![]() |
Re: RBT positions
Originally Posted by Dreamy
(Post 12458890)
I've had about 2392842094 at the last count :D
Only 3 since we moved to NSW (one when I was supervising a learner driver) - the rest were in Queensland, where it seemed like they were everywhere I turned. One of their favourite spots was on the mainland side of the bridge from Bribie Island, (so no way to avoid it) especially on a Friday evening after the kids had been playing football - a couple of the mothers fell foul of that one, particularly delightful to be drinking and driving with a bunch of teenagers in the car with you. Two of the ones here in NSW were on a Saturday morning on the road from the Blue Mountains into Penrith - at a push, I'd guess their trawl was large from such a stop. The cop obliged and it came out as zero. He said I could have many more. :) |
Re: RBT positions
Originally Posted by Alfresco
(Post 12480087)
I did do a voluntary one on the beach ages ago. I wasn't driving on the beach, but I had been drinking beer before breakfast as we were camping.
The cop obliged and it came out as zero. He said I could have many more. :) |
Re: RBT positions
Originally Posted by Dreamy
(Post 12480105)
It's kind of obligatory to follow the instructions of a policeman, so I hope you did :D
|
Re: RBT positions
So last Sunday the police decided to set up on the 3 lane William St near Kings Cross at about 10am obviously to catch the morning drunk crew heading toward the city.
So they blocked 2 lanes of 3 forcing everyone into a single lane where they picked and chose who they let through. With the family in the car naturally I got let through. The problem was it caused traffic chaos with a queue right back through the tunnel to Rushcutters Bay. That's about 1.5km's. What a bunch of dicks. |
Re: RBT positions
Originally Posted by Beoz
(Post 12480748)
So last Sunday the police decided to set up on the 3 lane William St near Kings Cross at about 10am obviously to catch the morning drunk crew heading toward the city.
So they blocked 2 lanes of 3 forcing everyone into a single lane where they picked and chose who they let through. With the family in the car naturally I got let through. The problem was it caused traffic chaos with a queue right back through the tunnel to Rushcutters Bay. That's about 1.5km's. What a bunch of dicks. Statistics show that alcohol is a factor in around 20% of all fatal crashes in Australia - surely that is something that should be lowered? |
Re: RBT positions
Originally Posted by old.sparkles
(Post 12481420)
Perhaps is people stopped drink driving the need to have RBT's would decrease.
Statistics show that alcohol is a factor in around 20% of all fatal crashes in Australia - surely that is something that should be lowered? |
Re: RBT positions
I really don't understand the constant moaning about police and speed traps/RBTs/etc. If you don't speed or drink/drug and drive you won't get fined. Everyone knows or should know the rules and if they break them then tough shit. Speed cameras may be revenue earners but stay inside the speed limit and you won't be adding to the so called Police Social Club. Also the argument that the police should be hunting the real criminals irritates the hell out of me. Grumble over. ;)
|
Re: RBT positions
Originally Posted by old.sparkles
(Post 12481420)
Perhaps is people stopped drink driving the need to have RBT's would decrease.
Statistics show that alcohol is a factor in around 20% of all fatal crashes in Australia - surely that is something that should be lowered? I am all for stopping drunk driving but forming a long traffic queue for it is insane. I have no problem with speed cameras, as long as it's not a trap. For example some years ago there used to be sections of the Pacific Highway where it would be 100 then suddenly reduce to 70 with a camera and this would regularly change with minimal signage. All for speed cameras in built up urban areas. It's not only the dangers of speed but noise associated with speeding vehicles. |
Re: RBT positions
1 Attachment(s)
Originally Posted by Beoz
(Post 12482269)
What's the other 80%? Speed?
I am all for stopping drunk driving but forming a long traffic queue for it is insane. I have no problem with speed cameras, as long as it's not a trap. For example some years ago there used to be sections of the Pacific Highway where it would be 100 then suddenly reduce to 70 with a camera and this would regularly change with minimal signage. All for speed cameras in built up urban areas. It's not only the dangers of speed but noise associated with speeding vehicles. Other causes on this are speeding, but also fatigue and I would imagine driver distractions would also factor but not shown from my quick look. I'm sure Google can give you the info. Yes tailbacks from RBT's can be inconvenient, but tailbacks and road closures from crashes can be worse. Sorry if you feel inconvenienced on a Sunday morning - perhaps you can ask them to do it on a Monday another time? Personally, I think Sunday morning RBT's highlight the additional issue on driving the morning after. Alcohol takes time to pass through your system and you can very easily still be under the influence the morning after. Having kids in the car isn't a reason not to be pulled over as many people drive without thinking. And I never checked further on those fatal crashes - nothing suggests that it is the intoxicated person who ends up as the fatality. The goal is to make the roads safer for all of us. Edit - the map from the link above (just 2016 - the most recent year): |
Re: RBT positions
Originally Posted by Beoz
(Post 12482269)
What's the other 80%? Speed?
