“Ludwig has missed the point.”

Not at all Bazz.

The point is to maximize road safety (or find the right balance between a high level of safety and a relatively low level of inconvenience for drivers, or inefficiency in travelling on our roads).

As a fundamental part of this, we should be striving to make road-users accountable for their actions as far as is possible, with good driver-training, effective policing and responsible management of all safety aspects of the vehicle that a driver is in charge of.

Speedometer accuracy falls squarely within these principles.

I agree that there still has to be provision for some degree of inaccuracy. But it surely has to sit within another important principle - respect for the law as it is written, and not some vague approximation that is open to different interpretations by different enforcers, or subjective or discriminatory enforcement.

Governments and police should be very loudly publicizing that speed limits will be policed at face value after ? 1 July 07, and that everyone is advised to have the accuracy of their speedos checked, and that they should err on the side of caution and drive a few ks under at all times, and a few ks slower than that if they are not confident that their speedo is accurate.

Either this or do what is necessary in law to redefine the meaning of speed limit signs so that they indicate speed zones, where the enforceable speed limit is a few ks (5kmh, 10kmh, 5% or 10%) above what is stated on the signs... and very strongly advise people to drive a few ks below the effective speed limit.

As speedometer accuracy can vary with tyre wear and pressure, it should be a standard requirement for speedos to be checked at every service and whenever new tyres are fitted. Simple really!

Speedo inaccuracy should most definitely not be used as an excuse to accept fuzzy and inconsistent interpretations of speed limit laws.

Ludwig,
It's all very well to say that the law should be observed but there are many laws that are downright stupid or are so obscure that no one, save the unlucky few who have been booked, ever know of their existance.
Would you blame the drivers who ignore the stop signs that I mentioned above?
How about those that cross the unbroken line on the left of the kerbside carriageway, should they be prosecuted for doing so?
Particularly when their action may have been to enable drivers of faster cars to pass? Thus cutting down on frustration, stress etc and thereby contributing to overall road safety.

Is Mise

There are indeed many laws that need reform. So let’s strive to reform them instead of just accepting that they are on the books, to be ignored or applied sporadically. This extends to speed limits, which are inappropriately high or low in some instances.

Many laws by their very nature are not black and white and have to be open to a degree of interpretation. But this should not an excuse for treating black and white clear-cut laws such as speed limits in a fuzzy nature.

Similarly, stop signs are hard and fast pieces of law. However I would argue that there are very few instances where stop signs are needed. Give way signs would suffice. There should be no need to come to a stop if you don’t have to in order to safely give way. Of course instances such as you mention in your post of 16/3 where redundant signs exist, should be remedied by the removal of the sign, and certainly not by way of just ignoring the sign. Simple.

A strict law-enforcement regime would need to be accompanied by extensive law reform so that silly situations such as not being able to legally cross the solid white line in order to overtake a vehicle turning right don’t exist.

Ludwig,

The stop signs at the railway level crossings have been reported so many times that people simply got sick of the futility of the exercise. In a couple of cases someone simply removed the signs and threw them on the railway line.

The crossing of the unbroken left hand line is law simply because the law on crossing the unbroken centre line applies to it as well. Why? Because it is an unbroken line. Simple to the point of stupidity.
People unknowingly break the law every day by moving across the line to let other vehicles past. They do it as a matter of courtesy, then one day they extend the same courtesy to a Polce Car and get booked.

Maybe the Government needs the revenue, maybe the Constable got a knock back that morning? Who knows?
It is a stupid interpretation of the law and if those in power gave a damn about things it could be changed simply by ordering those who paint the lines to paint a broken line on the kerb side of the lane.

On of the most stupid of all the road-safety slogans is "Speed Kills"
Because, as I posted above, deserted, houseless 50 kph streets on the edges of towns where the locals regularly do 10, 20 and 30 kph over the posted limits are proof that the slogan is misleading at best and fatuous at worst.

I totally agree Is Mise.

If the signs were not removed after someone, anyone, notified the relevant authority, then someone is being highly irresponsible. If the police book people when it is patently obvious that the signs should no longer be there, then they are being totally irresponsible.

A strict law-enforcement regime must be accompanied by a basic duty of care and responsibility from the relevant authorities.

‘Speed kills’ is indeed a stupid simplistic slogan. So is ‘Every k over is a killer’. Especially when the same governments that push this also allow us to do a few ks over the stated limit!

There is so much slackness and duplicity involved, from all parties; the public, police, government, Dept of Transport, NRMA, RACQ, etc.

I most strongly support the RACQ, but quite frankly even they are not doing anywhere near enough to hammer home the problems, and solutions.

No, Ludwig, as I said, you just can't ignore the laws in relation to
measurement standards whether you are the police or the courts.
The laws relating to measurement are Federal law and as such prempt
any state law on speed measurement. Where charges are made, such as in
fines the accuracy of devices used to measure speed is proscribed.

This is why some fines for speeding have been overturned.