Ridiculous press release

01-06-2005, 02:29 PM

I appreciate that the police don't get to choose what traffic rules they enforce but stuff like this is irritating. Theres no need to contact the media and blow stuff out of proportion like this. You would think that if he actually cared about road safety he would be asking why the road toll has been increasing as the average speed of cars falls due to tough anti speeding laws. Instead they would rather launch ridiculous attacks on various minorities they dislike for what ever reason.

Police anger at L of a speed
Holly Ife
01jun05

A 16-YEAR-old learner has been caught driving at 132km/h in a 110km/h zone on the Western Highway at Myrniong near Bacchus Marsh.

The youth, clocked by Sen-Const Ian Davis's laser speed measuring device about 10.15pm on Sunday, was being supervised by his mother.

Two other passengers, believed to be the 16-year-old's brother and father, were sitting in the back of the car.

"I was just appalled," said Sen-Const Davis, of the Moorabool traffic management unit.

"Firstly by the speed he was travelling, but also by the fact his parents would allow him to drive at that speed. I was sickened by the speed but also by the lack of concern shown to other motorists."

He said the penalty -- a $205 fine, three demerit points and a month's suspension of the youth's learner permit -- was not severe enough.

"He can still get his licence as soon as he turns 18," he said.

"It would be more of a punishment if he had to wait a few months longer to get his licence."

Sen-Const Davis said that while older people were still caught speeding, it appeared mainly young people who were not getting the "speed kills" message.

Sen-Const Davis said penalties for speeding should be doubled or even quadrupled for P-platers until they got the message.

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/com...5E2862,00.html

JG3282 · 01-06-2005, 02:36 PM

what's the problem?

EA2BA · 01-06-2005, 02:46 PM

its fair enough, i think the parent should have lost there licence as well.

01-06-2005, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ONGAS

what's the problem?

Contacting the newspapers over nothing, stupid generalizations like its mostly P-platers that speed, headache inducing kneejerk reactions like quadruple fines and points for P platers, I mean tough new speeding laws have increased the number of road deaths making them 4x worse is sure to save lives...

01-06-2005, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dellboy999

its fair enough, i think the parent should have lost there licence as well.

I agree with them being fined and everything, its just the silly stuff they felt the need to say that is annoying.

EA2BA · 01-06-2005, 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lizardmech

I agree with them being fined and everything, its just the silly stuff they felt the need to say that is annoying.

yes i agree with you on the p-plate comment, seeing as this was an L-plater in the first place, i think just become conditioned to moronic police statemtents i didnt even really notice ........ lol :hihi:

Smoke Pursuit · 01-06-2005, 03:07 PM

22 kms over the limit wow... 22 kms makes shit all difference if your in a decent car with decent brakes... The RTA and Police spend so much talking about how much quicker you could stop if you were doing the speed limit rather then 10 kms over for example... Have they foggotten the fact that different cars have different stopping capabilities? Cars fitted with ABS vs. cars fitted without ABS.. Put an XD Falcon with shotty brakes next to a BA XT with ABS and see the difference.... Then we come to the fact that he was young blah blah blah.. Some of our younger drivers are alot more capable in a car then older drivers, not saying that all young people are good drivers, but still alot of them seem to have good distance sense etc when driving. On the other hand you see 40 year olds tailgating (especially women) and carrying on...

When will the government learn that speeding isnt the main factor with respect to carnage on the roads. Ofcourse its one of the factors, but I personally think the roadworthyness of cars is the prominant issue which the government DON'T spend enough time talking about in their media campaigns, nor enforcing it.

Ghiadude · 01-06-2005, 03:14 PM

yes the xt will brake quicker, but they will argue that they need a law for the lowest common denominator which is shit car, shit driver.... thats when one "could" argue that if you could prove your car is capable and you are more highly trained that you should be let off in certain instances.....

Dezza · 01-06-2005, 03:16 PM

It's so annoying that they generalise that all P-platers (especially male) are maniacs. I'm now so glad to be off my Ps. The thing that really annoys me is how they want to limit passengers in the cars. The police and government seem to think that P-plates + passengers = Instant maniac. While I was on my Ps, most of my driving involved driving brothers and sisters around (a load off mum and dad), driving fellow students to exams and other stuff. If I went out, I was usually "Designated Dezza", and I'd make sure that all I'd drink is coke. I always drove sensibly and while I did make mistakes, it had nothing to do with my passengers (if I had any). Of course, there are plenty of P-platers who give the rest a bad name, but hopefully they all get caught out.

