parliament supporting their views on road safety," he said.

"That is not right and we have an obligation to protect the lives of our people, not encourage people to cheat when they're driving cars at speed."

Mr Dorrington says he finds the action almost unbelievable and WA is the only state in Australia where the detectors are still legal.

"The Road Safety Council has recommended to our minister to get rid of them and yet as I said again, we find in Parliament that people are paying money to have their opinions given to try and keep them in Western Australia," he said.

ED: Of course, if anybody ACTUALLY listened to Grant Dorrington, we would have cameras at every intersection, and Multanova on every street.  See the next article to see why this makes NO sense.  There is not a single shred of evidence to support outlawing radar detectors.  The rhetoric that speed kills is so over hyped. All other statistics show radar detector owners are safer and more conscientious drivers! How about poor roads, poor signage, poor driver training and unsafe driving.  A speed camera does not curb any of these practices - they actually allow them.

Speeding fines climb to $70m as road deaths soar

Written by Yasmine Phillips

The West Australia news paper

Thursday, June 12, 2008

Revenue from speeding drivers caught by Multanovas and hand-held cameras almost doubled last year to more than $70 million while the road toll spiralled to an 11-year high, according to figures that have cast fresh doubt over the State Government's road safety strategy.

The figures showed the total fines increased by about 87,000 and that motorists who were caught driving 10-19km over the speed limit made up the greatest proportion of infringements, paying fines of about $37 million.

The statistics, provided in response to Opposition questions in Parliament, also showed drivers speeding less than 9kms over the limit accounted for 45 per cent of Multanova fines and 26 per cent of the revenue.

The Opposition said yesterday the statistics shows the Government's tactics were failing to have any meaningful impact on the number of road deaths.

The Government is considering a new strategy that includes new high-tech speed traps on up to 40 roads. Shadow road safety minister John McGrath said the figures proved WA's appalling road toll would not be turned around with another strategy focused on speed cameras.

"We think a stronger police presence on the roads would act as a stronger deterrent that whizzing past a Multanova and getting an infringement three or four months later," he said.

Opposition Leader Troy Buswell said the statistics indicated speed cameras were nothing more than a revenue-raising trap.

Mr McGrath said Multanova revenue rose by almost 47 per cent between 2006 and last year while fines from hand-held cameras increased by about 83 per cent.

The road toll climbed from 201 in 2006 to 236 last year.

Police Minister John Kobelke said revenue increases could be attributed to a tough new penalty system introduced at the start of last year and Multanovas being used in regional areas "which mean that the overall number of images declined, but the hit rate increase."

Mr Kobelke said the road toll had fallen since Labour came to power in 2001.

The RAC said WA needed a comprehensive strategy that addressed speeding and driver behaviour as well as safer roads and vehicles.

Legal Restraint

Michel Foucalt, Biopolitics, Chris Berg, Speeding Cameras, Binge Drinking.

Laws are restrained by politics, society and culture to an extent. A law which goes against standard and common practice will get openly disregarded. In the same that a law which is too conservative or archaic will be disobeyed as social and cultural practice increasingly liberalizes. The laws can be enforced but at great expenditure of energy. Most police-states end up consuming so much energy that they require propping up by some resource (oil for instance) or they represent a factional interest so exclusively they force the nation into poverty and ruin (Myanmar).

Biopolitics is the process put forward by Michel Foucault to describe how modern liberal democracies protect life through law; whereas before laws protected against violence. The conservative right to life faction has ridden this wave and is many respects the most visible face of this process. However the nanny-state style policies of protecting people from themselves is another insidious biopolitical practice. Alcopops is a very recent example.

As Chris Berg writes trying to establish conventions through the state that contradict common practice means the convention is devalued, the institution ignored and the process brought into disrepute as non-relevant:

It may well be that a third glass of wine dramatically increases the risk of accident and injury to the drinker. But what good are the federal government's new healthy drinking guidelines if they deviate so far from the norm of usual social drinking practices?

The principle of self-governance seeks efficiencies through spontaneous self-organisation with minimal regulation. This process is accepted economically with a free-market with minimal state interference. Yet in other areas governments consistently intrude using biopolitics, or the protection of life, or protecting people from themselves, as the validation for it.

This week I was coming home down Route 101 north. It is a three lane high way that runs up the East Valley of Phoenix. There is currently a fourth lane being added to the highway and there are jersey barriers in the left lanes. Because of this construction the speed limit is reduced to 55mph.

No-one does it. Not even the police that travel the 101.

The safe speed for this highway is somewhere between 65mph and 75mph. This is what everyone does. Foolishly on Thursday night rush hour a mobile radar detector was put on the 101 north. It caused a traffic jam. People jumped on the brakes, and the free flow of self-organisation was broken. Whoever did it worked out it was a bad idea as it was removed the next day.

A study was done in New York where speed limits were arbitrarily reduced to see what commuter behaviour was. It turned out the speed limits were ignored and the traffic continued at the speeds commuters considered safe and appropriate.

When people see speeding cameras, whether in NSW or Arizona, they throw the anchors out and pass by the camera at 5pmh below the speed limit. This is more dangerous than the free flow of traffic.

[US] federal and state studies have consistently shown that the drivers most likely to get into accidents in traffic are those travelling significantly below the average speed. According to an Institute of Transportation Engineers Study, those driving 10 mph slower than the prevailing speed are six times as likely to be involved in an accident. That means that if the average speed on an interstate is 70 mph, the person travelling at 60 mph is far more likely to be involved in an accident than someone going 70 or even 80 mph.

The local council of Scottsdale has peppered the north Route 101 from Shea Rd to Scottsdale Rd with speeding cameras. IN rush hour there are always traffic jams in that area. Yet the free flowing East Valley 101 from Shea Rd to Warner Rd does not have the same issues. The difference is that the cameras are causing traffic jams.

I have driven on the German autobahns. They are not as open as they used to be, between construction and local principalities putting speed limits on the autobahn (to protect life, not enable liberty) means that much of it is speed limited. As someone from a country that is speed limited everywhere was that Germans were very rule oriented in their behaviour; just general consideration was enough to make the principle of spontaneous self-organisation safe enough at speeds of 170 kmh. The other interesting aspect was that people did the speed they thought as safe and no-one beeped, hassled or drove at them aggressively for it.

This is what gets lost in the over-regulation of the biopolitical state.

Multanova photos ‘thrown out’

17th May 2008, 9:15 WST

YASMINE PHILLIPS

Police were so far behind in processing speeding fines that thousands of Multanova photographs were thrown out last year rather than being used to issue fines to offending motorists, the Opposition claimed yesterday.

Figures supplied by WA Police in response to questions from the Opposition in Parliament show that about 28,000 Multanova images were discarded last year.

Shadow road safety minister John McGrath said the cancellations proved that police were forced to discard the photos because of the massive backlog in processing Multanova fines, which have an average delay of 53 days.

Police deny that the images were discarded because of a backlog in processing fines.

The figures also showed that the number of pictures taken by speed cameras had halved over the past four years despite steady increases in the number of Multanovas in use.

Mr McGrath said the declining number of photographs was further evidence that the system was not coping and that a parliamentary inquiry was needed to identify the cause and extent of the problem.

“Are speeding drivers being let off the hook because police are taking fewer camera shots or throwing more film into the bin?” he said.

“I think the public needs some answers on Multanovas and how they work. We don’t expect the police to tell people the great intricacies but we do need to be confident that the system is going to work properly and will pass all tests in terms of scrutiny.”

Last year, more than 1100 rolls of film, which each hold an average of 25 photos, were discarded. A total of 468,000 images were taken, compared with more than one million four years ago and 708,000 in 2006.

Traffic services Insp. John Vivian said the films were cancelled because of testing, technical and operational issues, not because of the backlog in processing infringements.

He said the implementation of the new speed camera infringement processing program, CAP Speed, had presented some difficulties but he expected improvements as soon as next month.

“Yes, there is a backlog but we are putting out the number of images as quickly as we can,” Insp. Vivian said. “We’ve employed more people to address those issues and we’re slowly bringing it down.”

“The underlying thing behind all this is we do have strict quality control and if there is an operating error we will cancel the film.”

He said people were quick to criticise speed cameras without recognising that the road safety message was getting through to West Australians.

RAC member advocacy executive manager David Moir, who has called for a review into the Multanova program, questioned their use as a deterrent given the lengthy delays between the time an offence occurred and the issue of the infringement notice.

“The question is how well is the current enforcement program working given that the whole purpose of this is to reduce crashes yet we are seeing the number of fatal accidents and serious injuries rising in recent years.”

Police plane catching speeders

Written by FRANK PEEBLES
Citizen staff
Tuesday, 20 May 2008

The RCMP traffic plane flies over the intersection of Highway 16 and Domano Boulevard. (Citizen photo by Brent Braaten)

There are now speed traps in the skies around Prince George.  For the first time, RCMP are using planes to catch drivers speeding on local highways thanks to some lines on the asphalt and some eyes in the sky.

"The first time they used it a couple of weekends ago, they caught 50," said RCMP Sgt. Pat McTiernan. "The air patrols use the lines painted on the highway plus a time calculation to determine a driver's rate of speed. A member in a vehicle on the ground then pulls the driver over when the information is radioed down from the plane."
The technique has been used in several other locations of Western Canada.

"We are marking 16 locations throughout North District," said RCMP Staff Sgt. Gord Flewelling. "We will be using the plane to identify aggressive drivers: those who speed, pass on double-solid lines, and so forth. These zones of focus will be in our high-crash areas where we really want to improve the safety of the public."

