Common misconceptions

[flappist]

Originally Posted by irish2

Wikipedia is not a referencable source for any Australian university. That should be enough reason to believe it does have it's flaws.

But then neither is anything that disagrees with current academic agenda regardless of how accurate it is.

[AWD Chaser]

Speed Cameras reduce the road toll

Not sure about its legallity but your are allowed to not drive without your licence - police will ask 24 to 48 hours to present it at the station

[ST]

Originally Posted by AWD Chaser

Not sure about its legallity but your are allowed to not drive without your licence - police will ask 24 to 48 hours to present it at the station

You can drive without your license but you don't know if it's legal? Maybe try clarifying that a bit more.

EDIT: I have read it again and you've said you are allowed to not drive without your license? Ok, not sure exactly when that would come in handy?

[adelaidecrows02]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Be very careful here, it will depend greatly on the state legislation, in QLD it is clearly not.

I have also checked NSW state road law and having 4 occupants in the back seat of a car with three seat belts is clearly illegal there too. Both NSW and QLD road laws are almost direct copies of the Australian Road Rules 2009 in this respect.

Perhaps in the state the detective works he may be correct, in NSW, ACT and QLD he is not.

Yes, good point - I had intended to point out that this was for SA only

[Riksta]

Originally Posted by AWD Chaser

Incorrect - and you answered it yourself - speed does not kill, however extreme acceleration can.

Don't say that or we'll have laws where we can get busted for taking off "slightly too quickly" even though the police don't have a way to measure it, and neither do us drivers.

Next thing we'll all have an accelerometer on our dashboards, a needle pointing to how fast we're accelerating, with acceleration limits as well as speed limits and the world will be even crazier than what it is now!

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by fmc351

I think that is right, I believe both can be fined. But what I referrd to was the reason for splitting the ages in the legislation. Under 16 is solely the drivers responsibility in traffic law at least, maybe parents under something pertaining to child care issues, like DOCS.

Over 16

I have no doubt differnet seatblets, seat restraints etc have some bearing too. But a 15 yr old sits in a normal seat.

Under 16

You are right, I believe the age delineation is likely to be for a number of reasons and attributing responsibility is definitely one of them.

[SSD-85]

Here is a REALLY common misconception:

AUs are ugly.

C'mon people, secretly you ALL love them

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by adelaidecrows02

Yes, good point - I had intended to point out that this was for SA only

I did try and research SA legislation but their website is crap, I did however note that for road rules they refer to the Australian Road Rules 2009 and provide a link (which didn't work). So it seems that they use the Australia Road Rules and if this is the case (note I said IF), either the detective is wrong or it was a while ago and the legislation has changed.

Don't say that or we'll have laws where we can get busted for taking off "slightly too quickly" even though the police don't have a way to measure it, and neither do us drivers.

Don't look now but there already is and has been for a long time. My brother got done and in the infringement it was worded something to the effect of "excessive acceleration". He revved up his SS ute and dropped the clutch at a set of lights, took off really quick and won the traffic light drags (even though the car next him was not actually racing him). The problem was there was an unmarked cop behind him at the time.

[DJM83]

Originally Posted by D3v[]

you do have to indicate when merging at the end of overtaking lanes... so many people dont...

AND AT THE SPEED OF THE ROAD YOU ARE MERGING ONTO

Originally Posted by Scotty85

Here is a REALLY common misconception:

AUs are ugly.

C'mon people, secretly you ALL love them

Agreed

[adelaidecrows02]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

I did try and research SA legislation but their website is crap, I did however not that for road rules they refer to the Australian Road Rules 2009 and provide a link (which didn't work). So it seems that they use the Australia Road Rules and if this is the case (note I said IF), either the detective is wrong or it was a while ago and the legislation has changed.


Don't look now but there already is and has been for a long time. My brother got done and in the infringement it was worded something to the effect of "excessive acceleration". He revved up his SS ute and dropped the clutch at a set of lights, took off really quick and won the traffic light drags (even though the car next him was not actually racing him). The problem was there was an unmarked cop behind him at the time.

be interesting to see what the law really is - might make a call tomoz

[CODSASR]

Originally Posted by JimNiki

Is it true that if you're from Frankston and female and have been on the plonk, then you can shove half the school in the boot of your car on your way home?

Only if its a magna mate

[ST]

Oh dear, I didn't mean to but it looks like i've


I was aiming for a bit of interesting insight on various cars/models/engines that most of us might have the wrong information on (or not have any at all). I did not intend for it to become another speeding/road rules thread.

Anyway, carry on gentlemen/ladies!

[Ben73]

All police care about road safety.
Today I saw an unmarked police car speeding 110-120 in a 100 zone tailgating a ute, then up the road suddenly pulled into a turning lane and stopped, got out walk into the middle of the road and put his hand up at an approaching semitrailer (which was traveling at 100) to get him to stop..... no OH&S rules would allow police to do this and it's not the smartest thing to do either.

About 5 minutes earlier I saw the same police car do 2 U-turns over a double white lines in moderate traffic in about teh space for 3 minutes.
It was a unmarked Gold SS and had no flashing lights or sirens, so if not in an emergency they must obey all road rules.

No I am not having a go at police, just these guys in particular. In my 200km travels today this police car was by far the most dangerous driver I saw.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by Ben73

About 5 minutes earlier I saw the same police car do 2 U-turns over a double white lines in moderate traffic in about teh space for 3 minutes.
It was a unmarked Gold SS and had no flashing lights or sirens, so if not in an emergency they must obey all road rules.

