Yes, but it wouldn’t make perfect dollars … 
3 Likes
This is always a great topic and discussion.
There are so many different ways to look at road safety. There are also diverse views on the use of, benefits for/against, and motivations revenue/individual around speed detection devices/cameras.
There are those who believe that the cameras serve no purpose other than revenue.
Others suggest visible deferents are the most effective at stopping poor driving behaviours. And those who observe when the deterrent is not present nothing matters.
Red Light Cameras at high risk intersections are one targeted visible example. Although drivers still miss even these, or appear to push the limits?
So far there has been no perfect solution. The evidence is the current road toll.
1 Like
From year to year any affect of the cameras seems variable.
In Victoria it went up, then came down. The cause and effect of it coming down seems inconclusive. Cameras might have contributed, or it might all be safer vehicles or more stringent requirements for L and P platers? In Victoria safer roads is probably not in the equation, at least not as a statistically significant component.
Something about Qld.
In NSW it seems speed cameras are indeterminate on their graph, but graduated licensing at least appears to have made a difference, although any influence of speed cameras may be filtered out as presented.
It seems fatalities are counted but not so much routine fender benders. Cameras certainly have proven useless at making drivers more considerate or less risk averse judging by the yahoos and cowboy drivers regularly witnessed zigzagging through traffic, not an indicator to be seen - nor usually a policeman to ‘counsel’ them.
1 Like
A different example of policing with a police patrol vehicle stopping an alleged drunk driver who was speeding on a motorway.
Fat lot of good a speed trap hidden in the bushes would have achieved here, but some real proactive policing avoided a potential disaster.
1 Like
I think that this may be the case. With fixed speed cameras, once one knows the road one will also ensure that one doesn’t speed past the fixed camera. This is something we do, as well and many others we know.
If one knows the location of cameras or speed traps, one will also slow down (ensure maintaining speed limit) so that one does not get a infringement notice.
Having random and unknown speed traps/camera locations makes one cautious when driving as one does not know if and when there is likely to be the potential to be caught out when speeding.
There are some apps which give fixed locations (such as permanent cameras) as well as locations provided by the app users (such as Waze which can have information about current camera locations…assuming the data is live and updated by users regularly.
2 Likes
I challenge that assertion. It might make some drivers slow down in fear of fines but it does not make anyone ‘more cautious’. The yahoos and cowboys know they can drive any way they want if they stay in the speed limit re cameras, and they know the chances of being caught by a patrol car are low.
Bad driving is more dangerous than speeding from my perspective.
‘The system’ has grabbed onto the lowest possible cost approach to ‘road safety’ that probably does reduce the number of accidents a bit, and with the bonus that it handsomely feeds the treasury. If you don’t speed you don’t pay is an argument, but ‘going there’ tacitly admits it is about revenue not safety.
It is not true that if you don’t speed you will not have an accident nor a fatality. There are t-bones and head ons as well as inattentive drivers rolling their vehicles as examples.
I’ll repeat I have no worries about red light cameras nor point to point cameras nor the concept of the new mobile phone catching cameras, but not hidden speed cameras. Putting fear in a motorist (the main reason de tat of a hidden camera) is apparently government’s way to pretend they are addressing bad roads, bad drivers, and increasingly technical, lengthy, and complex road rules that make ever more actions into infringements.
3 Likes
Are we safer when at work than when driving to and from work, the shops, the school run, …?
Is it possible to compare?
There is a perception workplaces are dangerous or high risk. Workplaces are where most accidents and injuries occur. Workplace safety includes a focus on “at risk behaviours“ and zero tolerance.
Are there lessons for road safety to be learnt from how the safety culture of the Australian Workplace has been transformed over recent decades?
Some basic statistics.
Road Trauma
In 2018 there were 1,145 road fatalities nationally.
IE
A fatality rate of 4.6 per billion vehicle km. In 2008 the fatality rate was 6.9 per billion km, or 50% higher than 2018.
https://www.bitre.gov.au/publications/ongoing/road_deaths_australia_annual_summaries
Workplace Trauma
In 2018 there were 144 Workplace fatalities (1.1 per 100,000 workers) nationally. In 2007 There were 310 fatalities (3.0 per 100,000 workers), or approx 3 times higher than in 2018.
Roads vs Workplaces
It is a challenging comparison.
For roads in 2018, 4.6 fatalities per billion vehicle kilometres equates to approx 1 per 5 million vehicle road hrs, assuming an overall 40kph average road speed.
For workplaces in 2018, 1.1 fatalities per 100,000 workers equates to approx 1 fatality per 150 million hours worked. This assumes approx 1620hrs per worker annually.
More simply considered, an occupant or driver of a motor vehicle is
30 times more likely to be fatally injured on the road,
when compared to a person who is at work. Typically there are around 40 hospitalisations due to road accidents for every road fatality. The cost to families and the economy? Tragic and $$$.