The lines are painted according to a tested formula that is accepted in court for its accuracy. McTiernan said lines had to be painted on straight stretches "to allow people notice to safely pull over and stop" when directed to do so by police on the ground.
McTiernan said one driver caught by the eyes in the sky did not understand how the process worked. The driver was sporting a top-of-the-line radar detector and upon receiving a speeding ticket promptly pulled the device from the dash and angrily smashed it to pieces on the pavement, thinking it useless. Police explained that the rate of speed was not determined using radar, but simple math in a controlled environment - all from high above.

The air patrols are so far on stretches of Highway 97 to the south of the city, but police say all highways around Prince George will have sections set for air enforcement in the coming weeks.

Roadside speeding fines plummet

Posted Mon Apr 14, 2008 8:14am AEST. ABC.

New figures show the number of speeding fines issued by roadside police officers has dropped significantly, while cameras are catching more drivers than ever before.

The New South Wales Government statistics show police issued 202,000 speeding tickets last year - 44 per cent down on the figure for 2003-2004.

Fines issued through speed cameras are on the increase, rising to 620,000 last year.

The Traffic Services Commander, Superintendent John Hartley, says the figures are misleading.

He says although there have been fewer speeding fines issued by roadside police, the number of overall infringement notices has risen.

"The number of infringements issued by police generally over the same period has increased from 480,000 to 540,000 last year," he said.

"So we have more tickets being issued, a huge increase in breath tests and the fact is, our road toll's the lowest it's been in 50 years."

But Opposition police spokesman Mike Gallacher says that is not the point.

"[Drivers] are not getting the message at all and what it also shows is that the highway patrol is not out there," he said.

"They're being taken off to do other jobs...

"The highway patrol are the best most effective way to actually get the message across by being out there on the streets, so despite what police say, I think the figures speak for themselves. It's such a substantial drop."

Superintendent Hartley denies the highway patrol is losing officers.

Speed camera fine doubts

Posted Fri Apr 18, 2008 8:01pm AEST. ABC.

Speed camera accuracy has been questioned in SA.

The South Australian Opposition says an apparent speed camera glitch means hundreds of motorists may have been wrongly fined.

An Adelaide man is disputing a speeding fine issued last January based on evidence from a mobile police camera on Main North Road, because of contradictory information about the camera's positioning.

The ABC Stateline program has revealed conflicting figures from the police and the SA Police Minister that suggest the camera was in two locations at once.

The Opposition's Iain Evans says a mistake has been made has called for any wrong charges to be dropped.

"Commonsense says all of the photos taken that day from that camera are likely to be wrong," he said.

"They all should be reviewed and, if they are wrong, they all should be withdrawn.

"If people have paid fines or lost demerit points, the demerit points should be reinstated and the fines reimbursed."

No speeding fine cover-up, Qld Deputy Premier says

Posted Thu Sep 20, 2007 9:05am AEST. ABC.

Queensland's Deputy Premier Paul Lucas has admitted to being busted for speeding but denies reports he deliberately had his ministerial driver take the blame.

Mr Lucas says his driver paid the fine believing he had been picked up by a speed camera while driving 71 kilometres in a 60-kilometre zone to Brisbane airport in April.

But Mr Lucas says in June he discovered he was the one speeding after viewing a photo.

The Deputy Premier saying there has been no cover-up.

Mr Lucas says he tried to rectify the error with the police but they would not change it as the fine had been paid.

"I did all that I could I wrote to them saying, 'please give me the ticket'," he said.

"I wrote in June to them asking for them for the ticket but they wouldn't do that - that's their right. They treat everyone equally but I also have to understand that as Transport Minister you have to set an example and that wasn't a good example in speeding.

"Even though it was slightly over the limit it is not good enough."

Mr Lucas says he did not need to make a public statement when he realised his driver had incorrectly taken responsibility for a speeding fine.

He says speeding is a serious offence, but the incident in question is not a matter of public record.

"We have a demerit point system that takes into account the fact that people do make mistakes," he said.

"We don't want people to make any mistakes, but that's what the demerit point system is.

"It's not like some other offences like high-range speeding where you lose your licence immediately or some offences where actually go to court and are disqualified - those are matters of public interest, this is not."

But Queensland Liberal leader Bruce Flegg says it took three months for Mr Lucas to acknowledge the error and it shows there is something seriously wrong.

"If it were any other driver protected by an incorrect statutory declaration, Mr Lucas would want to throw the book at them," he said.

Mr Lucas has reimbursed his driver for the $100 fine.

Lucas slams media for reporting MP's traffic violations

Posted Mon Oct 29, 2007 7:31pm AEDT. ABC

Deputy Queensland Premier Paul Lucas has lashed out at the media for its reporting of an MP's traffic infringement history.

Premier Anna Bligh sacked Michael Choi as the parliamentary secretary to the Transport Minister, after discovering he had received a number of speeding fines in the past 12 months and has previously had his licence suspended.

Mr Lucas himself came under scrutiny last month when it was revealed his driver had paid a speeding fine incurred when the former transport minister was actually behind the wheel.

Mr Lucas became agitated when ABC radio's Madonna King asked him about another MP who was promoted following a speeding fine.

"Its funny we don't know what the media's history is and the media has the ability to comment on these issues... I'm making the point to you that you have the use of the airwaves and the Courier Mail has the use of the print medium to talk about people's traffic history, but they don't talk about their own," he said.

Driver attitudes worry police

Posted Tue Apr 10, 2007 8:47am AEST. ABC

Police say they are amazed at the stupidity and poor attitude of some of the state's motorists, after four people were killed on the roads over the Easter long weekend.

26 people were killed nationally across the same period.

Inspector Rob McCall from the Traffic Support Branch says more than 11,000 infringement notices were issued to people who should know better.

"Over the 10,000 mark now for speeding offences, that's combining both speed camera and infringement notices issued directly by police. In terms of seatbelts we're up to 405. For drink driving, which is a concern, 515," he said.

Inspector McCall says too many people underestimate the consequences of drink driving.

"The concern is drivers attitude and we must change that small percentage of people that continue to drink and drive," he said.

"They're quite lucky that they have been picked up for drink driving otherwise could end up with a fatal consequence or a serious injury to somebody else or themselves."

He says a 32-year-old Brisbane man had his licence suspended after allegedly doing 125 kilometres per hour in a 60 zone.

Inspector McCall says the man received a $700 fine.

"If he had've been involved in a crash he would've ended up with serious injuries," he said.

"From what I understand he's been issued with infringement notices and has lost eight points on his licence and has immediate suspension on his drivers license."

Police clock motorist at 200 km/h while on the phone

ABC News 9/4/08.


Police in Perth say a motorist was travelling at 203 km/h while on the phone and under the influence of alcohol. (ABC TV)

Map: Leeming 6149
Police in Perth say they have caught a motorist travelling at more than 200 kilometres per hour while talking on his mobile phone and under the influence of alcohol.

It is alleged the motorist was travelling at 203 km/h, in a 100 zone, on Roe Highway in the Perth suburb of Leeming at 12:45 am.

Police say he was still on the phone when he stopped for police and appeared to be arguing with his wife.

It is also alleged he had a blood alcohol level in excess of .05 and was driving without a licence.

The man's vehicle has been seized under the state's anti-hoon laws.

He is due to appear in court later today.

NOTE: A photographic speed camera would not have stopped this person until they either crashed or killed somebody. We highly commend the police for capturing this reckless driver.

NSW fire-fighters hit with speeding fines (wow, could I work for the government?)

April 4, 2008. NineMSN

NSW fire-fighters have been issued with speeding tickets after rushing to life-threatening emergencies.

The state government's State Debt Recovery Office is sending infringement notices to the homes of individual fire truck drivers and then leaving it up to the drivers to sign statutory declarations or take the matter to court to avoid paying the fines, News Limited reports.

The State Debt Recovery Office issued one fine even though the infringements notice clearly identified the vehicle as being a fire truck.

All infringements by fire brigades vehicles on call were previously struck off by the Fire Brigades NSW chief legal officer and police withdrew the penalty.

Now, the infringements are passed on to drivers who have to prove they were responding to emergencies.

The Fire Brigades Employee Union said it had issued a directive to its members not to pay the fines.

"It's the government fining itself, then spending a massive amount of money to sort out that it doesn't need to pay its own fines," secretary Martin Flynn said.

He said if the government did not fix the problem members would be advised to drive to road rules when going to emergencies.

High speed, cut price, vehicles offered for sale.  AS IF.

Yet another magic car. There are many document instances of police photo camera sending tickets to vehicle owners who car is obviously not physically capable of travelling at the alleged speed.

Reacting to news that a local man was arrested for breaking physics-defying speed barriers, a Scottsdale car dealer is promoting the fast moving vehicle at a lot on Hayden Road. Drivers interested in the vehicle that police say can reach 147 m.p.h. can see it for themselves. The creative dealer prominently displays the make of car that astonished even its manufacturer. Smile for the car dealer!

South Australian speeding ticket for Briton withdrawn

Thursday March 27, 05:21 PM. Yahoo News.

An Englishman issued a ticket for speeding in the Adelaide Hills has had the fine withdrawn because he's never been in Australia.

David Smart, a 65-year-old former surveyor from Scunthorpe in northern England, was flabbergasted to receive a speeding ticket from South Australian Police.

ADVERTISEMENT


He was fined $196 for driving 8km/h over the speed limit in Littlehampton in the Adelaide Hills.

SA Police said they issued Mr Smart the ticket after the registered owner of the speeding vehicle, Kathryn Julia Fluin, signed a statutory declaration declaring the Englishman was driving the car at the time of the offence.

"I've never been to Australia, which is a wonderful country I'm sure, and I would love to go there one day," Mr Smart told AAP.

"And I've never had a ticket in my life, I'm pleased to say.

"The woman is obviously mistaken and where she got my name and address from I have no idea."

After consulting with Scunthorpe police, Mr Smart was advised not to pay the fine, which originally arrived in his letterbox last December.

However he received a stern reminder from SA Police, ordering him to pay up or risk being issued an even heftier fine.

