Victoria Police Fuel Speed Camera Debate
17 Sep, 2007
14 Comments 
The Sunday Age reports Victoria Police will go all the way to the Supreme Court to prosecute speeding motorists that have been let off by the magistrates court.
Assistant Commissioner Noel Ashby confirmed that police would take every single successful driver’s appeal to the Supreme Court, as long as it was not backed up by technical evidence.
In other words if you can prove to the judge, on your own and without expert evidence, that you were not speeding, Victoria police will see you in the Supreme Court. A move which will leave many motorists scared of challenging their speeding tickets.
Mr Ashby also reinstated that Speed Cameras are all about road safety and not revenue raising, despite the Victorian government making in excess of $200 million per year from Traffic Camera Office tickets alone.
Millions of motorists have now been caught speeding Australia wide, but with the rising road toll, we have to ask, if Victoria police wants expert advise to beat a speeding ticket, we want solid, independent expert advise that speed cameras save lives in Australia!
We are waiting…
Location: Home / Speeding, Road Rules / ...
Rate Post: 
(4 votes, average: 4.75 out of 5)
Loading ...
-
Print it:
September 17th, 2007 at 1:37 pm
Are they serious?
Speed cameras are for road safety? Give me a break, Victoria Police are a joke, infact, the entire Aus police force have lost so much respect from motorists since speed cameras came about,
Wake up Australia, speed cameras do not save livs,
and kudos to you guys for having the guts to say it how it is.
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 1:41 pm
The absolute hypocrisy surrounding the speed camera debate is just ludicrous. The ’speed kills’ mentality is just a front for revenue raising. Even an accident within speed limits can, depending on the situation, still kill.
It’s high time driver training from a high school level is bought in to focus, instead of allowing Mum & Dad the entirety of the burden that is teaching a learner driver.
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 1:49 pm
Victoria Police are taking a very arrogant stance over this. As with any area of the law you should be able to defend yourself. The Police rely on drivers just accepting the ticket rather than questioning it, such as: was the speed detection equipment cetified as accurate etc.
I find the Australian Police’s attitude to speed very draconian - such as if you are going 6km over the limit you are more likely to have an accident than if you were doing the limit. It’s all about driver training. There are more vehicles on the road in the UK, speed limits are higher, the Police are more lenient (average speed on a UK motorway is 136kph despite the speed limit being 112kph) and the UK has less accidents per head of population than Australia.
Nearly every set of traffic lights I see here has smashed glass all over it where some d*ck head went through on red. Shows how good driver training is.
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 3:21 pm
Probably went through the red cos they were too busy watching the speedo
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 3:34 pm
I wouldn’t read much into this. It’s actually very difficult for them to lodge appeals the way the are saying - it’s a volume issue. Vic Police would be accused of clogging up the law courts.
It’s PR to scare people. Many people are having a lot of success with the Aussie Speeding Fines site & it’s .pdf.
They’re just trying to counter this stuff.
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 3:34 pm
In effect they are ensuring that no Victorian will ever contest a speeding fine. The cost will be lower to cop the points and pay the fine than to prove your innocence. So much for “Innocent until proven guilty”
I wonder if the Victorian Police need to prove beyond resonable doubt that the speed detection equipment was set up in accordance to the manufacturers instructions before a fine can be issued?
If this was the case, I dont think we would be seeing so many erroneous speed infringements on Today Tonight.
(Report)
September 17th, 2007 at 10:21 pm
I found this interest comment from Ford when they were complaining about a NZ speeding ad.
——
Clive Matthew-Wilson, editor of the car buyer’s Dog and Lemon Guide, said the ad was inaccurate and misleading.
“Statistically, fatal speeding accidents tend to involve young working class males driving a Japanese import,” he said.
“Middle-aged men driving new Ford Falcons have comparatively few fatal accidents.”
——————–
It would be interesting to see those stats.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 9:22 am
As a former NSW Highway Patrol officer I can state that the majority of HWP officers (including myself) that I worked with believed that speed cameras contributed nothing to road safety and were installed based on unreliable figures to simply raise money and make the government look good.
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 9:35 am
do the crime do the time
(Report)
September 18th, 2007 at 1:17 pm
If the speed camera is there to save lives how can changeing the speed limit on the Pacific Highway when the road doesen’t alter help? Oh wait can’t let people using cruise control slip by can we!
(Report)
September 28th, 2007 at 11:00 am
You people don’t seem to understand that speedlimits are the law, and if you go over them you are breaking the law and (as with all criminal acts) should be fined.
(Report)
September 28th, 2007 at 11:48 am
You’re correct Scott, but the argument you make cannot be extended to all acts of law. 10 years ago, 105kph in a 100 zone was not illegal. I cannot recall a time in history when the taking of a human life is not a crime, or rape, or theft or whatever the bottom-dwellers of society do for kicks/greed/lust/otherwise. The setting of speed tollerances and the creating of thresholds to establish a law are not in the spirit of what law making is about. The law is designed to protect everybody, you can’t tell me my 105kph on a 100kph freeway is protecting anybody but government coffers that increasingly rely on speed camera revenue to balance mis-managed budgets and fiscal incompetence. Speeding is defined by law as 3kph (or 5kph, or +- 10%, or whatever archaic state you live in). I argue the very system of imposing blanket limits on speed to be inherently flawed, with governments and the public in no position to be making calls on what highway speed limits should be. A system needs to be in place to ensure people who cannot safely control a vehicle are not allowed on roads. Licensing requirements should be increased and include tests on emergency control of a vehicle and road-craft. Speed limits should be increased for those capable of a higher level of vehicle control (due to the car they buy or level of assessed skill) and higher penalties are imposed on people who break these laws. I’m fed up with Australia having the most lazy, careless and dangerous drivers, and a culture of extremes where wowsers control our speed limits and lives behind the wheel, and those cowboys who don’t know any better but to fry their tyres and risk the lives of road users, instead of taking their childish games to areas suitable for their caveman-like behaviour.
There is no evidence to support speed cameras save lives, there is evidence to support driving training and better regulation on our roads of bad driving practises (not just dangerous speeding). There is evidence to support technology (such as ESP) can save unsafe drivers from themselves. We live in a motoring darkage in this country, something needs to be done.
(Report)
October 7th, 2007 at 4:59 pm
As a lawyer, I have found a rather large gap in the law which makes it almost impossible for the police to successfully prosecute a traffic camera infringement. However, the way fines are “priced” makes it uneconomical for motorists to seek legal advice in respect of infringements. It’s just a question of how much they value their demerit points.
(Report)
September 8th, 2008 at 11:19 pm
about FN time COPS / put the pressure on
(Report)