Should anyone be complaining about speed cameras?
They can’t be everywhere, but then neither can there be a mobile police patrol for every ten cars on our roads.
We need a better solution.
Changing behaviours, and preventing at risk behaviours before they turn into 160kph drunken speeding offences is far better than trying to catch a driver who is already drunk and speeding on the road. Speed camera or road patrol it may still be too late either way.
… aren’t people more cautious if they are fixated on the speedo rather than actual events occurring around the car? A speedo could surely never be a distraction like a stereo or a mobile phone or … almost makes autonomous vehicles a self-fulfilling prophecy.
… my eyes glazed over about two thirds of the way through this document https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/system/files/documents/1911/explanatory-notes-datasets.pdf
but would a full comparison need to include ‘all travellers’ (not just road users) if we compare it to ‘all workers’? (I don’t trust statistics …)
I’d favour creating good behaviour from the start - proper and effective training, ongoing skills maintenance and assessment - similar to what is done in the workplace … of course something does need to be done about the millions of drivers who had little more training than uncle Ted taking them for a few laps of the paddock
3 Likes
And all the ones who simply found their drivers licences in cereal packets?
Apologies, I left off the bedtime reading warning. Public issued government data and reports rarely state the obvious. Fear of accountability?
All statistics can be challenged in some way.
A more basic test might be to count up those you have known and can name who have been killed or injured in a motor vehicle accident. Do the same for your workplace, and compare. Some of us may be luckier in our choice of friendships than others.
Nothing complex in the analysis.
I doubt anyone would call that an analysis, just anecdotal commentary.
The cautious comment was in relation to speeding and not overall driving behaviour. If one thinks there is a risk of being fined through speeding or knowingly exceeding the speed limit, one is generally less likely to speed. If one choses to speed, one must therefore accept the consequences when caught.
There is arguments that speed limits don’t necessary mean safety…and example is driving at the speed limit during fog or storm rains…both which coukd have catastrophic implications. Also, it could be argued that higher speeds than speed limits could be equally as safe. The problem is there are many who seem unable to judge appropriate speeds under any driving conditions…and think pushing the boundaries poses no risks.
1 Like
It’s not a point for argument.
Or is there a counterpoint that most of the population is numb to road trauma?
Anecdote or statistic is it simpler to ignore, and for the community to accept lesser standards for convenience, than become part of the solution?
Excessive road speed is either acceptable or unacceptable? If it is acceptable, then yes, we don’t need hidden speed cameras, or do we?
Suggestions for removal of hidden speed cameras seems to say it is OK to exceed the speed limit. Drivers know they will not be detected unexpectedly. The best way to be rid of them is for everyone to slow down. Zero revenue and they will soon all disappear.
1 Like
In my opinion - herein lies a significant issue:
is not, by definition, the same as
the latter being set predominantly by
My view only
4 Likes
Personally, I agree with this sentiment. There are a number of other issues revolving around ‘revenue raising’ that I think are truly questionable, speed traps not being one of them.
3 Likes
Whilst driving back from Dan Murphy’s around an hour ago, I witnessed some idiot in a Toyota ute doing at least 100 km/h in the 80 km/h zone as he continuously weaved in and out of all 3 lanes whilst overtaking vehicles without slowing down.
I was hoping that the fixed red light and speed camera ahead would have organised a New Years greeting for him, but by Murphy’s Law, the light was on red.
In a workplace reporting of at risk behaviours or unsafe conditions is actively encouraged. The line between dobbing in a work mate and ensuring both of you go home unharmed has tilted firmly one way. Most businesses I’ve worked with respond to such reports in a constructive and affirmative way. Employers, workers, legislation and unions all have similar expectations.
In comparison getting a similar level of support from our policing systems would seem too difficult. Even with a dash cam to back you up and a clear indication of the relative speeds involved is there any evidence of successful court actions based on private observation.
Our legal system seems ready to rubber stamp speeding from a camera record or mobile phone use from a spy cam. Not so ready to respond to the observations of everyday motorists?
2 Likes
They do not have certified accurate anything, causing a minor problem under the law. Would you accept an ebay acquired anal thermometer monthly record as the basis to challenge the BOM’s AWS systems, if that makes a point?
3 Likes
Dashcam footage, submit to police?
3 Likes
Which may be a challenge for the legislators and the law? For many offences it has only been the word of the police officer, now sometimes backed up by camera.
It shouldn’t be for the majority of motorists, to have to accept a failed system.
Motorists need access to similar strategies to those used in workplaces to improve road safety outcomes.
Although I expect there is an obvious reason or two for the failure of governments to adequately understand and respond. There is a very noisy small group of motorists who argue for their rights to the freedom of the road. Something that in law does not exist, but has long been used in marketing automobiles and petroleum products. Marketing strategies long accepted politically for less transparent reasons.