The fine stated the car was caught speeding at 68km/h in a 60km/h zone on Adelaide Road, Littlehampton, at 9am on December 14, 2007.

The fine said Ms Fluin "affirmed in a statutory declaration that you were the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged offence".

"I went to my local police station and they advised me against payment because I haven't been there," Mr Smart said.

"I think if I get caught for speeding I'll have to give them Kathryn Fluin's name.

SA Police business services director Denis Patriarca said Mr Smart had been exonerated.

"As the nominated driver has disputed being the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged offence, his expiation notice has been withdrawn and police are following up with the registered owner," he said.

Ms Fluin, who couldn't be contacted, is likely to be charged with wilfully making a false statutory declaration, which carries a maximum penalty of four years jail.

Montgomery's Finest Won't Pay Fines

By Ernesto Londoño
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, March 8, 2008; Page A01

Among the thousands of drivers who have been issued $40 fines after being nabbed by Montgomery County's new speed cameras are scores of county police officers. The difference is, many of the officers are refusing to pay.

The officers are following the advice of their union, which says the citations are issued not to the driver but to the vehicle's owner -- in this case, the county.

That view has rankled Police Chief J. Thomas Manger and County Council Member Phil Andrews (D-Gaithersburg-Rockville), who chairs the Public Safety Committee.

"You can't have one set of laws for police officers and another one for the rest of the world," Andrews said.

In recent weeks, officers have twice been photographed speeding past a camera and extending a middle finger, an act that police supervisors interpreted as a gesture of defiance. "There is no excuse for that kind of behaviour," said Andrews, who was briefed on the incidents.

During the last eight months of 2007, the department's cameras recorded 224 instances in which county police vehicles were nabbed travelling more than 10 mph over the speed limit, the department disclosed this week in response to an inquiry from The Washington Post.

Of those citations, 76 were dismissed after supervisors determined that officers were responding to calls or had other valid reasons to exceed the speed limit. Nearly two-thirds of the remaining 148 fines have not been paid, including an unspecified number that remain under investigation, said Lt. Paul Starks, a police spokesman. He said the number of citations issued to police employees this year is not yet available.

Officer Mark Zifcak, president of the Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 35, did not respond to an e-mail and two phone messages this week seeking comment. In a notice posted on its Web site, the union advises that "members should not pay or set court dates for speed camera citations that are issued to the employer."

Manger is demanding that officers pay the fines, a request that has met stiff opposition from union leaders and has been ignored by some sergeants who were asked to investigate whether officers nabbed by the cameras had a valid reason to speed.

"We are not above the law," Manger said in an interview. "It is imperative that the police department hold itself to the same standards that we're holding the public to."

Officials at the county's fire department, sheriff's office and four municipal police departments said employees who have been caught speeding in government vehicles have paid the fines.

"The only time we don't make them pay the fine is if they're on an emergency call," Sheriff Raymond M. Kight said. "We haven't had any resistance at all."

The dispute over the citations is the latest in a series of confrontations between county police commanders and the union, which has become increasingly powerful in recent years.

Leaders of the police union recently filed a grievance arguing that the citations constitute a change in labour conditions that the department must negotiate with the union before implementing.

Some sergeants, who are covered by the union, have refused to investigate whether infractions occurred when officers were responding to calls, forcing commanders to turn to lieutenants, who are not represented by the union, according to two law enforcement sources who spoke on condition of anonymity because the cases are being investigated as personnel matters.

The sources said the cruiser in one of the incidents in which a vulgar gesture was made was assigned to Michael Simpson, an officer in Wheaton. One of the sources said Simpson appears to have been responding to a call in January when he was travelling at more than 80 mph on Randolph Road.

Simpson received speed camera citations in November and December, according to a database of citations obtained under a public records request.

Simpson did not respond to an e-mail message seeking comment, and efforts to contact him through the department's media office were unsuccessful.

Supervisors at the three municipal police departments in the county that operate speed cameras -- Gaithersburg, Rockville and Chevy Chase Village -- said employees have not resisted paying fines.

"We hold them responsible," said Rockville Police Capt. Bob Rappoport, whose department has received about a half-dozen citations. "Our officers have paid out of their own pockets."

Gaithersburg and Rockville officers are not represented by the same union as county police officers, and the Chevy Chase Village police do not have a union.

County Executive Isiah Leggett (D), who said he received and paid for a speed camera citation recently, said that he disagrees with the county police union's position but that he is confident that Manger will hold his officers accountable.

Under the law, owners of vehicles, not drivers, are punished for failure to pay fines. Manger said, however, that officers who continue to ignore citations might be disciplined.

Montgomery is the only county in Maryland that is authorized to use cameras to enforce speed limits, but legislation is moving through the General Assembly this year to allow speed cameras state-wide.

A bill introduced by Gov. Martin O'Malley's administration would allow local jurisdictions to use speed cameras in residential neighbourhoods, near schools and on highways with construction work. The Senate could vote on the measure as early as next week.

More police speed cameras for Western Australia.

Paul Lampathakis

Perth Western Australia January 12, 2008

SPEEDING motorists beware - WA police plan to increase the number of speed and traffic-light cameras by a massive 350 per cent.

Currently, there are 25 Multanovas and 30 red-light cameras in the state. T

he proposal, contained in a police-commissioned consultants' report, says: "... additional cameras are planned (an increase of 350 per cent) to achieve targeted reduction in speed and red-light violations, and hence road-related deaths.''

Police would not reveal whether the plans involved increasing each type of camera by this amount, or both combined.

If the number of each type was increased, it would result in up to 112 speed and 135 traffic-light cameras on the state's roads.

Police confirmed the report had gone to the WA Government for consideration, as part of a "broader approach to road safety.

The report, titled Infringement Management Service Provision, Project Steering Committee 1, said: "(WA Police) is facing a challenge in delivering on its road-safety objectives, as a result of constraints being experienced in its speeding and red-light camera, and traffic-infringement operations.

"(It) currently takes nearly six months to process an infringement, a delay that erodes the effect of cameras on driver behaviour.

"Further, additional cameras are planned (an increase of 350 per cent) to achieve targeted reduction in speed and red-light violations, and hence road-related deaths, placing further strain on the current operation.''

Opposition Leader Paul Omodei said the report showed the Government was on the wrong track because increasing the number of speed cameras had failed to curb road deaths.

Since 2006, Multanova numbers have nearly doubled, from 14 to 25, yet the death toll shot to an 11-year-high of 235 last year, he said.

"If the State Government is planning to go ahead with this, when speed cameras have proven ineffective in reducing the number of people dying on our roads, then the question must be asked, is it more about revenue-raising than road safety?'' Mr Omodei said.

"I have had enough of hearing about mothers, fathers, sons and daughters dying on our roads, while this Government sits on its hands, refuses to take road safety seriously, and then moves down the same failed path of putting in place more speed cameras as a silver-bullet fix.''

He said the Liberal Party wanted a parliamentary inquiry to come up with solutions.

"We want to look at aspects of road safety, from driver training to the condition of our roads and the amount of time police have to spend off the road to do administration work, rather than patrolling,'' he said.

"There is no doubt that we need more police on our roads. I want to see at least a 25 per cent increase in the amount of time spent by police officers on traffic patrol after 2007's shocking road toll.''

He also said that only 21 cameras were operating and only five of those were based in regional areas where many road fatalities occurred.

A spokesman for acting Police Minister Eric Ripper said the plan was "among all the things continuously being considered''.

He denied it was about revenue, saying speed was a direct contributor to the deaths of about 60 people on WA roads every year.

Comment: The number of people who die DAILY in Australia from suicide and smoking alone is hundreds of times higher than road fatalities, yet there is no fine, no major advertising campaign and little media attention to this fact.  Why?  Simply there is no way to tax people who are suicidal and tobacco is already taxed to the hilt.  Spot the hypocrisy?

Unpaid speeding fines are mounting up.

$500m lost in unpaid fines

The Courier Mail. By Edmund Burke January 12, 2008 11:00pm

ALMOST half a billion dollars in fines are outstanding as the State Government loses its battle to make people pay for offences including speeding, running red lights and littering.

A Sunday Mail investigation has found Queensland's State Penalties Enforcement Registry is overwhelmed by more than 1.9 million unpaid fines worth in excess of $462 million.

The Justice Department declined to provide figures for previous financial years, but a question on notice to State Parliament in July 2004 revealed Queenslanders then owed about $200 million in unpaid fines.

That means the debt has more than doubled in just three-and-a-half years.

Last night, a Justice Department spokesman defended the Government's tardy collection process: "The Queensland Government is collecting more money than ever before from people who refuse to pay fines," he said.

But the body has negotiated repayment plans to recover just $152 million of the outstanding fines – leaving more than $300 million unaccounted for.

The outstanding money represents a significant shortfall in state revenue.

The $462 million bounty could pay for the annual salaries of 7700 teachers, 9625 police officers, 1540 specialist doctors or 6600 nurses.

It could also cover the cost of 1000 buses, 178 CityCats, 28 state-of-the-art aged care facilities, half of the new $940 million Sunshine Coast hospital or the entire Inner Northern Busway project.

RACQ external relations manager Gary Fites said the Government needed to take the issue more seriously.

"That sort of money makes this important. People can't feel like they can get away with their speeding fines," Mr Fites said.

"That money could pay for a third of the Ipswich Motorway upgrade. It's just shy of what the Government invests in the fuel subsidy."

Treasurer Andrew Fraser last night refused to say whether the Government would renew efforts to retrieve the fines, but urged offenders to pay up.

"People who have done the wrong thing once shouldn't do the wrong thing twice," he said.

The State Penalties Enforcement Registry, or SPER, has powers to retrieve fines for a staggering 34,000 different offences involving agencies such as police, the courts, state government departments, local governments, the Electoral Commission and Queensland Transport. Fines range from speeding to failing to vote and to wear a bicycle helmet.

