Alfresco

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.

Dreamy

It's kind of obligatory to follow the instructions of a policeman, so I hope you did

Alfresco

I did indeed.

Beoz

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.

old.sparkles

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?

scrubbedexpat098

It's a fair point, you could argue that speed cameras are sometimes used as revenue earners if you wanted, but not RBT's, they have one purpose, to keep drunks off our roads. A bit of inconvenience is nothing

moneypenny20

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.

Beoz

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.

old.sparkles

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):

scrubbedexpat098

And if one of yours ever got killed by a drunk friver (heaven forbid) you'd bloody soon change your tune. Has it ever crossed your mind that the police may have worked out that drunk drivers are hiding themselves in plain sight among law abiding sober drivers on busy roads? The old human shield trick.

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.

Beoz

Don't mind the RBT. Don't mind Sundays. Closing 2 lanes out of 3 and causing a massive tailback is insane.

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.

smileyguy

They do seem to be rather predictable in terms of location and timing. However I did notice the regular Thursday morning shift that was along my usual route has abruptly disappeared!

GarryP

Well, the problems are:

• Speed traps are seen mainly as money earners for the police (which is what they are) and given the way the speed limits go up and down without sense, and the police count 1kmh as over (even though they can't be that accurate) means they are an overall net negative. Doesn't change speed (which generally isn't that much of an issue) and just builds up resentment of the police. Yes, the police SHOULD be hunting real crims...
• RBTs fail for a variety of reasons. Both they aren't particularly random (they only happen in certain locations, times) and because again, alcohol isn't the primary factor much of the time. All alcohol does is reduce the quality and timeliness of your reactions. But there are lots of other ways that can happen (you're tired, screaming kids, on the phone, you're looking out for cop cars).

It's a bigger systemic issue that really requires dealing with; humans are cr*p at tasks like driving, where sustained and heightened attention is required. Add to that that roads are usually badly designed (accident blackspots, common failure modes) and alternatives to drink driving aren't easily available - and things like speed traps and RBTs generally just make things worse by trying to take the easy way out and creating disbenefits at the same time. This should be expected, metric based approaches and targeting what you can measure generally always create more problems than they solve.

Here's some data, rather than just anecdote:

http://www.ndlerf.gov.au/sites/defau...onograph41.pdf

moneypenny20

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. 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.

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.

GarryP

Or alternatively, if RBTs worked, then nobody would ever drink drive and nobody would get caught ....

Right, and RBTs don't stop that, by your own admission.

Which was my point. If you only deal with what you can measure (eg bloody alcohol) and not the actual problem (people not paying as much attention as necessary) then you create a situation where people chase the metrics and forget the real problem - so you never actually fix the real problem.

Which is obviously the case.

So what you are saying is there are too many police and the numbers should be cut?