Speed Limits Increased Under The Libs?

[hamiltonau]

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/state-election-2011/review-of-speed-limits-20110226-1b9gb.html

O'Farrell reckons hes going to have a hard look at revenue raising tactics and probably raise limits on country roads. If thats a promise me likey otherwise just another empty election time stunt?

[oweban]

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/state-election-2011/review-of-speed-limits-20110226-1b9gb.html

O'Farrell reckons hes going to have a hard look at revenue raising tactics and probably raise limits on country roads. If thats a promise me likey otherwise just another empty election time stunt?

I would have thought if they were serious about it they'd have talked about that back when the Territorys went out... Seems like a grab. Even though they don't need to say shit, they could just sit back and watch Labor continue to implode.

[MBS206]

I'm gunna say, it's another ploy. But if they do get in, I would love them if they do stop the speed limits being lowered... Although, I always thought the RTA (Who we don't vote in) were the ones controlling the speed limit. (Yes, they're a government agency, but they hold a lot of power over the roads)

[jawrgy]

It doesnt matter if lib's say they are going to increase speed limits and then not do it once they get into power. As the above mentioned, libs dont need to do or say anything, they pretty much have this election in the bag. Only the people on welfare will vote labor, any1 with half a brain will vote libs.

[smart_one]

I don't trust Labor or Libral, what I do trust is the Family First party, although their preferences go to Libral (which is the lesser of two evils), at least Family First actually stand up for the average Australian and keeps both of the two major parties in check as much as they can with their small numbers in parliament. They have family and Christian orientated values, but at least they don't actively exclude homosexuals, Muslims, Hindu's, law breakers, divorcees, alcoholics etc.... as being Australians like the Christian Democratic Party (CDP) does.

I used to vote for the CDP but with their 100% closed minded extremist belief that only Christians and their ways are the only way no exceptions, I thought that would actually be detrimental to the country, especially since Australia is made up of people of every race and religion and even sexual orientation despite what CDP as an individual thinks is right.

I have turned to Family First for a couple of main reasons.

1: They have Christian/Family values (values that all religions share and values that I think help society)

2: They accept everyone as being important, not just the rich elite or the Sunday Church goers unlike some other parties.

3: They are not scared to speak up in parliment when something un-just has occured to Australians (eg: the revenue raising on our roads without putting that money back into road education and improvements of roads).

And please people don't vote for the Greens, they are probably the only party more dangerous than the CDP lol :banana: :banana:

[Mosullivan]

And please people don't vote for the Greens, they are probably the only party more dangerous than the CDP lol :banana: :banana:

I'm not sure how many fans of the Greens that you would find on a performance car forum lol.

[MBS206]

I don't trust Labor or Libral, what I do trust is the Family First party, although their preferences go to Libral (which is the lesser of two evils), at least Family First actually stand up for the average Australian and keeps both of the two major parties in check as much as they can with their small numbers in parliament. They have family and Christian orientated values, but at least they don't actively exclude homosexuals, Muslims, Hindu's, law breakers, divorcees, alcoholics etc.... as being Australians like the Christian Democratic Party (CDP) does.

I used to vote for the CDP but with their 100% closed minded extremist belief that only Christians and their ways are the only way no exceptions, I thought that would actually be detrimental to the country, especially since Australia is made up of people of every race and religion and even sexual orientation despite what CDP as an individual thinks is right.

I have turned to Family First for a couple of main reasons.

1: They have Christian/Family values (values that all religions share and values that I think help society)

2: They accept everyone as being important, not just the rich elite or the Sunday Church goers unlike some other parties.

3: They are not scared to speak up in parliment when something un-just has occured to Australians (eg: the revenue raising on our roads without putting that money back into road education and improvements of roads).

And please people don't vote for the Greens, they are probably the only party more dangerous than the CDP lol :banana: :banana:

Religion and Politics should be kept separate at all costs.

Logic should be the determining factor.

Remember it's the Christians trying to cripple our internet infrastructure by restricting what we can and can't access on the internet.