SPER also has the power to suspend a fine-defaulter's driver's licence, or to require employers to deduct money from pays. It can also order a bank to transfer money from bank accounts to SPER.

The news of the massive debt comes as Surf Life Saving Queensland looks into the possibility of giving lifesavers the power to fine beachgoers who ignore warnings.

Tougher water restriction penalties and the introduction of fixed speed cameras will also add to fines.

Speeding fines overwhelmingly headed a Top 20 SPER list of the most common unpaid fines, with Queenslanders owing about $150 million for such offences.

Brisbane City Council issued 191,317 fines worth $11.7 million in 2007, mostly for parking offences.

New radar detectors give speed freaks a rush

As Police Step Up Surveillance, Scofflaw Drivers Fight Back With a High-Tech Arsenal

By JONATHAN WELSH, The Wall Street Journal

January 10, 2008; Page D1

Radar detectors, once thought of as relics, are back on the radar.

As people endure longer commutes and growing traffic jams, they are increasingly tempted to hit the gas pedal harder. Police are fighting back with a web of electronic surveillance, from laser and radar speed traps to automated cameras that spot speeders and issue tickets by mail.

To improve their odds, committed speed demons (and scofflaws) are resorting to a new generation of high-end radar-detection devices. These gadgets, which include the $399 Valentine One, the $450 Escort Passport 9500i and the $450 Bel STi Driver, promise to help drivers spot and avoid radar and laser speed traps. The new models, which detect a wide range of radar bands and lasers, are touted as having better range and more sensitivity than their predecessors while generating fewer false alarms.

Some models use global positioning systems, typically found in navigation devices, to locate other possible pitfalls. The new $440 Cobra XRS-R9G, for example, alerts drivers to red-light and speed-sensing cameras, which are being used in New York; Philadelphia; Scottsdale, Ariz.; and a growing number of other cities.

Make no mistake: Speeding can be lethal. Though the devices are legal for passenger cars in most states, they are frowned on by police officials and safety groups, who stress that speeding is a destructive habit that wastes fuel, slows traffic by causing accidents and costs thousands of motorists their lives each year. "Radar detectors are used by drivers who intend to speed, as opposed to drivers who inadvertently speed on occasion. And speeding is a big safety problem on our roads," says a spokesman for the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, a research group funded by the insurance industry.

Consumer interest in traffic-monitoring systems is growing as people spend more time in their cars and travel farther annually than they used to, according to federal statistics. As growing traffic congestion causes more delays, some motorists are tempted to make up time by going faster. Radar-detector companies say their customers aren't crazed speeders but regular drivers who feel they have a right to know if they are being monitored and want extra protection.

"Look, I'm not a kid and I'm not a big speeder, but I like to be aware when I'm driving," says Barry Lane, 68, a school administrator from Chestnut Ridge, N.Y., who has used radar detectors since the 1980s. He says the devices have helped him on many occasions. A couple of years ago, for example, his detector chimed just as he came over the crest of the Delaware Memorial Bridge into New Jersey. The warning gave him just enough time to slow down while approaching a well-hidden police speed trap.

As navigation systems, voice-activated phones and a range of warning chimes have proliferated in even the most basic vehicles -- and people have become more accustomed to interacting with electronic gadgets in their cars -- devices that warn of police activity have begun to seem more mainstream.

All these factors have led the radar-detector industry to experience "a sort of rebirth," says John Larson, chief executive of Escort Inc., the closely held maker of the Passport 9500i.


Radar detectors first became popular in the 1970s after the U.S. adopted a national 55-mile-per-hour speed limit. Even though the limit helped cut highway deaths and improve fuel economy, motorists widely flouted the rule. For many drivers, keeping such a slow pace felt increasingly frustrating as cars' power, handling and overall performance improved markedly through the 1980s. The 55 mph limit was repealed in 1995, and soon after speed limits began creeping upward state by state, typically to 65, 70 or 75 mph.

While raising limits was supposed to reduce the number of lawbreakers, it seems to have had the opposite effect. Many drivers tend to exceed the limits even when they are set high. Research indicates the higher limits resulted in a 35% increase in deaths on rural highways in the four years after speed limits were raised, the insurance group says. Vehicles are capable of higher speeds than ever, and advanced engines, suspensions and tires make them stable, quiet and easy to drive at high speeds.

Police and other safety officials say they are confounded by people's need to speed, because the danger of driving too fast seems obvious. Speeding was a contributing factor in 31% of traffic fatalities and accounted for 13,543 traffic deaths in 2006, the most recent year for which statistics are available, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Police say excessive speed makes it harder for drivers to negotiate turns and manoeuvre or stop their vehicles in emergencies.

One problem is that drivers, the broader public and politicians tend to view speeding as a harmless infraction that everyone commits occasionally, according to the Insurance Institute. People are more offended when drivers run through red lights or drive drunk.

Speeding is also getting more expensive. States and municipalities that are cash-strapped often use speeding tickets as a way to generate revenue, and insurers penalize drivers for moving violations. Virginia, where radar detectors are illegal, caused a stir last year when it rolled out "abusive driving fees." While it applies to a number of moving violations in addition to speeding, the new rule became widely known as "the $3,000 speeding ticket" because fines and fees can reach and even top that amount. Despite the moneymaking potential, the Virginia State Police say the fees don't affect the way they enforce traffic laws, and police in general say they don't enjoy issuing traffic tickets.

"Safety is the bottom line for us, so we want to slow drivers down because speeding costs lives," says Corinne Geller, public-relations manager for the Virginia State Police. Ms. Geller says police there generally don't "hide" so they can more easily catch speeders. Indeed, they try to be as visible as possible because "the best deterrent is a blue-and-gray [police car] in your rear-view mirror," she says.

Fast drivers face fast license loss - New Zealand set to ban radar detectors!

5:00AM Saturday December 22, 2007. The New Zealand Herald. By Mathew Dearnaley and Paula Oliver


Drivers face losing their licences faster if they keep speeding or running red lights in breach of sweeping new road safety rules.

Neither will they be allowed to use radar detectors to avoid being caught speeding, under a package of measures the Government announced yesterday to cut the road toll to no more than 300 deaths a year by 2010.

Much of the package is aimed at young drivers.

It modifies the graduated licensing system, especially through an extension of the minimum time for which young drivers must be supervised at the wheel.

The Government has decided to accept reduced revenue in general from fines against motorists in return for prescribing higher demerit points for those caught speeding or failing to stop at intersections.

Next year will see a three-tier demerit scheme of 25, 50 or 75 points - depending on the seriousness of offending - towards the 100-point threshold at which licences are suspended for three months.

Drivers also risk having their cars impounded for exceeding speed limits by more than 50 per cent, meaning 75km/h in urban areas, compared with 90km/h now.

Demerits will be higher for all speeding offences, but the toughest clampdown will be on drivers running red lights, who will be slugged with 75 points compared with 20 now.

That should put an extra sting into a red-light camera trial due to start early next year at 10 of Auckland's most dangerous intersections.

Auckland road policing manager Inspector Heather Wells welcomed the move as "a big wake up" for drivers who were too blasé about the risk of injuring or killing others by ignoring red lights.

The minimum time for which people younger than 25 must stay on learner licences before graduating to restricted licences will be doubled to 12 months next year. Such drivers will face tougher practical tests before moving up.

Those on restricted licences are in for considerably lower fines but higher demerit points for breaching conditions such as bans on driving without fully licensed supervisors at night or with passengers.

Their vehicles may also be impounded for 28 days on a second breach of such conditions, but fines will be slashed from $400 to $100 for each offence.

Even failing to wear a seatbelt will attract 25 demerit points as well as $50 fines.

Radar detectors will become illegal, attracting fines and demerit points on an escalating scale in a three-year, phase-out plan. Those using detectors will initially face $50 fines and 25 demerit points, rising to $150 fines and 75 demerit points in the third year.


Transport Safety Minister Harry Duynhoven said he was prepared to withstand a potential backlash by those using detectors to lessen their chances of being caught.

"My job is to try to save lives out there on the road - if people don't like it, tough."

The existing $400 fines for breaches of restricted licence conditions were not working, as young drivers often split the amount with their illegal passengers or avoided paying amounts which they could not otherwise afford.

"But demerit points do work because we know that for these young people, losing their car is the top thing we can do to them," the minister said.

Automobile Association spokesman Mike Noon said the package would go a long way towards safeguarding young drivers by increasing supervision requirements at a time when they were most vulnerable.

He said that a proposal in United Future leader Peter Dunne's private member's bill to raise the minimum driving age to 16 would simply "move the casualty rate out by a year" without ensuring youngsters had more practice before taking sole charge of a vehicle.

Allowing the police to impound vehicles for repeated licence breaches may also make parents more vigilant about the behaviour of young drivers - especially if parents were the vehicle's owners.

Mr Noon said that although he expected the ban on radar detectors to "polarise" motorists, the new strategy of reducing fines while increasing the chances of putting offenders off the road should dispel any criticism of the police for acting as alleged revenue-gatherers.

Ministry of Transport land safety legislation manager Leo Mortimer said that although the 2010 road toll target would be tough to meet, the new measures would "certainly give it a good nudge, because we really want people to change their behaviour".

The Government is also considering in a separate exercise a zero alcohol tolerance for drivers under 20.

Editorial: Safety moves good, but not good enough.

5:00AM Saturday December 29, 2007. The New Zealand Herald.

The Government has lofty aims for the sweeping new road-safety rules that were released just before Christmas. Their purpose, said the Transport Minister, was to slash the road toll to less than 300 deaths a year by 2010. The size of the task was immediately evident, given that on the day of the announcement, when most holiday wheels had yet to turn, the toll for 2007 already stood at 407.