Not entirely true.

305 Exemption for drivers of police vehicles
(1) A provision of the Australian Road Rules does not apply to
the driver of a police vehicle if:
(a) in the circumstances:
(i) the driver is taking reasonable care; and
(ii) it is reasonable that the provision should not
apply; and
(b) if the vehicle is a motor vehicle that is moving — the
vehicle is displaying a blue or red flashing light or
sounding an alarm.
Note Motor vehicle and police vehicle is defined in the dictionary.
(2) Subrule (1) (b) does not apply to the driver if, in the
circumstances, it is reasonable:
(a) not to display the light or sound the alarm; or
(b) for the vehicle not to be fitted or equipped with a blue
or red flashing light or an alarm.

Basically this means they are exempt from all elements of the road rules as long as they take reasonable care (that they must be able to defend in court) and they have reasonable cause to do so.

Ambulance and Fire have to use beacons and siren to be exempt but the police do not. This is greatly due to the need to pull over a motorist, flicking the lights on may alert the motorist and allow them opportunity to run before vehicle identity has been established. It is more effective to come up behind, establish ID and then flick the lights on.

And they are allowed to step onto the road to stop traffic, what are they going to do, stand 5m off to the side and whisper "stop please"?

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by ST

Oh dear, I didn't mean to but it looks like i've


I was aiming for a bit of interesting insight on various cars/models/engines that most of us might have the wrong information on (or not have any at all). I did not intend for it to become another speeding/road rules thread.

Anyway, carry on gentlemen/ladies!

Sorry mate, you have been around long enough to know what happens with thread subjects like this one. It is because there are so many misconceptions regarding road law, police and road safety. It was only a matter of time.

[burnz]

FACT: more ppl die traveling too and from work than any holiday period..

[ford man xf]

Apparently the GT sticker stripes on my XY are meant to be painted on, according to a guy at the car wash I was chatting to who struck up a conversation, he claimed to have owned 2 phase 3's as well, think he had been drinking a few too many bicardi breezers

[ford man xf]

also you spend more time with your workmates than you do with your own family

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by ford man xf

also you spend more time with your workmates than you do with your own family

Averaging 60 hours a week at work, that is so true.

[ST]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Sorry mate, you have been around long enough to know what happens with thread subjects like this one. It is because there are so many misconceptions regarding road law, police and road safety. It was only a matter of time.

I have been around here more than long enough to know that when it moves onto subjects like these it results in thread closure.

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

And they are allowed to step onto the road to stop traffic, what are they going to do, stand 5m off to the side and whisper "stop please"?

All of what you said made sense until this.

Why would you walk onto a highway to stop a truck when he could of pulled the truck over like most cops do, get behind him and whack on the sirens. Or even put his flashing lights on while in front of the truck and get him to stop.

They police car literally overtook the truck very quickly, went a few hundred metres up the road, got out of the car and walked onto the road. Can you explain why the did it this way. Am I missing something?

[motorcycles4eva]

speed doesn't kill.. the idiot that pulls out in front of you at warp speed is the one that kills...

smoking kills.. not when i fry tyres..it makes me happy

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by motorcycles4eva

speed doesn't kill.. the idiot that pulls out in front of you at warp speed is the one that kills...

smoking kills.. not when i fry tyres..it makes me happy

That's correct speed doesn't kill. Suddenly becoming stationary is what does.

[LXL15]

Speed doesn't kill...acceleration (or deceleration ie, crashing) does. You could accelerate at 1m/s^2 for ten years and not die, until you start approaching the speed of light and relativity takes over from Newtonian physics, of course...then again, if you're not shielded from the air (or whatever is trying to slow you down) you could get squashed...like being run over while lying on the ground...

[ST]

General relativity and the impossibility to accelerate at or faster than the speed of light are Einstein theories (since we are on a thread of clearing misconceptions).

[HLC]

Common Misconception:

AU's are Ugly. :O

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by Ben73

All of what you said made sense until this.

Why would you walk onto a highway to stop a truck when he could of pulled the truck over like most cops do, get behind him and whack on the sirens. Or even put his flashing lights on while in front of the truck and get him to stop.

They police car literally overtook the truck very quickly, went a few hundred metres up the road, got out of the car and walked onto the road. Can you explain why the did it this way. Am I missing something?

Easy, because most of the time you sit behind a truck (off to one side so you are in their mirrors) for km after km and they do not see you (because they don't check their mirrors on a straight highway) and they don't hear you (because the engine is loud and they have the stereo blaring over that).

Happens to us all the time at work. We sit there for ages changing siren tone, flashing lights etc and they have no idea we are there.

I am sure he made a judgement that the truck had sufficient time to stop, did it stop or did it run him over?

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by HLC

Common Misconception:

AU's are Ugly. :O

We are not biting on that one

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by LXL15

Speed doesn't kill...acceleration (or deceleration ie, crashing) does. You could accelerate at 1m/s^2 for ten years and not die, until you start approaching the speed of light and relativity takes over from Newtonian physics, of course...then again, if you're not shielded from the air (or whatever is trying to slow you down) you could get squashed...like being run over while lying on the ground...

We do not have any form of machine that could withstand the resulting speed that you have used in your example, so at some point the machine will fail and you will die and speed caused it (you did not hit anything)

My point is, theoretically it is possible that speed can kill without a sudden stop. But I agree, at road speeds it is the sudden stop that kills you, the speed just makes it more likely to.

[uranium_death]

Anything and everything with regards to the Prius being a 'green car'