Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 110615	2010-06-24 23:47:00	How to net over $6k income in 4 hours	coldfront (15814)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
1113314	2010-06-25 06:13:00	Let's have zero tolerance on everything.	Sweep (90)
1113315	2010-06-25 06:22:00	Yes, I am referring to the inconsistent speedo readings. But that's a simple fix, get them tested every time they go in for a WOF. I have not seen speed camera photo, so I can't commend on that. But I assume they have a speed, date, time and your car on it, right? In which case you can argue that you were driving, or have an excuse for speeding (medical emergence or some such). Simple fix? Somewhat disagree. - For anything speed related and to test - both reliability and accuracy requires ideally extensive testing. Particularly for NZ wide implementation of a speedo as a determining factor in law for wof's. I know because - I have worked in calibration and quality assurance services. Also could be costly because calibrated equipment is required to be assessed by third parties frequently - notably NZ's IANZ (http://www.ianz.govt.nz/) - Yes many argued when speed camera first came out - often publicized in the herald at the time - and today people probably still contest. Thus if you cannot prove I'm sure they will reasonably prove with evidence at hand...nothing new (I think)...	kahawai chaser (3545)
1113316	2010-06-25 06:29:00	Agree of Disagree I find the fact that 1 in 10 motorists were found to be travelling over the speed limit by a strategically placed camera in a location that has no excesssive speed related accidents or deaths where a motorists may find themselves for a brief time exceeding the speedlimit by what is effect a jogging pace concerning . Given that they will in 99% of the cases be unaware they exceeded the speedlimit until a few weeks later and will pay without question that $30 . Maybe the revenue gathered from each camera can be reinvested in more equipment to be set up at the base of every hill in New Zealand! Imagine the revenue that could be gathered!	coldfront (15814)
1113317	2010-06-25 07:45:00	Lowest speed I found out was ticketed for 2kph over the limit makes sense to assume the Police were adopting zero tolerance which is a $30 fine for speeds of 1-10kph over the posted speed limit, $80 for those 11-15kph etc. Why do you think I am questioning the policy given we have been lead by media reporting to believe in a tolerance level? The media were reporting statements by the Police outlining their temporary change in policy. The Police written guidelines also states "Drivers of any vehicles exceeding the speed limit by less than these stated thresholds may be issued with an infringement notice if their speed presents a risk to public safety in the prevailing circumstances." Unless there was something special about the location of this camera perhaps you should see if the local paper is interested in following this up.	PaulD (232)
1113318	2010-06-25 08:25:00	200 of them were ticketed for speeds exceeding the speedlimit by 1kph . I should have added or more! Facts are facts 10% of motorists exceeded that speedlimit with a potential to net over $6k . You can argue the toss over exact figures the fact is the camera was located wher there was a ZERO reported accident rate . That is revenue gathering! If it was not revenue gathering why not issue demerits as well? You should be looking at why was so many picked up speeding there and what road improvements or calming could be done to prevent this excessive speed . Maybe one of those speed check signs and a slow down messege falshed at the motorists would be more advantageous or would that impact the revenue?	coldfront (15814)
1113319	2010-06-25 08:31:00	No one seems to have picked up on the fact that 4Kmh at 100Kmh is 4% over but 4Kmhover at say 50Kmh is a bit more than 4%	gary67 (56)
1113320	2010-06-25 08:39:00	No one seems to have picked up on the fact that 4Kmh at 100Kmh is 4% over but 4Kmhover at say 50Kmh is a bit more than 4% Like 8%.	Sweep (90)
1113321	2010-06-25 08:40:00	You need more information. On the face of it issuing tickets for 1kph over the limit makes the Police Area Commanders appear to be liars. This sounds like someone has just forwarded the whole log for ticketing regardless. Without knowing the range of infringements you can't talk of excessive speeds. If all the 200 were less than 4k over the limit any talk of excess speed would get no respect at all. When cameras were originally introduced only the top 15% were ticketed.	PaulD (232)
1113322	2010-06-25 09:04:00	No one seems to have picked up on the fact that 4Kmh at 100Kmh is 4% over but 4Kmhover at say 50Kmh is a bit more than 4% I picked up on that a few months ago Its ok to do 54kph but not 104kph on the open road, bit of confusing it seems as to is it % orkmh...dont you think.	coldfront (15814)
1113323	2010-06-25 09:19:00	You need more information . On the face of it issuing tickets for 1kph over the limit makes the Police Area Commanders appear to be liars . This sounds like someone has just forwarded the whole log for ticketing regardless . Without knowing the range of infringements you can't talk of excessive speeds . If all the 200 were less than 4k over the limit any talk of excess speed would get no respect at all . When cameras were originally introduced only the top 15% were ticketed . Still missing the point made though and made an assumption based on you interpretation of the first post . Until I saw that Log I would not have realised that 10% of the motorists passing that speed camera would have been logged at speeds exceeding the posted limit . Irrelevant of how many where actually ticketed my point to put across that the potential was there to net 200 drivers at $30 minimum a shot! 200x$30=$6000 Its unfortuante that the log DOES NOT show the relative speeds of those caught etc . Made me wonder how much revenue is generated in the name of Road Safety from these cameras and how reliable the information is let alone how many peopl realise and would change their habits because of a financial penalty . Atitude that seems common is its only $30, $80 so just pay it and its gone away . With demerits the odds are you would take more notice given the potential for loss of licence . Does it improve road safety though?	coldfront (15814)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10