Technology helps dodging traffic jams and speed traps

TomTom rocks with fines, you can have your own sounds, so mine alerts me 1km before hand, because at 240km (troll) you need all the distance you can muster - and it makes a VERY loud police siren :twisted:

DotComMotion said:
You want stop being fined for speeding? Here's a thought: How about you drive at or below the speed limits as displayed per roadside signs?
Click to expand...

*yawn* and I'll stop government corruption by stopping to pay taxes.
 
DotComMotion said:
You want stop being fined for speeding? Here's a thought: How about you drive at or below the speed limits as displayed per roadside signs?
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone is saying don't use speed traps. Even in Germany the autobahn isn't entirely unlimited. In many circumstances speed is dangerous and in those circumstances a speed trap could be used to help reduce the danger.

I do believe that speed traps in South Africa are not really about road safety though. IMO South African roads could be made far safer by removing unroadworthy vehicles and punishing those who drive recklessly (taxis anyone?).

Police tend to trap where it actually isn't dangerous to speed, for example on long straights where they can pick up big fines. I don't often see them trapping where it would be truly dangerous to speed, tight blind bends for example. I imagine the reason for this is less revenue would be generated as people won't speed in the truly dangerous areas unless they are maniacs. Anecdotal, but I would more than welcome a formal study.

I got a ticket for not obeying a stop sign the other day. There was no one else on the road and while it is true that I didn't "stop" in that my speed was not reduced to 0km/h, I did slow down to around 5 or 10km/h before the stop street and make sure that the other roadways were clear, there were no pedestrians etc. there was also plenty of visibility. So... where was the danger?

EDIT: incidentally does any know if our police have a policy of trapping more in high-accident zones than elsewhere like they do/did in the UK?
 
Last edited:
xrapidx said:
*yawn* and I'll stop government corruption by stopping to pay taxes.
Click to expand...


ooh-kay :confused: and how is that related to anything? Look, the concept of rules of the road is very simple simplistic in nature you stick to what the roadside signage asks you to,you are pretty much homefree.
 
porchrat said:
I don't think anyone is saying don't use speed traps. Even in Germany the autobahn isn't entirely unlimited. In many circumstances speed is dangerous and in those circumstances a speed trap could be used to help reduce the danger.

I do believe that speed traps in South Africa are not really about road safety though. IMO South African roads could be made far safer by removing unroadworthy vehicles and punishing those who drive recklessly (taxis anyone?).

Police tend to trap where it actually isn't dangerous to speed, for example on long straights where they can pick up big fines. I don't often see them trapping where it would be truly dangerous to speed, tight blind bends for example. I imagine the reason for this is less revenue would be generated as people won't speed in the truly dangerous areas unless they are maniacs. Anecdotal, but I would more than welcome a formal study.

I got a ticket for not obeying a stop sign the other day. There was no one else on the road and while it is true that I didn't "stop" in that my speed was not reduced to 0km/h, I did slow down to around 5 or 10km/h before the stop street and make sure that the other roadways were clear, there were no pedestrians etc. there was also plenty of visibility. So... where was the danger?

EDIT: incidentally does any know if our police have a policy of trapping more in high-accident zones than elsewhere like they do/did in the UK?
Click to expand...

The logical fallacies in your argument are astounding. So, let me get this straight; It is okay for you to speed excessively but not quite okay poor taxi owner to save a few pennies by putting a wreck on the road? I think that's snobbery of the highest order. The last I checked, the wording "STOP" meant just that.Not drive at a speed of at least 10km/h to assess the situation around you and there is no equivocation about that.
 
Last edited:
DotComMotion said:
ooh-kay :confused: and how is that related to anything? Look, the concept of rules of the road is very simple simplistic in nature you stick to what the roadside signage asks you to,you are pretty much homefree.
Click to expand...

So enforcing the law by breaking the law is ok?

AFAIK, speed camera's have to be marked, they have to be visible, etc, etc....
 
DotComMotion said:
The logical fallacies in your argument are astounding. So, let me get this straight; It is okay for you to speed excessively but not quite okay poor taxi owner to save a few pennies by putting a wreck on the road? I think that's snobbery of the highest order. The last I checked, the wording "STOP" meant just that.Not drive at a speed of at least 10km/h to assess the situation around you and there is no equivocation about that.
Click to expand...

I never said what I did wasn't illegal, just that that police presence would be better utilised by actually saving someone from dying in a high accident zone as opposed to fining someone on a random unused backstreet.

To me the purpose of fines should be to enhance safety, not just for the sake of bringing in revenue. Neither seems to apply in my case as that road is so underutilised that I doubt it enhanced safety to a large degree or brought in much revenue.

Also please don't put words in my mouth, I never said I was advocating excessive speeding. What I meant was in order to save lives the traps should be setup in places that will end up reducing accidents... not on a straight section of road that accidents don't occur on but people frequently speed down. Perhaps you believe I am wrong and that is fine you are entitled to your opinion. Perhaps we should be using the system they use in the UK where when an area is deemed a "high accident zone" they place a speed camera there. It has been shown to reduce accidents. That would be IMO a far more productive use of police time and effort than the current methods they seem to employ.

Also unroadworthy vehicles are not acceptable. "saving a few pennies" I have no problem with. Putting passengers, pedestrians and other motorists at risk for the sake of those few pennies I am not OK with. I don't care who you are.

