So a lot of you are probably aware of the new NSW road rule, requiring motorists to slow down to 40km/h when passing a stationary emergency vehicle displaying blue or red flashing lights.
I got to experience it first hand for the first time last night driving from Sydney to the 'gong on the freeway. Doing 110 km/h, then as I come around a bend, everyone is suddenly slowing down to 40 km/h because a police car is on the side of the road with flashing lights. My verdict - it was blood dangerous. I saw a lot of people in front of me barely stop before the vehicle in front of them, and I was bracing myself for the rear-ender that I thought I might receive.
then you were not being totally aware of what was happening around you. I was taught 40 years ago, always be prepared for someone dumn to do something stupid and unexpected,
The police were doing their job, you and others were not prepared..
put yourself in their situation or yourself broken down on side of road and vehicles flying past you at 100 dont feel soory for you.
The emergency services in sa are trying to increase the speed. Currently it's 25 part them. They don't like it because it causes accidents.
Select to expand quoteTonz said..
then you were not being totally aware of what was happening around you. I was taught 40 years ago, always be prepared for someone dumn to do something stupid and unexpected,
The police were doing their job, you and others were not prepared..
put yourself in their situation or yourself broken down on side of road and vehicles flying past you at 100 dont feel soory for you.
I disagree. I saw mention of this rule, but I didn't think it applied to police cars doing their normal 'pulling people over and booking them', yet today there was a cop on the side of the road, waving people down.
Really? I can understand when its an irregular thing, like when an ambulance or fire engine is on the side of the road, but when its a cop just doing his regular business on the side of the road? I wouldn't think it would be such a big deal but they seem to pull over wherever, and I know they are concerned about their safety, but maybe they should be pulling over a bit further up in a place where it is actually safe?
So, if a cop sits on the side of the road writing out something with his lights going, which he probably has to do for safety reasons, everyone around him needs to slow down to 40km/h? I really thought it only made sense to other emergency vehicles.
Fortunately I don't have to drive to work or go to the shops. It's getting to the point in the good state of NSW if you drive or ride on a State owned road in a normal way, there is a law you are breaking.
I am looking forward to autonomous cars. Once they are out there I can cut up my drivers licence and give the middle finger to the Rip Off State.
Select to expand quoteTonz said..
then you were not being totally aware of what was happening around you. I was taught 40 years ago, always be prepared for someone dumn to do something stupid and unexpected,
The police were doing their job, you and others were not prepared..
put yourself in their situation or yourself broken down on side of road and vehicles flying past you at 100 dont feel soory for you.ding
Dumb and unexpected is normal .
If your game enough , Riding a bike , it's assential.
I think this law just came in WA too? Or I could be confused ? SLOMO I think they called it, slow down and move over.. I don't think cops get that much of choice where people pull over, if you were to acknowledge them then drive slowly to a safe place to pull over I don't think that they would mind..
I've seen cops here lose their cool and start screaming at people because everyone slows down to rubberneck at accidents.
Cops need to give up on speed traps and chasing people down, and hand that duty over to speed cameras.
So emergency services lives matter
but the public stopping to tend to car issues or what ever don't
.
So speed camera vehicle operators lives should matter as well, lets all slow to 40kph as we pass them
. Maybe then the cost to run them would exceed the revenue they generate and they would disappear...... only to then be replaced by more fixed cameras.
If I were a cop, I'd sit on the side of the freeway, get the speed gun out, turn my fancy lights a flashin' and book everyone that drove past...
gotta meet those quotas!
I wonder what we'll do once the pollies have invented a law for everything, f*ing nanny state.
Select to expand quoteRails said..
If I were a cop, I'd sit on the side of the freeway, get the speed gun out, turn my fancy lights a flashin' and book everyone that drove past...
gotta meet those quotas!
I wonder what we'll do once the pollies have invented a law for everything, f*ing nanny state.
I wouldn't be surprised if they did this as 'a lesson' to the public about the new law.
Where does it stop? Do they then say that you need to slow down 100m before? 200m? Do they setup another radar unit before the guy with his lights on so that they capture all the wrong doers?
I wonder what will happen at the end of the 12 month trial period. I am a bit cynical and I doubt they are going to say "well, it was a pain for everyone and didn't really help us, so we are not going to bother about it" or "it only really applies to some situations so we are going to create and install different flashing lights to indicate the safety risk".
For sure they will say "yes, it was a success, and we are now going to make it permanent" regardless of what the real world results are.
Whats the problem?
Who in Sydney can drive at over 40kmh between 5am and 11pm anyway??
Had it over here in WA for almost a year, a lot of confusion with it, How far away do you slow down (besides the traffic flow) do you have to slow if you are multiple lanes away, how far do you travel past before you can speed back up. Overall most people don't slow down much, maybe lift of a bit that's about as far as it goes.
Understand the need, but in reality its a stupid rule as nobody knows who work it properly
Select to expand quoteelmo said..
Whats the problem?
