A new high-definition camera mounted in the tail-light of a bicycle, to record vehicles passing too closely, accidents, abuse and general bad driving, and to work towards improving road safety for cyclists:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-vsYCybCs8&feature=youtu.be

Sounds like an excellent idea to me.

So then, why can’t the same principle be extended to cars and indeed all vehicles?

Why don’t the police, Dept of Transport, RACQ and all other relevant parties encourage people to mount cameras in their cars?

This would surely make all the difference to the way the rank drivers drive, once they realise that their behaviour can easily be recorded in full and that this can then go to the police as hard evidence.

FOR JUST A FEW D0lLARS A DAY
WE CAN LIFE YOUR LFE FOR YOU.*

it seems clever//til your computer 'dies'
and they are designed/to die

no thanks/free public transportation
[im sick of walking in auto polution/put a tax on fuel/so us walkers can move/arround like the poluters do...anyhow i dont trust computer nurds

the FIRST DEATH BY AUTOMOTON?
will the comuter make life and death choices
[dont hit the lady and the kid in the pram/better to kill the single driver/by hitting the truck..[which person to avoid]..look its all clever/but at what cost?

i like the idea/of the 2000 dollar car
if that needs be self drive ok[think of all the instrumentation
mechanical engineering..we could save..these cars could behalf price
but instead they will be double

no i love driving/WHO NEEDS AUTOS
as you can see im conflicted/and unINTRESTED...how about google glasses/that auto upload all we see/for later edit..for free

never the less/auto..driver/less public transportation
the new norm?..[the nut behind the wheel is the biggest cost.]

Thaat is the case now. It just depends what state you live in.
Tailgators, No indicators, Illegal head lights. All good for keeping the driving comunity on their toes.

It's called hard evidence, and can't be disputed.

AUTHER/quote..<<.‘The central puzzle..is why the state should have to tolerate exemptions..from generally applicable laws..when they conflic..with religious obligations..but not with any other equally serious obligations of conscience.’>>

Section 116
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_116_of_the_Constitution_of_Australia#Text_of_the_provision_and_location_in_the_Constitution

has been interpreted narrowly by the High Court of Australia: while the definition of "religion" adopted by the court is broad and flexible, the scope of the protection of religions is circumscribed. The result of the court's approach has been that no court has ever ruled a law to be in contravention of Section 116, and the provision has played only a minor role in Australian constitutional history. Among the laws that the High Court has ruled not to be in contravention of Section 116 are laws that provided government funding to religious schools, that authorised the dissolution of a branch of the Jehovah's Witnesses, and that enabled the forcible removal of Indigenous Australian children from their families.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_116_of_the_Constitution_of_Australia#Meaning_of_.22religion.22

It asks whether there...<<..is ‘any reason to think that moral ideal would only single out religious claims of conscience, protecting our Sikh boy but leaving our rural boy with no legal remedy.’>>

OPEN CARRY*
the knife must be a Public declaration/of belief*
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_116_of_the_Constitution_of_Australia#Meaning_of_.22religion.22

L

OUG.... The public transport system was supposably the best idea ever, I don't think so.....buses in Sydney have turned three lanes of smoothly flowing traffic, into two lanes of bullsh@t. Then we add the push-bike maniacs to the equation....The world is moving quite fast with very little time to achieve the daily tasks needed......CCTV as a height-light of human ingenuity? has to keep in mind the congestion of modern day understandings, which brings more dangerous situations to the roads.

Bike riders pay your road TAX or get off the streets:)
I've nearly killed three of them so far...(in their minds, that's one meter...I don't have to look behind me, cause I don't, the law says so) ....so you can see the fear I have for their safety.

That extra 1 meter moves vehicles away from the left-hand side, as law 101 of the motor drives hand book states quite clearly.

I have seen many near misses, not with bike-riders, but with vehicle head-ons.

Q...OUG....then why spend millions on push-bikes tracks if their not going to use them?



KAT

oops sorry/wrong thread
no further thoughts

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=16418&page=28

WE are ever making the list longer
the list/of lost skills/arts/TRADES

NOW/I CAN BUY THAT AUTO DRIVE TRUCK
A FLEET OF AUTO DRIVE BUSES/ point being who has the job to afford their work OFFER...[NOW A MINER/CAN Sell off our and/via auto drive truck/to auto drive trains/via auto loading onto auto shps/who deliver it/into the automated factory

and we still got fools working 24/7[mainly revenue raising sin taxes\
with comm car and huge ensions on highest pay scales/to go to private schools/oh who cares..

home james
MARK MY WORDS...PATENT THE PHRASE.