I am all for stopping drunk driving but forming a long traffic queue for it is insane. Has it ever crossed your mind that Police have worked out that people who drink and drive may actually be hiting in plain sight on those busy roads? I have no problem with speed cameras, as long as it's not a trap. For example some years ago there used to be sections of the Pacific Highway where it would be 100 then suddenly reduce to 70 with a camera and this would regularly change with minimal signage. All for speed cameras in built up urban areas. It's not only the dangers of speed but noise associated with speeding vehicles. I've been caught is a so-called speed trap before, it's because I was stupid enough to be speeding. Minimal signage is still signage, they don't encourage you to ignore it, that's entirely the driver's responsibility however cinical the placement would arguably seem. |
Re: RBT positions
Originally Posted by old.sparkles
(Post 12482278)
NSW have statistics on accidents here - Crash and casualty statistics - NSW general view - Interactive crash statistics - Statistics - NSW Centre for Road Safety
Other causes on this are speeding, but also fatigue and I would imagine driver distractions would also factor but not shown from my quick look. I'm sure Google can give you the info. Yes tailbacks from RBT's can be inconvenient, but tailbacks and road closures from crashes can be worse. Sorry if you feel inconvenienced on a Sunday morning - perhaps you can ask them to do it on a Monday another time? Personally, I think Sunday morning RBT's highlight the additional issue on driving the morning after. Alcohol takes time to pass through your system and you can very easily still be under the influence the morning after. Having kids in the car isn't a reason not to be pulled over as many people drive without thinking. And I never checked further on those fatal crashes - nothing suggests that it is the intoxicated person who ends up as the fatality. The goal is to make the roads safer for all of us. Edit - the map from the link above (just 2016 - the most recent year): This is a regular RBT spot. Usually one lane worth of RBT action leaving 2 lanes to pass through. Anyhow, thank goodness the fuzz saw sense last Sunday. Back to normal operating procedure. They must have realised the there was no need to take down 2 lanes to do the job. |
Re: RBT positions
Originally Posted by Beoz
(Post 12454815)
Not sure if this is a Sydney thing but the police here always set up their RBT's in the same spots at the same time.
Sort of seems a little against purpose. You would think the element of surprise would be more effective. Or is it some requirement to dull the imagination? |
Re: RBT positions
Originally Posted by moneypenny20
(Post 12481538)
I really don't understand the constant moaning about police and speed traps/RBTs/etc. If you don't speed or drink/drug and drive you won't get fined. Everyone knows or should know the rules and if they break them then tough shit. Speed cameras may be revenue earners but stay inside the speed limit and you won't be adding to the so called Police Social Club. Also the argument that the police should be hunting the real criminals irritates the hell out of me. Grumble over. ;)
Here's some data, rather than just anecdote: http://www.ndlerf.gov.au/sites/defau...onograph41.pdf |
Re: RBT positions
Originally Posted by GarryP
(Post 12483032)
Well, the problems are:
Here's some data, rather than just anecdote: http://www.ndlerf.gov.au/sites/defau...onograph41.pdf You can't police people driving with undue care and attention when children are screaming and drivers are tired, you have to wait until they cause an accident and then prosecute. You can police people driving whilst under the influence. As for the 'searching real criminals', give me a break. The guys doing RBTs are generally doing them because it's quiet back at the nick and other police are doing the hunting. They're not being told to forget about murderers but to concentrate on catching Damo driving whilst over the limit in his white ute. |
Re: RBT positions
Originally Posted by moneypenny20
(Post 12483042)
Sorry but if RBTs are in the same place and alcohol isn't the primary problem then programmes like RBT wouldn't consistently show idiots passing through them over the limit.
Originally Posted by moneypenny20
(Post 12483042)
Alcohol and driving is a big problem. There is a constant mindset, especially amongst tradies after work that they must nip into a pub, sink a few and drive home.
Originally Posted by moneypenny20
(Post 12483042)
You can't police people driving with undue care and attention when children are screaming and drivers are tired, you have to wait until they cause an accident and then prosecute. You can police people driving whilst under the influence.
Which is obviously the case.
Originally Posted by moneypenny20
(Post 12483042)
As for the 'searching real criminals', give me a break. The guys doing RBTs are generally doing them because it's quiet back at the nick and other police are doing the hunting. They're not being told to forget about murderers but to concentrate on catching Damo driving whilst over the limit in his white ute.
|
| All times are GMT -12. The time now is 2:15 am. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.