Who in Sydney can drive at over 40kmh between 5am and 11pm anyway??
Ha! Surprisingly parts of Sydney are fine to get over 40kmh , and we even have places outside the city 
I have been dismayed to find that the Kwinana moves very slowly and slower than some normal '70kmh' roads in Sydney in peak hour. How have they turned a new freeway into a parking lot for a city that doesn't really have that much traffic?
Select to expand quoteRails said..
If I were a cop, I'd sit on the side of the freeway, get the speed gun out, turn my fancy lights a flashin' and book everyone that drove past...
gotta meet those quotas!
I wonder what we'll do once the pollies have invented a law for everything, f*ing nanny state.
Wouldn't that be entrapment?
In real life I would think the cop/paramedic/fireman would be more concerned about the job at hand than to pay too much notice to the passing cars.
Select to expand quoteFormulaNova said..elmo said..
Whats the problem?
Who in Sydney can drive at over 40kmh between 5am and 11pm anyway??
Ha! Surprisingly parts of Sydney are fine to get over 40kmh , and we even have places outside the city
I have been dismayed to find that the Kwinana moves very slowly and slower than some normal '70kmh' roads in Sydney in peak hour. How have they turned a new freeway into a parking lot for a city that doesn't really have that much traffic?
Yes, south of Armadale road on the Freewaypark we have the longest carpark in Australia. Oh well, It gives the train passengers something to chuckle at.
Select to expand quoteTonz said..
then you were not being totally aware of what was happening around you.
Which part of my post indicates that?
I observed a number of people coming close to running up the back of each other, how does that make me unaware or unprepared?
the ppl have the power, if 5 million ppl don't wont it, it wont happen.
like anything, just that we are a lazy country of sheep who just talk about it.
5million ppl out front of parliament house would change some stuff pretty quick.
Select to expand quoteRus13b said..
the ppl have the power, if 5 million ppl don't wont it, it wont happen.
like anything, just that we are a lazy country of sheep who just talk about it.
5million ppl out front of parliament house would change some stuff pretty quick.
5 million exactly?
Select to expand quotedjt91184 said..Rus13b said..
the ppl have the power, if 5 million ppl don't wont it, it wont happen.
like anything, just that we are a lazy country of sheep who just talk about it.
5million ppl out front of parliament house would change some stuff pretty quick.
5 million exactly?
nah, his dreaming! 4,999,999 more likely
Select to expand quoteTonz said..
then you were not being totally aware of what was happening around you. I was taught 40 years ago, always be prepared for someone dumn to do something stupid and unexpected,
The police were doing their job, you and others were not prepared..
put yourself in their situation or yourself broken down on side of road and vehicles flying past you at 100 dont feel soory for you.
The rest of us must have missed this new development in human evolution that allows tonz to see around corners.
Bummer
Select to expand quoteTonz said..
then you were not being totally aware of what was happening around you. I was taught 40 years ago, always be prepared for someone dumn to do something stupid and unexpected,
The police were doing their job, you and others were not prepared..
put yourself in their situation or yourself broken down on side of road and vehicles flying past you at 100 dont feel soory for you.
It doesn't matter how vigilant a driver is being in these situations. If the traffic speed is 110km/h and there is a bend in the road, a sudden deceleration of 70km/h is eventually going to end in accidents.
I would say driving past a stationary vehicle at speed would be safer than cars getting out of control and colliding around emergency vehicles.
It's only logical.
It all goes back to the tired old myth that speed alone causes accidents and not the overall circumstances.
Select to expand quoteAdriano said..Tonz said..
then you were not being totally aware of what was happening around you. I was taught 40 years ago, always be prepared for someone dumn to do something stupid and unexpected,
The police were doing their job, you and others were not prepared..
put yourself in their situation or yourself broken down on side of road and vehicles flying past you at 100 dont feel soory for you.
It doesn't matter how vigilant a driver is being in these situations. If the traffic speed is 110km/h and there is a bend in the road, a sudden deceleration of 70km/h is eventually going to end in accidents.
I would say driving past a stationary vehicle at speed would be safer than cars getting out of control and colliding around emergency vehicles.
It's only logical.
It all goes back to the tired old myth that speed alone causes accidents and not the overall circumstances.
There was a study a while back that found it's not the speed the traffic's moving that's the issue, it's the differences in speed of individual vehicles -- everyone driving 120 is safer than some people driving 60 and others 100.
Select to expand quoteSubsonic said..Tonz said..
then you were not being totally aware of what was happening around you. I was taught 40 years ago, always be prepared for someone dumn to do something stupid and unexpected,
The police were doing their job, you and others were not prepared..
put yourself in their situation or yourself broken down on side of road and vehicles flying past you at 100 dont feel soory for you.
The rest of us must have missed this new development in human evolution that allows tonz to see around corners.
Bummer
Yeah. similarly the time I saw the cop was after coming over a rise at 110km/h on a clear section. Yes, there could have been a car stopped in the middle of the road, but how likely is that? To suddenly pull on the anchors to go from 110 down to 40 is no doubt going to create a problem for those behind me, especially if they are not as alert.