[oweban]

and telling me i can't look at porn cause kiddies might get at it

I LIKE MY PORN AND SMUT THANKYOU VERY MUCH

edit::

I'd written a long diatribe on how Family First have a VERY narrow vision of what "family" should be, and how they stifle progression, but I'm not going to bother.

[Galois]

Unfortunately the culture in this country puts emphasis on speed limits not safety, so an elected government would have an uphill battle trying to raise the speed limits. People are so concerned with the speed limit (and we have to be) that it is costing safety. Tired drivers focusing on keeping to 115 rather than the risks, doing 40 through a school zone on narrow streets with parked cars and hundreds of little kids around, that's all fine and legal, but certainly not safe. Speed is blamed for most crashes, but these aren't people doing 120 on the freeway, it's dumbasses doing 120 in a 50 or 60 zone, it's people doing the speed limit in torrential rain, they're the ones that cause the big and preventable ones.

[zebra]

Religion and Politics should be kept separate at all costs.

Logic should be the determining factor.

Remember it's the Christians trying to cripple our internet infrastructure by restricting what we can and can't access on the internet.

+1 but I would even go as far as to say religion should be kept out of everything to do with day to day life.

So wilst im a Christian on the birth certificate, but that is as far as that goes.

Therefore I don't want god botherers (no offence intended to anyone) running the country/State because as Matty said there is a massive conflict of intrest in regards to what the whole population needs.

ON topic now lol

No way will speed limits be increased...and after driving to and from Sydney yesterday after not being up there for a while I can only say that it is a good thing.

The amount of people who should not be on the roads is rediculous....its not just Sydney drivers Canberra drivers are just as bad if not worse...but there is less off them trying to drive into the side of my car.

Also the condition of the roads wont allow it.....drive to Canberra and do 120 the whole way...there are lumps on the road big enough to lift a wheel or two off the ground....and thats in a well sorted car.....so how are the Smiths from Mt Druitt going to do it in their VN vacationer wagon with 4000000ks and the original shocks going to do it without flying off and becoming part of the scenery.

[MaTBoY]

it's worth noting he didn't say he WOULD do any of this... only that he WOULD INVESTIGATE these issues. ooo an investigation, waste more time and effort to not do what you weren't going to do in the first place. i'm so sold mr Ofarrell.

[oweban]

how are the Smiths from Mt Druitt going to do it in their VN vacationer wagon with 4000000ks and the original shocks going to do it without flying off and becoming part of the scenery.

i fail to see how this is a bad thing

[simpletool]

I'm not sure how many fans of the Greens that you would find on a performance car forum lol.

From recent history I would say Greens would be the most rational on complex issues. They seem to be the only party that looks at the real facts rather than cpopular knee jerk reactions. That's why I am a green voter recently.

As for higher speed limits? I wouldn't hold your breath. Most Australian roads could only handle 110kmh. You could do 120kph on some inter-city roads (Sydney - Newcastle). NSW doesn't seem to have many 120kph capable roads compared to say SE Queensland.

[chunkylover69]

As for higher speed limits? I wouldn't hold your breath. Most Australian roads could only handle 110kmh. You could do 120kph on some inter-city roads (Sydney - Newcastle). NSW doesn't seem to have many 120kph capable roads compared to say SE Queensland.

It is interesting to note that 5 minutes from Christchurch airport there are plenty of unrestricted roads. Similar landscape to NSW, similar roads, same cars yet vastly different policy when it comes to speed limits. You can't find an unrestricted road in the whole of Australia let alone 5-10 minutes from a CBD.

[Galois]

it's worth noting he didn't say he WOULD do any of this... only that he WOULD INVESTIGATE these issues. ooo an investigation, waste more time and effort to not do what you weren't going to do in the first place. i'm so sold mr Ofarrell.

Ohh and don't forget money, our money

[blk94r33]

Unfortunately the culture in this country puts emphasis on speed limits not safety, so an elected government would have an uphill battle trying to raise the speed limits. People are so concerned with the speed limit (and we have to be) that it is costing safety. Tired drivers focusing on keeping to 115 rather than the risks, doing 40 through a school zone on narrow streets with parked cars and hundreds of little kids around, that's all fine and legal, but certainly not safe. Speed is blamed for most crashes, but these aren't people doing 120 on the freeway, it's dumbasses doing 120 in a 50 or 60 zone, it's people doing the speed limit in torrential rain, they're the ones that cause the big and preventable ones.