Sorry if I've gone off topic (like I have a habit of doing) but I am getting sick of these generalisations, even if they no longer apply to me. In terms of the enforcement of speed, the government should realise that the public knows it is just revenue raising, and just creates more road rage. The police put out the article for simple shock value but the sooner they end this "Wipe off 5" campaign and put more emphasis on drink-driving and drugs the better.

DivHunter · 01-06-2005, 03:42 PM

FACT:
Higher speed limits = lower death toll

Until the state govt. pull their heads in and stop the blatant revenue raising abuse of power under the guise of 'speed kills' they can all get ****ed. Why? Why!? did you all vote in a labour govt. FOOLS! :P

It should all be about driver training and learning to drive to the conditions!

01-06-2005, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShockWaveXR6na

22 kms over the limit wow... 22 kms makes shit all difference if your in a decent car with decent brakes... The RTA and Police spend so much talking about how much quicker you could stop if you were doing the speed limit rather then 10 kms over for example... Have they foggotten the fact that different cars have different stopping capabilities? Cars fitted with ABS vs. cars fitted without ABS.. Put an XD Falcon with shotty brakes next to a BA XT with ABS and see the difference.... Then we come to the fact that he was young blah blah blah.. Some of our younger drivers are alot more capable in a car then older drivers, not saying that all young people are good drivers, but still alot of them seem to have good distance sense etc when driving. On the other hand you see 40 year olds tailgating (especially women) and carrying on...

When will the government learn that speeding isnt the main factor with respect to carnage on the roads. Ofcourse its one of the factors, but I personally think the roadworthyness of cars is the prominant issue which the government DON'T spend enough time talking about in their media campaigns, nor enforcing it.

YES I CANT AGREE more.... x 1000000000

but see the govt trying too sell that point to everyone isnt dramatic and then you cant have people like Screwby and Devices like Speed Cameras and laser guns around if you alert people to safety..

Its all about the money

deesun · 01-06-2005, 05:09 PM

Maybe it's because I am older and I have defended plenty of P platers before and I would love to see defensive AND advanced driver education included in getting ones license but I can't for the life of me understand why you are defending a LEARNER for exceeding the speed limit by so much. Since when was a learner allowed to do 100kph let alone 132.It wouldn't matter what sort of car he was in he has little or no experience at the wheel.As for his parents or any supervisory driver they are F**kwits too. There is NO excuse for this behavior,NONE. The supervisory driver should have been fined double what the L plater was and double the points. Far too often latley we have seen this sort of behavior and it's no wonder we have drivers with this sort of attitude. I'm with the copper on this one but he isn't allowed to say what he really thinks for fear of upsetting some poor F**kwit 16 year old and his parents.They are lucky to still be alive.

out:

01-06-2005, 05:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deesun

Maybe it's because I am older and I have defended plenty of P platers before and I would love to see defensive AND advanced driver education included in getting ones license but I can't for the life of me understand why you are defending a LEARNER for exceeding the speed limit by so much. Since when was a learner allowed to do 100kph let alone 132.It wouldn't matter what sort of car he was in he has little or no experience at the wheel.As for his parents or any supervisory driver they are F**kwits too. There is NO excuse for this behavior,NONE. The supervisory driver should have been fined double what the L plater was and double the points. Far too often latley we have seen this sort of behavior and it's no wonder we have drivers with this sort of attitude. I'm with the copper on this one but he isn't allowed to say what he really thinks for fear of upsetting some poor F**kwit 16 year old and his parents.They are lucky to still be alive.

out:

What they did was illegal, but I really doubt they are "lucky to be alive". I really doubt both parents would be happy to sit there at 130km/h if it seemed like they were traveling too fast for the conditions. It doesn't take a lot of driving skill to be able to drive a reasonable car safely down a highway at 130km/h. Making a learner do less than the speed limit when its not needed is stupid, it creates a pointless traffic hazard, many australian drivers have no manners and are incompetent so they will just tailgate them.

Marlin_Girl · 01-06-2005, 05:42 PM

sh1t... i did 140km/h on L's under mums supervision overtaking... "C'mon Cass! put your foot RIGHT down FLAT or we wont make it!!"...

She actually didn't know about the road rule where you DONT speed when overtaking!

:

SHouldn't have done it though.

XA-Coupe · 01-06-2005, 05:53 PM

Amusing that people think that there isn't a problem with a L Plater doing ~130 ks.
I guess it's the invincibility of youth.
By the way, P platers do tend to drive like dickheads more .. I see it every day and guess what .. when I was a P Plater I did too !!
I would love to see all these guys that think they can speed ( like 20 - 30 ks faster than the limit ) safely do an advanced driving course .. it's a hell of an eye opener at how lousy your skills really are.