Select to expand quoteKamikuza said..There was a study a while back that found it's not the speed the traffic's moving that's the issue, it's the differences in speed of individual vehicles -- everyone driving 120 is safer than some people driving 60 and others 100.Adriano said..Tonz said..
then you were not being totally aware of what was happening around you. I was taught 40 years ago, always be prepared for someone dumn to do something stupid and unexpected,
The police were doing their job, you and others were not prepared..
put yourself in their situation or yourself broken down on side of road and vehicles flying past you at 100 dont feel soory for you.
It doesn't matter how vigilant a driver is being in these situations. If the traffic speed is 110km/h and there is a bend in the road, a sudden deceleration of 70km/h is eventually going to end in accidents.
I would say driving past a stationary vehicle at speed would be safer than cars getting out of control and colliding around emergency vehicles.
It's only logical.
It all goes back to the tired old myth that speed alone causes accidents and not the overall circumstances.
Fancy that! A study ignored once more by the nutters who determine traffic infringement policy!
Actually, and obviously, no. It might be safer if everyone drives at the same speed, but they don't. Traffic rules have to allow for that, so speed limits are lower than a road might be designed for.
I saw one of those mobile speed camera cars today on footpath with the hazzard lights on so an orange light was going on roof.
The speed check sign said 80km .
Its not applicable to hazzard lights is it even if they are on the roof racks ?
A month ago my wife slowed to 40 as she passed police with a car pulled over on the side of the road.
Five minutes later the police pulled her over!
They thanked her for slowing down while passing them
Select to expand quotesgo said..
A month ago my wife slowed to 40 as she passed police with a car pulled over on the side of the road.
Five minutes later the police pulled her over!
They thanked her for slowing down while passing them
jeeez had to slow down and pulled over, hope that doesn't happen to all of us!
Select to expand quoteactiomax said..
I saw one of those mobile speed camera cars today on footpath with the hazzard lights on so an orange light was going on roof.
The speed check sign said 80km .
Its not applicable to hazzard lights is it even if they are on the roof racks ?
Parking on the footpath is illegal. I hope you pictured it and reported it to the police.
Select to expand quoteAdriano said..Kamikuza said..There was a study a while back that found it's not the speed the traffic's moving that's the issue, it's the differences in speed of individual vehicles -- everyone driving 120 is safer than some people driving 60 and others 100.Adriano said..Tonz said..
then you were not being totally aware of what was happening around you. I was taught 40 years ago, always be prepared for someone dumn to do something stupid and unexpected,
The police were doing their job, you and others were not prepared..
put yourself in their situation or yourself broken down on side of road and vehicles flying past you at 100 dont feel soory for you.
It doesn't matter how vigilant a driver is being in these situations. If the traffic speed is 110km/h and there is a bend in the road, a sudden deceleration of 70km/h is eventually going to end in accidents.
I would say driving past a stationary vehicle at speed would be safer than cars getting out of control and colliding around emergency vehicles.
It's only logical.
It all goes back to the tired old myth that speed alone causes accidents and not the overall circumstances.
Fancy that! A study ignored once more by the nutters who determine traffic infringement policy!
Top ten reasons for traffic accidents compiled by a British insurance company: "excessive speed for the conditions" was number 8, the top 7 being "failure to judge other road users" doing something or being distracted ie. cell phones.
Speed is not the issue -- it's just the easiest to actively police effectively and keep your metrics up.
Select to expand quoteKamikuza said..Adriano said..Kamikuza said..There was a study a while back that found it's not the speed the traffic's moving that's the issue, it's the differences in speed of individual vehicles -- everyone driving 120 is safer than some people driving 60 and others 100.Adriano said..Tonz said..
then you were not being totally aware of what was happening around you. I was taught 40 years ago, always be prepared for someone dumn to do something stupid and unexpected,
The police were doing their job, you and others were not prepared..
put yourself in their situation or yourself broken down on side of road and vehicles flying past you at 100 dont feel soory for you.
It doesn't matter how vigilant a driver is being in these situations. If the traffic speed is 110km/h and there is a bend in the road, a sudden deceleration of 70km/h is eventually going to end in accidents.
I would say driving past a stationary vehicle at speed would be safer than cars getting out of control and colliding around emergency vehicles.
It's only logical.
It all goes back to the tired old myth that speed alone causes accidents and not the overall circumstances.
Fancy that! A study ignored once more by the nutters who determine traffic infringement policy!
Top ten reasons for traffic accidents compiled by a British insurance company: "excessive speed for the conditions" was number 8, the top 7 being "failure to judge other road users" doing something or being distracted ie. cell phones.
Speed is not the issue -- it's just the easiest to actively police effectively and keep your metrics up.
Here, they seem to use "speed was a contributing factor" which is both useless information and also sounds like it actually means something. Of course, if there was no speed, then there would be no damage, but apart from that it means nothing.