Has the Government come up with a formula that will reverse this trend in time for the 2010 target to be achieved? Probably not. Much of what has been prescribed will help, but the new package is as notable for what is absent as what is in it. A useful point of comparison is the police's prescription for meeting the 2010 target. In 2005, they stressed the need to reduce speed limits and breath and blood-alcohol limits, introduce demerit points for all speeding motorists, and improve their ability to tackle drug-impaired driving.

What have they got? Steps are in train for those driving under the influence of drugs, and now there are to be tougher demerit penalties for speeding drivers and new demerits for seatbelt and intersection offences.

Next year will see a three-tier demerit scheme of 25, 50 or 75 points - depending on the seriousness of the offending - towards the 100-point threshold at which licences will be suspended for three months. The toughest clampdown will be on those running red lights. That will attract 75 points, compared with 20 now.

All this makes sense. The wider use of demerit points will be a better deterrent than fines, which do not deal effectively with repeat offenders. Often, indeed, fines are not paid, or, in the case of youngsters, come from the pockets of parents or fellow passengers. The strategy should also end claims the police act as revenue collectors.

Young drivers are, quite rightly, a focus of the new rules. The minimum time for which they must stay on learner licences before graduating to restricted licences will be doubled to 12 months. They will also face tougher practical tests before moving up. This increases the supervision requirements for vulnerable young drivers and means, hopefully, that they will be more skilful behind the wheel. But it steers well clear of more contentious means of tackling their continued over-representation in crash statistics.

Missing, for example, is any mention of compulsory third-party insurance, the lifting of the legal driving age to 16, or compulsory driver training to a high standard. All these steps are logical, and would have added bite to the policy.

The omissions do not end there. The Government has put much emphasis on the fact that motorists will not be allowed to use radar detectors to avoid being caught speeding. "If people don't like it, tough," thundered Transport Safety Minister Harry Duynhoven. But he knows full well that most drivers will support this initiative. More relevant is the Government's failure to act in areas where widespread backing could not be guaranteed. Still, for example, nothing has been done about the use of hand-held cell phones by drivers. This lapse is the more incomprehensible given that Britain has just elevated the practice from careless to dangerous driving, liable to a penalty of two years' imprisonment.

This package seeks to change driving behaviour. That needs to happen, but it would occur more quickly if the Government changed its own behaviour. A bolder approach less mindful of the ballot-box would have yielded a far more comprehensive and cogent package. Then there would have been a real chance of the 2010 target being met.

Stolen radar detectors sold online

12:00AM Friday July 28, 2006

Two Christchurch men face theft charges after police targeted car radar detectors being sold on the Trade Me website.

Police seized 15 radar detectors, a global positioning system (GPS) unit, a car alarm and a computer in a recent raid after noticing a disproportionate number of the detectors being sold from Christchurch on the online auction site.

Sergeant Lachy Garrick, of Christchurch police, said three detectors had been found during the raid in courier packs ready to be shipped to buyers.

Two men, aged 24 and 26, had been charged with theft. One appeared in Christchurch District Court yesterday and the other was to appear on August 2.

"The value of radar detectors stolen is estimated to be in excess of $50,000," Mr Garrick said. "Considering they cost from $500 to $1200 retail, they were generally being on-sold for less than half price."

The detectors were believed to have been stolen in car break-ins.

Mr Garrick said the detectors and GPS units were the new "hot" items being targeted by car thieves. They were easy to see on car dashboards and there was a ready market for them.

Senior Sergeant Andrea Jopling said police would trawl the Trade Me website again to look for stolen items being offered for sale.

Trade Me staff had co-operated with police and were "fantastic" to deal with, she said.

Website buyers were warned to be wary and urged to question the serial numbers and origins of items being sold.

Many of the items had not been reported stolen and police had been unable to return them to their owners.

Ms Jopling said the recent operation had resulted in a "good catch".

"It would have been better if more people reported that they had items stolen and took note of serial numbers and brands," she said.

Your Views: Are police working to a speed ticket quote?

11:30AM Tuesday March 13, 2007. The New Zealand Herald.

A large rise in the number of speeding tickets given to people driving between 1 km/h and 10 km/h over the limit has caused National to reopen the debate about whether police are instructed to meet a ticket quota.

Statistics released yesterday showed that, in 2000-01, 315 people were ticketed for going 1-10 km/h over the limit. In 2005-06, 41 people were prosecuted for going 1-5 km/h over the limit and 34,651 for going 6-10 km/h over it.

This forum debate has now closed. Here is a selection of your views on the topic.

C Williams
How many infringement notices have been issued to motorists who follow too close? More dangerous than speeding in most circumstances.

Rob VP
Do they exist, most probably, in some form. Do I care? No! And for years I have been driving for a living. Speeding is one easy measure of a motorists' observance of the law. Tailgating and other dangerous overtaking are bad habits which are much harder to prove, even though in my view they are much more dangerous. What makes me laugh is when I slow down to 30km/h for a patch of roadwork's and then have a queue of cars behind me trying to overtake in the roadworks section, including the dawdler who couldn't even get to 80km/h on the open road a while back. And let us not even start about the annoying habit some drivers have of running at 80km/h until the passing lane when they kick it up to 105km/h only to drop back to 80km/h at the end of the lane. Can you tell I drive trucks for a living yet? So in my view the Police can continue to issue tickets for speeding in the 5-10km/h over the limit, but I just wish other, more dangerous offences were dealt to with just as much "enthusiasm" as speed.

I have got five classes of licence, have been driving for 27 years, and travel at the speed limit everywhere unless that would be unsafe - dawdling and dawdlers p- me off. I have never had a crash or a ticket. If you want to avoid fines and crashes, take it from me: staying within the speed limit works.

Michelle
Oh come on, we all saw the leaked faxes and even testimony from cops and relatives/friends of cops about how they have to meet a "quota", so they are insulting us if they declare otherwise. There are many out there who deserve to be ticketed and the cops can more than likely meet those quotas on most drivers I see around. What worries me is when the cop can not meet his quota and its his performance review which is on the line. What is he going to do? he's going to pull me over for being 1km over, even though my odometer does not drill down far enough for me to measure that, or he is going to pull me over doing 50km/h and fine me for doing 60km/h because he doesn't want to lose his bonus or get a poor performance review. Can you believe I got ticketed for no warrant on my car in my own driveway, not even on the public road? And they called me liar. I also got fined for parking on yellow lines in the Lower Hutt CBD, and I live and studied in Upper Hutt and wasn't there. ! Once again I was called a liar. Can they blame us for being worried about corruption when we are faced with situations like this? I don't doubt for a second there will be people persecuted for uncommitted crimes in order for some corrupt cop to protect his performance based pay-rise.

C.McLeay
Its fantastic to read all these views, but what good does it do? Do the Herald send them on to the Police Minister, What's her name? She hardly ever makes an appearance to comment on anything! Or to even be remembered. When she does, it is spin doctoring at its worst. Please put a paper bag on her head, then the comments might sound feasible. What is wrong with this picture? If corrupt Government departments, including the Police want to prove they are clean and actually know what they are doing, they could listen to the people who pay their wages, we are their employers, not the other way around.

Life is full of common sense answers, i.e. what does it cost the taxpayer to look after an accident victim, right from the moment of that accident involving police resources, Hospital resources, ongoing care etc? Therefore put in place the things that would stop the extraordinary expense these accidents cause. 1. Speed bumps all around the Schools. 2. Large viewable signs to actually let you know a school is just around the corner! 3. Speed bumps just before all lights! 4. A Huge advertising campaign. Now all this will initially cost money, but will save millions and millions of our money.


Jim Cable
Police administration, as it seems to be understood today, appears to be an utter shambles. On one hand traffic-ticket quotas are vehemently denied by the Commissioner - yet on the other, an instruction within Central Districts to keep issuing tickets so it can hold its No 1 position in the country indicates a very different understanding of the subject. Once our police were cops 24-hours a day - yet now, if "off-duty", they are penalised, "black-marked" and actively discouraged for attending to obvious criminal matters or attempting to carry out duties that our society once expected, nay demanded, of them. There is something very rotten in police administration. It is my belief that it stems directly from seriously flawed attitudes present in the Beehive.

Daniel
For all those who have ridiculed my earlier comment and think that a fine imposed on someone who drives 1 km/h over the speed limit is justified, think about this: If your speedometer reads 98 km/h but your actual speed is 102 km/h, as measured by the more accurate equipment the police use, you will be fined. The 10 km/h margin of error takes into account speedometer uncertainty. I am all for reducing the speed limits (e.g.. 90 km/h instead of 100 km/h) if that will save lives but, as someone with a scientific background, removing uncertainty in measurements is scientifically unethical.

Jim Donald
The police may as well move in with the Inland Revenue Department. They would feel right at home since they would have so much in common - draconian powers to harass the citizens who pay their salaries!! Speed alone doesn't kill, but when that is allied to the atrocious driving conditions experienced so often on our third world roads where the only protection from oncoming traffic is a painted line, it is a different story. Instead of hiding behind trees at the end of passing lanes the Police should be doing their job which is to protect the public by apprehending those drivers who are driving dangerously - and this does not necessarily mean just exceeding the arbitrary speed limit.

D.H.R.
Police are told in training that they have to collect their salary off the roads, of course it is a revenue gathering exercise. I am also told that the equivalent of the entire annual budget for the police is paid out in benefits every 21days, so what does that tell us about the Govt. priorities. Do not blame the men and women in blue, they have to do a very unpleasant job and have to implement the policies from on high, so sheet the responsibility back to the people who make the rules. We are all living under a virtual dictatorship in this country.