01-06-2005, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marlin_Girl

sh1t... i did 140km/h on L's under mums supervision overtaking... "C'mon Cass! put your foot RIGHT down FLAT or we wont make it!!"...

She actually didn't know about the road rule where you DONT speed when overtaking!

:

SHouldn't have done it though.

Overtaking people as quickly as you can is the safest way but the government refuse to acknowledge it.

XA-Coupe · 01-06-2005, 05:55 PM

I agree .. but it's only safe to a point.. you can;t justify 180 overtaking because your exposure is less...

Rodp · 01-06-2005, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShockWaveXR6na

22 kms over the limit wow... 22 kms makes shit all difference if your in a decent car with decent brakes... The RTA and Police spend so much talking about how much quicker you could stop if you were doing the speed limit rather then 10 kms over for example... Have they foggotten the fact that different cars have different stopping capabilities?

Did you miss the fact that it was a 16yr old L plater? It wasn't 22 over the limit, it's 52 over the limit (at least in NSW anyway) by a driver who's time behind the wheel could probably be measured in hours... at night! What experience would this L plater have in an emergency situation?! ZERO!

Maybe I'm just getting old, but that's a combination just asking for trouble. I agree with the Senior Constable!

I do avoid P platers in riced up cars because I've spent a lot of time on the road around P platers in riced up cars. Prior to the police cracking down on the McDonalds on Orange Grove Rd, I would have challenged anyone in a decent looking car to go to the Macca's last at night on the weekend and escape the gauntlet of P platers.

The MaDDeSTMaN · 01-06-2005, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XA Coupe

I agree .. but it's only safe to a point.. you can;t justify 180 overtaking because your exposure is less...

Well said, not only because of stopping time (as the government is so quick to point out), but reaction times, road conditions, other drivers unpredictability, etc. Personally, I think doing speeds over say 140km/h on most Victorian roads would be too risky, given the miserable state of some of our roads.

01-06-2005, 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XA Coupe

Amusing that people think that there isn't a problem with a L Plater doing ~130 ks.
I guess it's the invincibility of youth.
By the way, P platers do tend to drive like dickheads more .. I see it every day and guess what .. when I was a P Plater I did too !!
I would love to see all these guys that think they can speed ( like 20 - 30 ks faster than the limit ) safely do an advanced driving course .. it's a hell of an eye opener at how lousy your skills really are.

How is it so much harder to drive on a highway at 130 instead of 110? Its not like speeding by 20 or 30 in a 60 zone around traffic. All you have to do is leave an appropriate distance between cars and slow down for corners if needed. Im sure there are plenty of idiot P platers but theres no shortage of non P platers that get speeding fines, saying that its mainly P platers that speed is naive.

deesun · 01-06-2005, 06:17 PM

You cannot defend the indefensible. You don't know what the traffic conditions were. Did the press release say? No. Did it say what the weather was? No. Did it say what sort of car it was ? No. Did it say what condition the car was in? No. As for the hazard on the freeway, its only a hazard when the other drivers aren't watching what they and the other cars around them are doing. This is also something the supervisory driver should have been considering.If it were very heavy traffic I would have stopped in the nearest bay and swapped drivers so that there wasn't a hold up to the other drivers in heavy traffic. Lighter traffic and no I wouldnt.

XA-Coupe · 01-06-2005, 06:20 PM

You fail to understand the main issue. If shit happens at 130 , it takes a LOT longer to stop than from 110. The right car can travel at 290 for days on end safely ... but should a roo hop out or some moron change lanes and boom, you are history. That's an extreme case but you should get the idea. The laws of physics dictate that 10% increase in speed is more than a 10% increas in stopping distance. A line had to be drawn somewhere and they drew it there.
I didn't say P Platers were the main speed offenders, I said they drive like dickheads, you don't need to speed to do that.

edit: they don't all drive like that before someone bothers to say it

01-06-2005, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XA Coupe

I agree .. but it's only safe to a point.. you can;t justify 180 overtaking because your exposure is less...

Thats true, we don't drive race cars, most road cars produce lift at these speeds and lack tyres designed for those speeds.

01-06-2005, 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XA Coupe

You fail to understand the main issue. If shit happens at 130 , it takes a LOT longer to stop than from 110. The right car can travel at 290 for days on end safely ... but should a roo hop out or some moron change lanes and boom, you are history. That's an extreme case but you should get the idea. The laws of physics dictate that 10% increase in speed is more than a 10% increas in stopping distance. A line had to be drawn somewhere and they drew it there.
I didn't say P Platers were the main speed offenders, I said they drive like dickheads, you don't need to speed to do that.

