Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 139545	2015-05-20 06:48:00	Just as well its not Revenue gathering !!!	wainuitech (129)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
1401074	2015-05-20 06:48:00	Oh how sad :( Now the police doughnut fund is shy by $151,880 www.stuff.co.nz Its not Revenue Gathering so nothing is lost ;)	wainuitech (129)
1401075	2015-05-20 07:51:00	The silly thing is that all the speed readings were accurate. They had been correctly sent to speeders. The only error was that the reported time of the offence was off by one hour (big deal). So what is the 'required' tolerance on the reported time. 5 minutes? 1 minute? 1 pico second? At what point does this sliding continuum of time get tagged as sufficiently accurate, or inaccurate, or even relevant to the driving offence? What about an officer, or a parking offence involving writing a ticket? How accurate does their timepiece have to be? If we carry a device that is always kept 5 minutes different to the real time can we make a fair (but untrue) arguement against any offence (and record the time on our other device as an excuse / contra arguement)? By the time the officer has done his talking, and checking of licences, and begins writing a ticket, by that time when he checks his watch he's recording a time that is already 10mins or more after the offence - so is every speeding ticket ever written now in question?	Paul.Cov (425)
1401076	2015-05-20 08:08:00	The silly thing is that all the speed readings were accurate. They had been correctly sent to speeders. The only error was that the reported time of the offence was off by one hour (big deal). So what is the 'required' tolerance on the reported time. 5 minutes? 1 minute? 1 pico second? At what point does this sliding continuum of time get tagged as sufficiently accurate, or inaccurate, or even relevant to the driving offence? What about an officer, or a parking offence involving writing a ticket? How accurate does their timepiece have to be? If we carry a device that is always kept 5 minutes different to the real time can we make a fair (but untrue) arguement against any offence (and record the time on our other device as an excuse / contra arguement)? By the time the officer has done his talking, and checking of licences, and begins writing a ticket, by that time when he checks his watch he's recording a time that is already 10mins or more after the offence - so is every speeding ticket ever written now in question?it means the evidence has been modified. A lawyer had got off several speed camera tickets which had been digitally manipulated (zoomed in on)2 min out you could understand but not an hour tell that to Mark Lundy	plod (107)
1401077	2015-05-20 21:29:00	The placing of a camera at this location which was never a black spot looking down hill tells me it's all about revenue gathering.. I think this one makes the most revenue in the country. Didn't they drop the speed limit down from 100K to 80K when the camera first went in??	paulw (1826)
1401078	2015-05-20 22:22:00	The placing of a camera at this location which was never a black spot looking down hill tells me it's all about revenue gathering.. I think this one makes the most revenue in the country. Didn't they drop the speed limit down from 100K to 80K when the camera first went in?? There used to be fatal crashes on the gorge reasonably regularly, so it was a blackspot. That said, there's been a lot of changes to the road to reduce the fatality rate to about nil now. The camera is definitely a revenue gatherer though :D	autechre (266)
1401079	2015-05-21 02:13:00	A lot of lucky people just got let off on a loophole but fair enough. It needs to be accurate within a few minutes at least so that people can defend themselves if necessary. If the ticket is issued for a time you weren't even on the road you could theoretically provide a solid alibi. I think if the drivers face is clearly visible it's still grounds for a ticket, just lucky the law disagrees. I don't think we really have any grounds to ***** about speed cameras as revenue gathering personally. I'm sure that is the reason they are put in some locations but the truth is speeding is illegal and if you get caught doing it there is only yourself to blame. You know there are speed cameras, you know you are not allowed to speed, choosing to ignore that and ending up with a fine is self inflicted pain. Sure in an Ideal world the police would focus solely on lowering accidents but in reality they need money to operate and might look at it as killing two birds with one stone. If nobody sped there'd be no revenue to gather but there'd also be less fatal accidents. How many is hard to say. I don't like speed cameras either but they are a fact of life and not going anywhere. You could possibly make the point that spending all the speed camera budget on road improvements and barriers etc would have saved more lives but it's difficult to measure the truth of that.	dugimodo (138)
1401080	2015-05-21 11:29:00	Oh how sad :( Now the police doughnut fund is shy by $151,880 I think it is more than a little unfair to malign our Kiwi police force with that perjorative reference to obese US Police officers and their supposed liking for donuts. You speed, you get caught, you pay the fine, and I'd like to see one driver on the road who could honestly say they had never exceeded the speed limit. Yes, I speed from time to time, and many years back I made a late night and VERY high speed emergency drive via suburban roads and motorway to get Mrs T to hospital when major issues arose late in pregnancy (no time for an ambulance, and where is a police car when you really need it?) and I was prepared to take the hit if I'd been stopped, my choice, but I wouldn't have stopped until I arrived at the hospital, police or no police. I've also had my share of speeding tickets, but I've never complained about the fines. For all we know the Gummint could be taking a sizeable cut of the annual fine revenue. Lose a family member, relative, friend or workmate to a speeding driver, and your attitude to speed cameras might make an unsignalled U turn. Billy	Billy T (70)
1401081	2015-05-21 12:43:00	I know a bloke who has had zero fatal accidents since that speed camera went in, he thinks it is an incredible device, however his lawyer and his mortician are much less enthusiastic. ;)	R2x1 (4628)
1401082	2015-05-21 19:29:00	I fail to see what is so great about the police losing money? Seems these people also complain that when something happens to them, the police 'do nothing' - well maybe they would do more if they had more funding.... And it's not like speeding is a smart idea anyway.	Agent_24 (57)
1