doog,

I have accumulated one minor traffic ticket in the many years I have been driving. That was where a long pre-existing signage had changed sometime through the week. I paid up anyhow and got on with life.

Now, had that been an age pensioner or anyone on a modest fixed income, it could have been budget disaster. The same applies where the person might deliberately break the law by speeding a bit because they are late, the road was clear and so on. Any infringement implies additional unnecessary risk. People are human.

For myself, I am very surprised by what science informs us are the risks of using a mobile, even glancing at it, while in charge of a vehicle. But then we, you too, often drive without active attention too. The risks are not what our intuition might suppose. We are just fortunate not to have had an accident.

It suggested to me that to reduce road trauma, maybe authorities should be slowly grinding their way through the ways to channel people into better driving, including recognising and handling hazards.

However the engineers and other professionals are already doing this and the aid of psychologists is continually sought as well.

Are fines equitable? Not always, but rest assured it is all under continual review.

Shadow Minister,

I definitely agree that the fines are pure revenue raising. The fact that constantly checking one's speedometer and watching out for speed zone changes is probably more dangerous than doing a few Ks over the speed limit on the odd occasion I think is evidence of this.

AJ Philips,

I agree with both of you.

It seems to me though that whenever police commissioners are under scrutiny over (say) burglary stats, the immediate knee-jerk is the publicity-generating 'crack down' on traffic and other minor offences. A ticket each time, no question.
Police Commissioner, "There you go, that is a police presence for you to be going with!".

The 'Our equipment can measure 1kph over and you will get done for it' did not come from politicians I believe but from senior echelons of the police.

In Queensland for example, The Courier Mail has had for many years back to JohB-P, the ready made headlines it trots out for those occasions, 'Blitz' and so on.

Leoj, you touch on a very sensitive point.
The speed measuring equipment is not checked frequently enough and
argument is pushed aside by the state law deeming it to be scientific
equipment.
The Commonwealth Measuring Act requires the person using the equipment
to be able to produce an up to date calibration certificate.
Not one in a thousand coppers would be carrying that.
You should be able to demand to see it in court at least.
Their reliability to measure with a plus or minus 1km per hour is
I think very dubious.
What is not realised is when using measuring equipment accuracy is
quoted as a percentage of full scale deflection.
ie if your speedo goes to 200km per hour the 1% accuracy means plus
or minus 2Km per hour. To say they can measure 1Km per hour at 60km/h
is obvious nonsense.
All speedo pointers are a lot wider than that.

There is a case where a radar device was defeated because the victim
was able to show that the unit responded to the radiator fan blades
of his car.
I think this case caused the introduction of laser devices.

All in all making such measurements under such typical unrepeatable
conditions is really the height of madness.

Bazz,

It is also a fact that bureaucrats may set out to test for a precedent.

Where you might be the unfortunate one chosen, even if you are a barrister your pockets might not be deep enough.

Politicians would be happy to let it run.

I have a million questions, but I will ask just one at this time. I would like to know who decides what speeds we do and where? It is patently clear that the enforcement of a law in this category, has nothing, nothing to do with saving lives. We are treated like children and maybe there is your answer. The problem is, I am no child and I know I'm being conned. I vehemently reject being treated as one. The attitude of the law makers/enforcers is such that they should be incarcerated. We are 'told' what to do with absolutely no explanation or justification about how that law came to be. Where and who established the 'terms of reference'? Where is the reasoning on how they came up with these 'laws'? For all you 'politically correct' Nancys, who believe that if it's law we must all comply, without question. Well it's people like you that have given rise to and allowed these mongrels to push us around and steal money from us, at their leisure and we are not allowed to challenge them. Thanks a lot you 'law lovers' are all as much morons and guilty of the same crimes as they are.