I thought I was the only one!

Doing 100kph into a corner on a country back road marked 20kph... FAIL

Doing 100kph when you can't see the end of your bonnet through the storm... FAIL

Going 80kph through the above mentioned school zone marked 40... UBER FAIL

It's plain common sense, but that doesn't matter when there's money to be made.

Even in vic the freeways are marked 110kph, the road conditions are good and easy to drive on with alot or traffic around, but travel on a similair road, with less traffic and distractions, in country vic, and all-of-a-sudden doing 110kph is insta-death? I could never grasp the logic behind that.

Speed is a factor in EVERY crash. If every car on the road was restricted to 15kph, and 5kph in built up areas, fatalities directly related to collisions would be zero, casualties would be near zero. Safe, but it's not practical.

However, a car doing 100kph, driven by subject A, fatigued and full of no-doz with a BAC of .049, driving at night in bucketing rain with stuffed suspension and brakes as the car is 30,000km over-due for a service but hasn't been checked/roadworthied as they keep paying the rego, as they have never been educated to think otherwise, but 4 new tyres, is somehow considered safe and enforced as such?

Yet subject B, who's had 10 hours rest driving a brand new commodore in optimum conditions during the day, but doing 115kph in a 100kph zone, is a menace to society and the number one target of media campaigns?

Would you rather be on the road with subject A or B?

Not trying to offend anyone, just joining the conversation....

[Galois]

You might like these then mate

http://smh.drive.com.au/motor-news/speed-doesnt-kill-says-benz-20100304-pjin.html

http://news.drive.com.au/drive/motor-news/140kmh-safer-in-australia-safety-expert-20101011-16fer.html

There was another thread like this a little while ago. The whole speed limit system in this country is messed up. Why does someone in a 400k km commadore towing a trailer have the same speed limit as a skyline, or any other sports car? There is an acceptable risk that an accident may occur, the speed limit is adjusted for that for an average or less than average car. So when you're cruising along at say 110km/h in a skyline with fat tyres, abs and airbags, and an enthusiast concentrating on the road and knowing how to drive, you are definitely gonna outbrake the guy doing 110km/h next to you for the same incident. And if you have to swerve, you'll own that too.

The s-class mercedes abs and stability control are designed with this in mind, apparently the stopping power is unbelievable, and the computers keep you straight. But owners of advanced cars like that are still restricted to the same speed limit as b-doubles on many roads.

But this country believes that it is speeding that kills, doing the wrong speed for the conditions is fine.

[blk94r33]

You might like these then mate

http://smh.drive.com...00304-pjin.html

http://news.drive.co...1011-16fer.html

There was another thread like this a little while ago. The whole speed limit system in this country is messed up. Why does someone in a 400k km commadore towing a trailer have the same speed limit as a skyline, or any other sports car? There is an acceptable risk that an accident may occur, the speed limit is adjusted for that for an average or less than average car. So when you're cruising along at say 110km/h in a skyline with fat tyres, abs and airbags, and an enthusiast concentrating on the road and knowing how to drive, you are definitely gonna outbrake the guy doing 110km/h next to you for the same incident. And if you have to swerve, you'll own that too.

The s-class mercedes abs and stability control are designed with this in mind, apparently the stopping power is unbelievable, and the computers keep you straight. But owners of advanced cars like that are still restricted to the same speed limit as b-doubles on many roads.

But this country believes that it is speeding that kills, doing the wrong speed for the conditions is fine.

Lol, sif safety engineer for Mercedes with actual statistics supporting his claims knows anything.

End of the day, speed cameras are effective at one thing: making money, Maquarie Bank isn't overly interested in the road toll, so why invest in cameras? (See other thread, somewhere...)

[MBS206]

Guys, of course speed is a factor in crashes, FFS, two stationary objects can not collide. It's physically IMPOSSIBLE!

[DR 32R]

Speed, red light cameras are so bad in NSW. I've considered not providing work across town if it involves too much of a drive. O'Farrel is on the right track.