At the end of the day you have to ask what the point of the maximum speed limit is?... is it just to prevent people going fast?... is it for the purposes of collecting revenue?... or is it to save lives? I personally believe it is intended to save lives (or at least to prevent the loss of lives) and thus police should be deployed accordingly.

If you could please point out where I advocated excessive speeding, stated that I shouldn't have had to stop at that stop sign or that I was referencing taxis as the only culprits and not merely using them as an example that most South African motorists will be able to identify with then I would be most appreciative.
 
Last edited:
xrapidx said:
So enforcing the law by breaking the law is ok?

AFAIK, speed camera's have to be marked, they have to be visible, etc, etc....
Click to expand...

Try using that argument in a court of law and see how far that goes. The problem here is that you are trying to justify criminal behaviour by comparing it to another. If you don't break the law, you don't get a fine and you don't find yourself in a position where you have to justify the unjustifiable.
 
Municipalities see speeding fines as a revenue stream (Twshane was complaining that the new ARTO system is costing them revenue due to their difficulties in implementing ARTO). Due to municipalities see speeding fines as a revenue stream, it does incline them to not set up speed traps properly and they can perhaps even fine someone going at legal speeds, since they are biased to getting their money.
 
DotComMotion said:
Try using that argument in a court of law and see how far that goes. The problem here is that you are trying to justify criminal behaviour by comparing it to another. If you don't break the law, you don't get a fine and you don't find yourself in a position where you have to justify the unjustifiable.
Click to expand...

Actually - I've gotten off many fines by simply writing a letter saying the fine was illegal... and if it is illegal, they can't use it against you. Its not exactly a complicated matter - there are reasons a speed camera has to placed in certain positions.

The police are not allowed to break the law any more than I am....

P.S. The police are not trying to enforce the law, they are trying to make money.
 
Last edited:
bex.cpt said:
I have been using TRAPSTER for the past few months and it's BRILLIANT
Click to expand...

Started this week - works nicely, need more detailed SA road maps though, but nice to use, I've marked a few hot spots in my area already.
 
SoftDux said:
I'm quite glad our country isn't run by some of the peeps on this forum :) What's the point to rules & regulations? Clearly very few actually do understand it.
Click to expand...

You mean like the cops who trap illegally?
 
No, I mean by the logic that is clear in this thread :) Have you seen how people drive lately? I live close to the Gilooly's interchange (the one with the accidents 365 days a year), and people (mostly with beem's / mercs / etc who think they own the road cause they own an fancy expensive car) drive no less than 140KM's through the 80km zone. What gives?

Sure, it's "a man thing" - if you drive a beem or merc, then everyone else on the road needs to bow to your superiority. Grow up! Just cause you got a million rand car and it's marked off @ 300Km's per hour doesn't mean you can drive like an arse

It's this kind of mentality that has contributed toward our country's state. "Rules only apply to poor people, people with slow / old cars, or lesser intelligent people. The rest don't need to adhere to rules, cause we know better"



P.S. This isn't aimed at you, xrapidx ;)
 
Granted - but see previous page about Autobahn in Germany, and their death rate, 1/3 of ours.

I think more should be done about unroadworthy cars and taxi's than speediing - but the police won't do anything because its not a strong source of income.
 
Sure, but we're not Germany. We also don't have take away cocaine shops on every corner. Just cause a system works for one country, it doesn't mean it will work here.

And I agree, un-roadworthy vehicles should be banned, the same way they do it in Europe & America. But then again, can you imagine how this will affective the economy, negatively? It helps our economy to have warns cars on the roads, and also to have speeding taxi's - who bring in more money in one day than most other industries :)
 
xrapidx said:
Granted - but see previous page about Autobahn in Germany, and their death rate, 1/3 of ours.

I think more should be done about unroadworthy cars and taxi's than speediing - but the police won't do anything because its not a strong source of income.
Click to expand...

Well... speeding is still a problem. Our driving tests don't prepare people for driving at high speeds. You have forgotten to mention that in order to attain a license in Germany one requires far more rigourous testing than one is subjected to here in South Africa. This is sure to reflect on motoring related deaths.

You have also conveniently forgotten to mention that while the autobahn has no speed limit in some areas, it is not completely unlimited throughout. There are generally unlimited strips throughout the network away from densely populated areas but by no means is it one giant unlimited road network.

You can't just list two figures (amount of cars and speed limits) from two countries and offer that as some sort of proof, there are far too many confounding factors.

Speed restrictions still need to be enforced as there are some really idiotic South Africans out there that shouldn't be driving at all let alone beyond 120km/h. Rather enforce the speed limits (i.e. place police speed traps there) in areas where it is particularly important to do so in order to ensure that no one loses their life. Don't reduce the number of speed traps, just move them to areas where they will be of the greatest benefit, not just to where people go fast in order to maximise revenue.
 
Last edited:
ToAsTeD said:
I love it when my Garmin goes "off" and saves me money. However sometimes i notice it doesnt pick up all the camera's and its got June Streetmaps 2009 installed, but majority of the time its excellent :D
Click to expand...
whats the best way to update the Garmin maps on my Samsung Omnia i900? It's running WinMo 6.1. Maps I have now are the original maps that came with it dated March 2008 I think.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X