Paul G
I have absolutely no doubt that there are traffic quotas. I have in the past been given a ticket for going 11km/h over the speed limit, fair enough, but I resent the fact that so many racers race around on the main avenues in Christchurch until all hours of the morning, and there never seems to be a cop there to catch them. What are they doing?? Are they taking care of normal police duties, or filling in paperwork on the tickets they have handed out that day for people that have been marginally over the limit...This government, and their sneaky policies are a disgrace. They are a law unto themselves. I will bet our political leaders chauffeured cars don't stick rigidly to the speed limit (Helens motorcade, classic example)... the difference is, if they are caught they don't get fined. It is just another wonderful form of taxation to fill Cullens lolly jar.

Peter
Of course they are, but isn't that suppose to be a good thing? I presumed it is just a way to push police to work harder at stopping traffic offences. I would hope they spend more time on catching reckless drivers and serious speeders than minor speed offenses though.IMHO, maybe they just need a better quota system so they fills more quota when they catch serious offences.

Alan Wilkinson
The reduced 4 km/hr (from 5 km/hr) tolerance near schools is ludicrous posturing by the police, which will achieve absolutely nothing useful. The differences in reaction time between drivers of differing skill and attentitiveness, not to mention the quality of their vehicles, is far far more significant (by a factor of at least 10) than such trivial differences in vehicle speed. Unfortunately traffic policing policy has fallen into the hands of idiots and we all suffer the consequences.

James Burnett
The performance-based revenue generating actions of the Police alienate motorists when they catch people slightly above the speed limit in white spots away from schools. On many roads the speed limit is too low. Raise the speed limit to fix the problem.

SB
I would just like to add - to all of the people who are bleating on, saying you should be able to drive 60 kph to make up for inaccurate speedometers, you need to realise you should still be driving 50 according to your speedometer - not 60 (if your speedometer is inaccurate and you are driving 60 then you could really be driving 70 or upwards, no wonder you all get tickets!!). The leeway that you can drive up to 10 kph over the speed limit only counts if you are actually driving the correct speed limit according to your speedometer.

SF
Well, I am not surprised our road toll is so high! The police still have not got the message. It is not speed that kills, it is the sudden stop. There countries that have no speed limits on certain roads, some countries even have minimum speed levels on motorways (these countries have a lower road toll than NZ).Formula 1 drivers, Rally drivers - all of this is proof that speed does not kill. What does kill is the lack of driving skills and the wrong driver attitude. That relates to the minimal requirements needed in NZ to sit a licence. Quit the speeding campaign, quit the drink driving campaign (as this obviously does not work either seeing the last 3 weekend blitzes, use money and resources where it will make a difference in the long run and that is driver education!

Jayne
Most of those issued with tickets do not pay them any way. I have a friend who has had unpaid fines for about five years now. Court costs have been added, a warrant issued for his arrest nothing happens. He has been caught since for several offences i.e. failing to provide a license, not wearing seat belt unwarranted car bald tyres - you name it and he just laughs it of. They know where he lives. What a waste of time and effort by the police and courts. Perhaps they should impound vehicles immediately and sell them to cover costs, three strikes in 2 years and u get locked up 4 a short period or perhaps the cops that issue these tickets should be made to follow up on getting them paid or face a penalty in their income.

Glenn Marvin
Are we really focusing on what really matters here? What it does identify is that there are still so many people that exceed the speed limit. I fully admit to regularly travelling up to 10km over the speed limit but also expect to pay the fine if stopped. We all know the limit and if we exceed it we should be prepared to pay up. Good on the Police I say. Zero tolerance is the best way to encourage conformance to the rules and create a cultural shift in attitude to speeding - as we have slowly seen happen with drink driving. If we did not speed, the police stats would go down it is that simple!

Clarke
I think the Police are sending a very clear message - particularly around schools - that every motorist should take heed of: the Police want you to watch your speedo, not the road.

AFP
How accurate is a Car Speedo at 50km/h? How accurate is a radar unit at 50km/h? How accurate is a Police Car speedo? How often when you get a WOF is the speed checked for accuracy or for that matter when it imported and certified for sale? I have checked 5 cars speedo with my GPS system and only one was accurate at 50km/h. The others ranged from 48 to 52km/h. I also have a radar detector. It is interesting that police will sit on the side of the road and blip you as you approach. How fair is it that the recorded speed you are doing is a faction of a second rather than say an average of 6 seconds. I have also witnessed a Police car slowing down very heavy traffic behind him so that there was sufficient gap between the car in front of him so he could radar cars coming towards him.

Stephanie
I think they should have quotas. Maybe the more money they get from speeding fines, the more money they will have to spend on solving robberies. It is not like the government give the Police nearly enough money to do their job properly. And with all the bad press the cops get, no-one even wants to be a cop anymore! If you are stupid enough to break the law, then you will reap the consequences.

SF
Strange question really - the answer is obvious. Yes, of course they are! It has been admitted by several police officers over the last few years. Has anyone lately read the job descriptions of police officers and considered the actual reason why we have police in NZ? What is the reason for their existence? Where are their priorities? Publicity of police wrong doings is not enhancing the police image. And to turn around in a muscle flexing exercise to "show the public who is boss" this latest episode is pathetic. Grow up and act your age! No wonder we have so much crime in this country, if police acts like this. There is a huge list of things to do - none of which includes speed ticketing. Sort yourselves out and get real! Police in our area constantly drive around with their cell phones glued to their ear, headlights and/or brake lights not working, speeding, etc, etc. Some years back a number of people out walking and I saw a several police officers heading off to a training camp in North Auckland, driving in a convoy of 7 cars at 85 km/h through a 30km/h reserve!!! Good one guys - great example!

Gavin
The police should be separated for the Traffic division. Ie... Bring back the MOT (Ministry of Transport) So we can have the area dedicated for traffic safety and infringements.

Rick
Whilst the Police are right in issuing tickets for this (relatively) minor infringement it is infuriating that as a result other crimes go unattended. As an example I have witnessed in South Auckland in the past two weeks three separate occasions where people have blatantly and dangerously driven through red lights in front of marked police cars, yet not one was pulled over?? Is the $150 fine not worth getting out of the car for?? Everyday I would see on average four or five cars run red lights just on my way to and from work. Whilst speeding (by up to ten kph) could be argued as being unintentional, you have malicious and deliberately dangerous drivers that remain largely unmolested as they speed through busy city intersections. If there is to be a quota make it on red light runners, as there would be enough in the Auckland region to fully sustain the national allotment, and while they're at it raise the fine from the current $150.

Ian
We could really annoy the Police and prevent them from filling their quotas by obeying the law? And that way they would have more time to have group sex with consenting 16 year olds.

Iris
Meeting quotas is wrong. Issuing ticket is not something to achieve. It is a way to punish those speeding not to speed again. My friend even accused of going through a red light so that they can give her the ticket.

Adam
Yes , this is a revenue gathering exercise. There is a quota to meet.
Why aren't the police this pedantic chasing real criminals rather than some poor motorist distracted for a second & exceeding the limit by 1 or 2 kms.

Daniel
I think that ticketing in the range 1-10 km/h over the speed limit is ridiculous in a scientific sense. How can someone be absolutely certain they are travelling 1 km/h over the speed limit? We only have our speedometer to rely on. Speedometers are not normally calibrated as part of the WOF service, so then how are we to know the speed we are doing is correct. Also, I do not recall many speedometers with 1 km/h graduations. Does all this mean our less accurate gauging of speed can be overruled by the scientifically proven and highly accurate equipment the police use? Why not reduce speed limits by 10 km/h while retaining sensible scientific principles, for example if the open road limit was set at 90 km/h a driver would only get ticketed above 100 km/h. It seems the police have disregarded errors associated with speedometer measurements. Would the police rather we kept our eyes on our speedometers than on the road?

Thom Grey
If the police are going to crack down and deny us that pleasure of 10kph, then speed limits need to be changed. Especially 50 areas. 50 areas should lurk around schools, yes, but should not crop up each time a sign of civilization rears its ugly head. But of course, it is easier to ping someone for a petty 10 kph over the speed limit than going after the rapists, murderers, and misc rapscallions out there. More money in it. Plus, the way our country is going, its not the cops who can really go after rapists and murderers. Its internal affairs. And traffic offences are so much less embarrassing than arresting each other.

Phillip
Violent crime is sky-rocketing. Gangs terrorize around with relative impunity. Street thugs intimidate, bash and rob locals and tourists alike, knowing the police will likely never find them. Police "brush off" 111 callers if they don't consider their report serious enough. Or they don't have the staff to respond to serious incidents and calls. Yet they have time to sit around, dozing on the roadsides, manning speed cameras?!?! No wonder no one feels safe any more in this country! Criminals have little to fear from our Keystone Cops, as they concentrate on speeding motorists, and leave the real troublemakers to create havoc!

Leon
I think the Minister of Police should tell us exactly what pressure is being applied on the Police in regards to blatant profiteering activities such as speeding tickets. It does seem over the top... and on the topic of "speeding'" the Police seem completely ignorant of research that shows that its not so much the speed that is at issue. They need to get a consultant in perhaps? We are getting a rather sordid and realistic picture of the NZ Police finally... Rapists, thugs, bullies, gangsters operating the biggest racket in the country! Aside from the Government of course!

Sara
So what if the police do have a quota? Have we all become blind to the speeders on our roads killing our loved ones? Personally I am getting sick of motorists who appear to have their own quota of how many pedestrians they can nearly mow down in a day! Get real, the only people worried about quotas is those who speed. Quite frankly the way I see people drive around my town of Masterton, we need more traffic control and a bigger quota!!! Half the time I hardly see a traffic patrol car on our streets as it is - so if the officers are getting pushed to do a better job, so be it and give that department more staff to meet it!

Charles M
All this talk is nonsense. Bottom line is that if you are caught speeding, then no one else is to blame for it except you. Cough up and pay the fine or drive under the limit and keep the roads safer.