Speed is only 1 factor in stopping distances, if stopping distances were such a big problem you would think there would be more laws about brake and tyre requirements for cars. If it was so critical wouldn't base model cars be vastly overrepresented in road deaths VS sports models? When was the last time you slammed on the brakes at 110 and stopped exactly a few cm short of an imovable object?

XA-Coupe · 01-06-2005, 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lizardmech

Speed is only 1 factor in stopping distances, if stopping distances were such a big problem you would think there would be more laws about brake and tyre requirements for cars. If it was so critical wouldn't base model cars be vastly overrepresented in road deaths VS sports models? When was the last time you slammed on the brakes at 110 and stopped exactly a few cm short of an imovable object?

speed is only one factor but it is the major factor. There are plenty of laws about tryes ( our speed ratings system ) and brakes these days are better than ever.. in some cases they are almost suitable for race use.
The one way of governing stopping distances is to govern ... speed !! Pretty easy eh??
As you seem to know the statistics about what cars are represented in the road deaths, lets hear the rest of the stats.
Last time I tried to stop quickly from 110 I couldn't and had to go around it.( Thanks John Bowe Institute !! ) Had I been going substantially faster I would have hit the tool that pulled out.

nick81xd · 01-06-2005, 07:26 PM

me and a mate did a test last year

we put my car up (xd) againist his dads VY exec in a brake test
80kph side by side then stop as quick as we could and after 3 test swapping sides with each other on average my car stopped roughly 30cms more then the commie so its **** all difference between ABS and non ABS

**Full Noise** · 01-06-2005, 07:38 PM

I’m not trying to start a blue, however, there are a few issues here that some people might not see as clearly as the officer that intercepted this particular person. As tx3dude put it the laws are set to compensate for the lowest common denominator, I don’t like it either but that’s the law and you just have to live with it. I don’t care what anyone says, this fool is sixteen years old and his experience is limited to say the least. I’m not trying to sound like a TAC commercial but this bloke is an accident waiting to happen and needs an attitude adjustment. wasn’t there a tragic accident near Castlemaine not long ago where a sixteen year old girl smashed a HSV Commodore and five people died? I’m not trying to sound like a copper here but look at it from their point of view. They have to pick up the pieces when people like this confuse their ambition with their ability.

Unfortunately I’ve been the first person on the scene of three fatal accidents and It’s not much fun. Things happen quickly at 130 kph, that’s 36.11 metres a second, combine that with 100 kph for the bloke coming towards him, 27.78 metre a second and that’s a close up gap of 63.89 metres a second.
Would any of you want this clown coming towards you out of control? I’ve got nothing against giving your car a rev but there is a time and place for these things, this was neither. The supervising driver needs to learn a little bit about social responsibility as well.

Cheers, Danny

Psycho Chicken · 01-06-2005, 07:46 PM

I don't see the problem at all.

The kid is 16 years old, so he's obviously got under a year on the road. If his parents think it's alright to do 132 in a 110 zone with that ammount of experience and under supervision what the hell is he going to do when he gets onto his P's?

Sure you could train monkeys to do 132 kph and I'm sure most of us here have done it for extended periods of time. However that really isn't the point.

LTDHO · 01-06-2005, 08:21 PM

Problem is:
Most parents and adult drivers do not know how to drive safely and allow a learner to drive over the limit and well past the drivers skill level. IMO the full licence driver should have got a fine also!

Teaching a learner to brake the law and speed is outright dangerous.

I have read that higher speeds can lower road tolls but not to somone that spent 3 years learning to drive on a playstation!!

This is beyond stupid.

MITCHAY · 01-06-2005, 08:47 PM

In my L training i learnt that it is rarely only one factor to an accident and usually is 2 or more factors. I mean what are this dudes parents goin to do slap him across the head while hes driving. A normal kid would slow down though.

About ABS brakes well they lose stopping distance in a straight lane and are more for twisty roads or swerving motions. On a gravel road its actually better to lock your brakes as the build up of gravel infront of your tyres can slow you down. On a normal straight road you will lose stopping distance with ABS brakes.

Ive got ABS and can tell anyone that straight away that you have to brake earlier in a straight line because when you hard brake it still doesnt have as much stop as non ABS cars (which will lock with too much brake). On the twisty stuff there is nothing better but on straight stuff brake earlier.

If this L driver gets caught doin that speed on his Ls imagine what he might clock up on his Ps without his parents next to him. And im sure if the weather was bad they would of mentioned it to add strength to the story.

And its a shame when P and fully licenced drivers tailgate and intimidate them when they are abiding by the law and even now as a P driver i still cop a rear vision mirror full of another car when im doin the speed limit. I wont speed just cause someone else is a hurry.