I got one just before Christmas for 55 in a 50 zone, thankfully from a speed camera

Linuxluver:

 

johnr: Has anyone else recently got a ticket for 55km in 50km zone? I now know 3 people including my mum who has got one in the last 2 - 3 weeks

It's only a $30 fine but the police seem to be dishing them out more

 

The police announced a 4km/h tolerance before Xmas....through the summer. That's probably it.  

 

That was for the months of December and January, so possibly. Waitangi weekend didn't have the 4km/h tolerance imposed so maybe they've figured it makes little difference to the road toll? Have been far too many deaths on the road so far this year.

Unsure if still the case, but it was also a top percentile if from Speed Camera. IE if the rolling average was 52, and the fastest of the day 56 you would be classes as the higher percentage so get one. However if everyone was doing 57-62 you might be left off the list while the larger got pinged.

In my opinion there is a misconception about the importance of speeding as a contributing factor in crashes. Probably most of us think that speeding is a factor in most crashes (that's what all the campaigns suggest), but that's actually not true. The proper statistics from the Ministry of Transport for the years 2012-2014 actually look like this:

Percentage of crashes with driving too fast for the conditions cited as a contributing factor:

Minor crashes: 14%

Serious crashes: 19%

Fatal crashes: 29%

Isn't that surprisingly low? But another number is incredibly high, and still hardly anyone talks about it:

"Drivers in speed-related crashes are less likely to wear safety belts than drivers in crashes in which speed is not a factor.  Between 2012 and 2014, at least 33 percent of the car and van drivers who died in speed-related crashes were not restrained at the time of the crash. This compares with 15 percent for drivers in fatal crashes that did not involve speed."

So, many speedsters who crash are (probably young) idiots who don't only speed, but also don't wear seat belts. The guy doing 55 in a 50 zone is probably no threat to anyone, neither is the guy doing 105 on the open road. (The latter was me, and I got a ticket for that in December.)

You can find the whole, quite interesting report here:

http://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Research/Documents/Speed-2015.pdf

Oblivian:

Unsure if still the case, but it was also a top percentile if from Speed Camera. IE if the rolling average was 52, and the fastest of the day 56 you would be classes as the higher percentage so get one. However if everyone was doing 57-62 you might be left off the list while the larger got pinged.

That is how speed cameras worked when they were first introduced, back when they only put them at high crash rate areas and had signs to let people know about them, before they really started to use them to screw over the driving people.

Issuing a ticket for breaking the limit seems fine to me.

Flattie:

 

In my opinion there is a misconception about the importance of speeding as a contributing factor in crashes. Probably most of us think that speeding is a factor in most crashes (that's what all the campaigns suggest), but that's actually not true. The proper statistics from the Ministry of Transport for the years 2012-2014 actually look like this:

 

 

 

Percentage of crashes with driving too fast for the conditions cited as a contributing factor:

 

Minor crashes: 14%

 

Serious crashes: 19%

 

Fatal crashes: 29%

 

 

 

Isn't that surprisingly low? But another number is incredibly high, and still hardly anyone talks about it:

 

"Drivers in speed-related crashes are less likely to wear safety belts than drivers in crashes in which speed is not a factor.  Between 2012 and 2014, at least 33 percent of the car and van drivers who died in speed-related crashes were not restrained at the time of the crash. This compares with 15 percent for drivers in fatal crashes that did not involve speed."

 

 

 

So, many speedsters who crash are (probably young) idiots who don't only speed, but also don't wear seat belts. The guy doing 55 in a 50 zone is probably no threat to anyone, neither is the guy doing 105 on the open road. (The latter was me, and I got a ticket for that in December.)

 

 

 

You can find the whole, quite interesting report here:

 

http://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Research/Documents/Speed-2015.pdf

 

 

 

 

 

Seriously? There are still people who get in cars and do not put seatbelt on? Jeez. Whatever happened to "Clunk click every trip"?

I'd feel naked driving without a seatbelt on.

Geektastic:

 

Flattie:

 

In my opinion there is a misconception about the importance of speeding as a contributing factor in crashes. Probably most of us think that speeding is a factor in most crashes (that's what all the campaigns suggest), but that's actually not true. The proper statistics from the Ministry of Transport for the years 2012-2014 actually look like this:

 

 

 

Percentage of crashes with driving too fast for the conditions cited as a contributing factor:

 

Minor crashes: 14%

 

Serious crashes: 19%

 

Fatal crashes: 29%

 

 

 

Isn't that surprisingly low? But another number is incredibly high, and still hardly anyone talks about it:

 

"Drivers in speed-related crashes are less likely to wear safety belts than drivers in crashes in which speed is not a factor.  Between 2012 and 2014, at least 33 percent of the car and van drivers who died in speed-related crashes were not restrained at the time of the crash. This compares with 15 percent for drivers in fatal crashes that did not involve speed."

 

 

 

So, many speedsters who crash are (probably young) idiots who don't only speed, but also don't wear seat belts. The guy doing 55 in a 50 zone is probably no threat to anyone, neither is the guy doing 105 on the open road. (The latter was me, and I got a ticket for that in December.)

 

 

 

You can find the whole, quite interesting report here:

 

http://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Research/Documents/Speed-2015.pdf

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Seriously? There are still people who get in cars and do not put seatbelt on? Jeez. Whatever happened to "Clunk click every trip"?

 

I'd feel naked driving without a seatbelt on.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZjJxOnJVGs

Sorry I don't know how to use BB Code, my attempt failed...

All the cameras are set to a 4k allowance so doing 55 in a 50 will ping you.

In most cars I've known, they display a bit over your real speed - my old 96 mirage was a good 5km over real speed (determined by gps and those reactive speed readout signposts) this is also reflected by Drive.com.au analysis of basically every vehicle they tested. 

In short if you get pinged at 55, there's a high likelihood you were a bit north (in my case that'd be 60!) than that on your speedo and you should have been paying better attention. 

SaltyNZ: Well, as I said, first ticket I've ever had, and I've been driving for 20+ years, so generally, no, I don't speed.

Not getting a ticket is not a sign of you not speeding, it's a sign of you not getting caught. :)

tehgerbil:

In most cars I've known, they display a bit over your real speed - my old 96 mirage was a good 5km over real speed (determined by gps and those reactive speed readout signposts) this is also reflected by Drive.com.au analysis of basically every vehicle they tested. 

In short if you get pinged at 55, there's a high likelihood you were a bit north (in my case that'd be 60!) than that on your speedo and you should have been paying better attention. 

There is something about the steepness of roads they are allowed to sit at the bottom of and radar people, there is a road here that they used to park at the bottom of, dont do it anymore as apparnalty it was not allowed due to the angles.