KiwiTT
What happened to the 10km/h threshold? A lot of cars have potentially inaccurate speedos, so this threshold seemed fair. Now a lot of innocent people abiding to what their speedo says and then still get fined / penalised. If the police want to increase their support for traffic control, they should focus on the high speeders (10+ km/h over the limit , drunks, reckless drivers and unwarranted cars.

Tim
Unless the speed limit is sensible, being pedantic about exact speeds is just money making not safety related. Some open road, roadworks leave 30kph signs where the road is clear, try driving on an empty clear open road at less than 30kph, yeah right. Its the demerits that are the real issue, especially if you drive regularly on heavily policed open roads. Do cars that hold up traffic get the same attention? do slow vehicles keep left? While school safety is another matter, speed revenues are not about safety. I have no respect for such policing.

Heather Coates
I absolutely agree that police are more interested in quotas than safety. Take one example just north of my city. There is a passing lane and all regular traffic obey the limit until they are around the corner, see if he parked in his usual place under the only tree, and then if he isn't there can hoot it. If he chose to park at the dangerous end of the passing lane drivers would not be able to exceed their limit while using the passing lanes as they would not be able to see him until it was too late. They would also catch the stupidity we see of drivers who are staying far too long out in the overtaking lane and causing traffic to have to swerve to avoid a collision. Probably not as much revenue but certainly less dangerous driving. We see many examples of this.

C Keyser
I support the police and what they stand for. Having emigrated to New Zealand from a country where law and order has collapsed, it is important to me that this does not happen here. From experience we know that, to a great extent, this breakdown is caused by a lack of public support for the police. Therefore, I am greatly concerned about the current negative image of the police with the New Zealand public. It is quite astounding that in a peaceful country like New Zealand, the police find it necessary to make themselves guilty of brutality, assault, rape and even public acts of brutality and blatant misuse of authority and the use of excessive force. (based on what is reported in the media) This unethical - and even criminal - behaviour of the police is guaranteed to lose them public support.

The unethical application (in my opinion) of speed ticketing has the same effect. Actually, because this new practice is applied to people who are generally law abiding and as a rule will never even meet the police or have any interaction with police, I think it creates a huge feeling of mistrust in the police and their practices. It is bound to compound the horrible reputation of the police at present and may contribute to the feeling that the police are in fact abusing the law, rather than enforcing it - and as a result cannot be trusted.

Considering the inherent inaccuracy of radar, the potential for misuse by unscrupulous operators - you only need to read the reports of the manufacturers (especially the "pop" facility of the radar)- and at times maybe deliberate targeting by police of vehicles on roads that have steep inclines and so on, it is no wonder that the general public finds ticketing within 10kph of the limit as "unacceptable". Adding to that the horrible image of the police at present, with alleged frequent police rape of women, police beatings of handcuffed prisoners (a cowardly act indeed) and other police abuses, it is no wonder that there is a public backlash. It is my opinion - given the limitations of the equipment - that any ticket within ten per cent of the speed limit is highly suspect. Hence, I think this practice is unethical and downright dishonest and should be stopped. Given the terrible police image, abandoning this (in my opinion) unethical application of law should go a long way to reassure the general public that the police is in fact serious about law and order and their ethics and can indeed be trusted. As a supporter of the police, I really hope they can start to cope with the "modern" public and learn how to deal with them. Public sentiment toward the police cannot be helped by flippantly enforcing rules that are perceived as clearly suspect by the general public. We do not need 1950s policing tactics in 2007! Please get us police managers who understand this before the police image is damaged to such an extent that law and order is threatened.

Colin Munro
Police issue tickets to those who exceed the speed limit set down as a law of our country. People who get ticketed are breaking the law and should expect to be penalised for it. Why is it that the politically motivated "Police bashers" cannot see that and instead just let the police get on with the job they are there for. If you don't speed, you will not break the law and you will not get a ticket or are certain people too dumb to see that? In spite of all the recent publicity, it should be remembered that 99 per cent of Police Officers are doing a great job and the force should not be condemned because of the disgraceful actions of a few renegades. How many of these "bashers" who constantly speak out against the Police would step in to do the unenviable job as a police officer? As the song says "Not many, if any".

Sarah
I feel that enough focus has been made on this particular aspect of road safety. I believe that on a whole we have improved & are now staying closer to the speed limit. My concern is the amount of people going through red lights & would suggest that instead of having the amount of time and effort along with speed cameras used, if they are short of revenue, try a few red light cameras. The amount of times there are near misses and for that matter, situations where we are caused to wait while people coming from another direction are using up our "go" time at the lights, seems to be continually in

Bill Hall
During my time with the Ministry of Transport there was no such thing as a ticket quota. We were assessed on the average number issued in our area. As an example: if the average was 100 per month for our area and a particular officer was only giving 20 per month he was asked why. Quite often it was because the officer may have been on heavy vehicle duties, driver licensing duties, accident investigation etc., or rarely just plain lazy. After driving on NZ roads (after being overseas for 15 years) I suspect the issue of higher ticket numbers is the fact that NZ is full of arrogant, discourteous and drivers, that appear to me, to basically don't just give a damn about the law. We can save a fortune on red traffic lights by removing them. It is apparent that in the eyes of Auckland drivers that they do not exist anyway.

Albert
Traffic police should not have merged with the police force in the first place. The merger could well be one of the contributors of increased in crime as the police spend most their time issuing traffic tickets whilst "small time" criminal investigations take a back seat. About time the two divisions split up and they take charge of their respective distinctive roles.

Jono
If the aim of speeding tickets is safety then sitting on the side of a straight road hidden behind a tree is not going to promote safe driving at all. Issuing speeding tickets is purely revenue gathering and has very little if any effect on the road toll. Increase safety at black spots and other high incident areas by putting a camera or police patrol in these areas and making them clearly visible. Alert motorists that these cameras exist as they approach the area and you will have everyone slowing down. This will make the areas safer, and those who get caught speeding through these areas have been sufficiently warned and caught fair and square.

Steve
Does not this issue typify the dilemma of being in opposition? Police being overzealous at doing their job, it does rather undermine the usual National Party election year "more cops and tougher cops" rhetoric which I am certain will resurface at the appropriate time.

Pete
What else is new in a socialist agenda, this government is sowing the seeds of regulating human behaviour on the one hand and reaping its penalties on the other. It explains why there is a continuous boom at the rich end and at the same a sliding depression at the other end. It is the only government in the world, which has managed to run both extremes of the economic cycle at the same time.

Andrew Montgomery
I can not understand how it is that so many are complaining about getting speeding tickets. It is dead simple. If you do not want a ticket, do not speed. What has happened to personal responsibility? It is not revenue gathering as your misinformed readers assert, the government gets plenty of money from cigarette tax which is why it wisely makes cigarettes available from every dairy and gas station in the country. It is all about bringing down the road toll. And to all those that get sick from cigarettes, the government wants you to keep smoking so it gets lots of money and you don't get old and draw a pension. Obviously the government and Annette King our erstwhile minister of health care for you deeply and are only doing what is in the collective best interest. So next time you get a ticket don't get cross but offer thanks to our tirelessly caring government.

Kris
have yet to see a police officer pull over someone for impeding the traffic flow. It would be nice to see someone who can not find the accelerator pedal, takes 500m to reach 40km/h and dawdles across an intersection, get a ticket for holding up and frustrating all of the motorists behind them. Better yet those ignorant people who insist on doing 80km in the outside lane on the motorway with no care or consideration for their fellow road users should be penalised at least as much as a "speeding motorist" who 99 per cent of the time is driving in a safe and courteous manner.

PK
There is a quota, it may not be called that but there is. A book of tickets every month per officer I was told. The cops need to clean up their organisation. Too much sex on bonnets and nothing being done about it until 20 years later. Cops parked in cycle lanes but they don't get tickets. I have seen a cop car with a broken tail light on duty. Not warrantable - should get a fine. I rang the police and informed them and they treated meike a criminal. Prime Minister speeds through the countryside scattering chickens and quiet country folk and the cops chip in to pay the fines their colleagues got. Then later on it is all swept under the carpet. Why should I worry if I am 1km over the speed limit?

Larry
I do not believe there is a quota for tickets. Police do not give anywhere enough tickets. Speeding is chronic in most areas and if drivers do not want tickets, slow down. Pretty simple unless you are stupid.

Terry Crosby
Speeding tickets are all about revenue gathering rather than road safety. The whole debate about slowing down drivers by means of more and more, and heavier and heavier fines, reminds me of the saying that the height of stupidity is to continue to do the same thing and expect a different result.

Murray M
Great! The answer; "Don't speed, you wont get a ticket" Sadly though, this message will not get through to most of the speeders who think they have a right to put everyone else at risk by their actions. Unfortunately someone was short in the brain department when these Neanderthals recidivist speeders were created.

Lars
Our crime rate is rising. We have more murders now than ever before, We have more violent assaults than ever before, We have the highest rate of unsolved crime now than ever before, We have more people getting away with serious crime now than ever before, we have more youth crime than ever before, We have more drug crimes now than ever before, Our road toll is still unacceptable, We still have a huge drink drive issue, Yet our govt instructs our police to chase revenue by target someone going 57 in a 50 zone. Great policy! At the end of the day though the police are only following the policy set down by the Labour Govt which is further alienating the police from the general public.

Joe Metcalfe
Yet another ridiculous over reaction. The fact of the matter is this, the police have in the last year introduced a policy of targeting all drivers who speed, not just those who exceed the speed limit by 10km/hr. The police are sending a message loud and clear that speeding is not acceptable. They are battling a culture where people thing that speeding by 10km/hr is OK because you wont get a ticket for it. The fact that it generates cash for the police force is to my mind a brilliant idea. More tickets for the idiots that speed because of better resources, and me not forking out, through my taxes, to fund it. It is the best form of users pay that I have ever seen.

Greg
Sure, ticketing at between 1 -10 kph over the speed limit might seem pedantic. Sure, there might be a quota. However, the power is ultimately in the drivers hands, or feet in this case. Do not speed. Should the cops not prosecute a burglar if they only steal a little bit? I would be annoyed if I got pinged for 52kph or something, but really it is in my control. The time it really seems like revenue collecting is when the speed trap is at the end of a passing lane or at the bottom of a hill.

Thag Anderse
Ingredients;1 cop, -1 taxpayer funded cop car with colourful lights, 3 ticket quotas, 1 hour, 1 large dollop of road safety, 3 taxpayers with self funded car, 1 km over the speed limit. Place cop in cop car, apply 3 quotas to cop with 1 hour. Add 1 km over the speed limit with the 3 taxpayers. Mix together with the large dollop of road safety. Cook it up with a high degree of tension and polarisation. Unfortunately the whole thing tastes absolutely foul, so this recipe is preferable for those who have no taste, or are gluttons for punishment.

John Lewis
Last year I watched 25 drivers flashed by a speed camera outside a school between 7:30 am and 7:40 am; that's 150 per hour. If the police increased their so-called quota a hundredfold they still would not catch everyone. If they put hidden cameras on the Auckland and Wellington motorways the revenue would be sufficiently deflationary to make Dr Bollard smile

Li
Even though it is wrong to set a quota for police for the speeding cars, however, if that can send out a message to drivers that even 1 km over the limit is still over the limit, then our roads will be so much safer. People in this country are so used to test the legal limit, and so used to get soft punishment or no punishment when breaking the laws, and because we have someone politicians) barking or bargaining for criminals or law breakers, this country will turn to be the warm bed for breeding criminals. If a quota can push the police to be tough on speeders, go for it. (even though I do drive sometimes over 1 - 9 km of the limit, if I ever get a ticket of that, I will surely drive more carefully not to over the limit again).

Paul
My brother is a serving police officer and during his time in the traffic department of his district, was required to issue at least two tickets an hour whilst on patrol. This was a directive from management. With the current storm around the police perhaps they should come clean if they want the public to have confidence in them again.

Andrew McKay
Police inform us that it is a very low fine if caught at speeds just above the threshold. I was ticketed 4 times for motorway driving at or about 113km per hour (always in the dry and at quiet times). The fines were small, each about $120. The consequence of a further ticket was a penalty similar to being drunk behind the wheel. The police set themselves up in places where they know they will get tickets, for example at the end of passing lanes. Go 10km per hour over the limit, you get 20 points on your licence. 5 of those and you have no licence. That used to be hard to achieve, but not now. Demerit points are the issue, not the fines. Low speed thresholds cause otherwise minor infringements to be much more serious offences, especially when you get several in two years.

Gavin Ward
I think it is madness to be issuing tickets for speeding in the range of 1-5Kph over the speed limit range if this is not revenue driven I do not know what is. Anything under 10Kph over the speed limit should come with a warning for those that do not give the police a bit of lip. This revenue driven system is doing nothing to help the police image at a time when you need to turn public attitude back to having more respect for the law and those that are there to enforce it.

Warren
From a relative who is a frontline police officer: they are required to complete a certain number of so-called client interactions with motorists each week or month, and writing a ticket is the easiest way to produce the paperwork to prove that they have spoken to X people in the timeframe. Often they get the required number as quickly as possible, then get on to doing what they joined the police for; preventing and solving more serious crimes.

Len Hill
What about the NZ standards for speedo accuracy? I am sure I can remember that it used to be only within 10km/hr. That was the reason for the 10k allowance over the speed limit we used to get. Has the standard changed? I hadn't heard. In Aussie a similar campaign had to be abandoned due to Aussie speedo standards being within 10km/hr, as I am sure it is in NZ.

Dill the cops
Of course they do face pressure. The Government turns the police force to a group of looters. How good is it to fine someone just 10km above the limit? This just adds unnecessary anxiety to drivers and make to already congested roads worse. Also, the potential profits from tickets divert the police from crime control. This is the worse which is happening now. No one cares when your house is broken into, or when you dial 111. Please, separate the MOT from the real Police who really fight crimes, like before. Finally, to our Labour Government, please stop levying extra tax from the roads. We have paid too much.

Heck
I guess speed ticket quotas only affect drivers that break the law? Lets increase the quota so my family and I are safer on the roads.

Sergey Sinitsyn
I believe it (quotas for speed tickets) exists since I know from others that when they were given a ticket for being over by few kms police officers were referring to a number of tickets they had to issue.

JK
Yes there is a quota. Just look at the locations in which you see police cars issuing tickets. They are not areas of traffic safety concerns. I have always seen police cars lurking in areas where inadvertently a driver could exceed the speed limit without really knowing including at the bottom of hills, on wider that normal residential roads or at the end of passing lanes. How about patrolling the areas marked by white crosses. They are the real indicators of areas that need to be targeted for traffic safety. Every citizen has the right to defend a speeding ticket. How about the 34,000 citizens that got tickets for 6-10km over the limit all take a collective stance and challenge their tickets in court. That ought to take all of the "quota cops" off the road and clog the judicial system for a couple of hundred years.

Andrea Burke
Quotas? What difference does it make? Everyone knows going over the speed limit is illegal. The fact that they have a motivation for police to crack down harder on the people who endanger our roads every day (especially outside schools), I tell you what, I am not losing any sleep over it.

Tony Stockdale
I have had 2 $80 tickets for going 61kph, in an area nowhere near schools. I have another car with cruise control, and have never had a ticket. In other words, my speeding was due to minor inattention to the speedo rather than the road. The net result is that I feel agro towards the MOT. Maybe others feel agro as well, and maybe this contributes to "road rage"? "To hell with them!"

Andrew Wilson
Who does Annette King think she is kidding? I think she has been to the Theresa Gattung school of corporate PR spin, where the key lesson is - If you deny often enough and long enough, you will fool some and confuse most. For minor speeding offences where the limit is exceeded by 10kms or less to have a near 10,000 per cent change in tickets issued within 5 years (i.e.: 356 to 34,651) and then for her to say nothing has changed makes me think simple arithmetic skills are not required for the top cop job. I see Police Spokesperson Dave Cliff offers no statistics of what proportion of those extra tickets were given outside schools. How convenient.

Photo radar - the New Zealand experience

Photo radar has been used in Australia for around 7-8 years, and in 1993, the New Zealand police decided to follow the Australians lead (as they slavishly do in all policy matters) and introduce it into New Zealand. They bought around 30 of Autopatrol PR100 cameras, which are a mobile Ka band unit. These are usually mounted in the back of a Toyota Camery station wagon, but can also be mounted on a tripod, away from the vehicle. At the same time, they bought 16 (?) fixed pole mounted cameras, which they move between various sites, so you can't tell if the box on the pole is loaded or not.

New Zealand is a small country at the bottom of the Pacific (head for Australia {the West Island), turn right and down a bit and there it is). Population of 3.5 million people, and 60 million sheep, although sometimes it is hard to tell them apart. We have around 1 - 1.5 million vehicles on the road. Around 2/3's of the population lives in the northern quarter. Land area is roughly the same as the UK, and cars are the main means of transport throughout most of the country.

The cost of buying the cameras and setting them up was $NZ17 million (around $US10 million) and in the first year of operation, they brought in $NZ23 million ( $US16 million) - a return on investment the mafia would be proud of. Each year since, they have averaged $23-25 million each year, with running costs of around $NZ10 million ($US 6 million). I am not 100% sure of the running costs figure, but I believe it is correct. I don't believe it would be any higher.

There are a few interesting points:

when they were introduced, the police and politicians said that it was not to be a money making venture, rather it was to increase road safety. To this end, one must ask why all the funds collected go into the consolidated fund, rather than driver safety and education? Despite election promises to the contrary, this has not changed, and has been quietly forgotten about.

In order to ease the introduction, it was stated policy that the cameras would not be hidden, but must be visible from 50m away. This is not as generous as it sounds, since it takes your picture at a 22.5 degree angle across the road, or around 25m away from the car. This gives you just enough time to put on a big smile as the robot says "cheese". It has also been observed in the breach in many occasions, as cars are hidden by trees, etc. As is typical of politicians promises, this has now been broken. They are "trialling" hidden camera deployment, with the aim of making it nationwide. Currently there are demerit points on your license for each ticket issued by an ordinary cop, but not with camera tickets. I am willing to wager that this will change within the next 2 years. Similarly, they are (supposed) to be used only in areas designated as speed camera zones, with signs to warn motorists. Again, this has often not been the case (but the ticket is still valid, with or without the sign) and there are moves to remove this condition as well.

At the time of introduction, a law was passed through Parliament saying that the registered owner of the vehicle was responsible for all tickets issued to the vehicle. Yup, if the police say you are guilty, then it must be so, unless you can point to someone else. Can't do that? To bad, pay the Man on the way out. Where were the cries of civil liberties groups, who are usually so vocal in cases of "guilty until proven innocent"? They were astonishingly quiet, possibly do to the "crime" becoming not politically correct thanks to a multi million dollar ad campaign supporting the introduction of speed cameras at the time. Proving yourself innocent is impossible, as there is no officer to put on the witness stand to cross examine, and unless you can name the driver, you end up wearing it anyway. Although the cameras are smart, they are not infallible, e.g. they require setting up so that the beam angle runs across the line of traffic at 22.5 degrees. If this is not done, then the resulting speed reading will be wrong. Try proving that it wasn't done correctly, 3 weeks after the fact... Other issues include;

• doubts about the legality of issuing traffic citations through the mail

• the inability of drivers to prepare an effective defence

• the presumption that a vehicle owner is guilty unless the person can prove his or her innocence

• the loss of personal contact and discretion on the part of police

• the temptation for municipalities to use this technology as a money-making machine

• the probability that many drunk and otherwise dangerous drivers will go undetected.