where to put your incar GPSr

Bundyrumandcoke · Post by **Bundyrumandcoke** » 23 January 09 10:17 pm

Probably not, but then they would find another way to tax us.

And old saying, The law is (can be) an ass.

TeamAstro · Post by **TeamAstro** » 23 January 09 11:47 pm

I say ban hats.

ArgusTuft · Post by **ArgusTuft** » 24 January 09 2:01 am

TeamAstro wrote:I say ban hats.

And moustaches and people with hats AND moustaches who drive Volvos. If you see a driver wearing a bowling hat And has a moustache AND drives a Volvo, make sure everyone in your car has their seat belt on, have safety helmets and fire proof clothing then turn around and go home. It's the safest thing to do!!!

tronador · Post by **tronador** » 24 January 09 11:00 am

jusojara wrote:
I mount my Sat Nav in the bottom right corner of the windscreen. I

Me too

team waldron · Post by **team waldron** » 24 January 09 12:18 pm

Even if not in law you could still be charged with something along the lines of "Not Displaying Due Care"

I can use my UHF radio but not my mobile phone, but if I had an accident using my UHF and it could be proved that using it lead to the accident I could be charged even though its not illegal to use it.

Putting it in law just makes it clearer for police to maintain law and order in our over governed world.

Fuddley · Post by **Fuddley** » 24 January 09 4:14 pm

Personally I don't know what all the fuss is about, If I have a good movie on like the classic Pollyanna, I don't get time to look at the GPSr let alone play with the buttons.

squalid · Post by **squalid** » 24 January 09 10:46 pm

I can slot my Colorado into the dash of my Camry covering the tacho. A quick glance is just like a quick speed check.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » 25 January 09 12:54 am

stealth_ninja_penguin wrote:There was a driver safety campaign a couple of years ago with the slogan "Good drivers just drive".

I really loved the NSW RTA minister that had no drivers license, that was priceless.

Also I really love how they chop and change the speed limits every 50-100m in places.

I agree some people do stupid things and they shouldn't and then have accidents, some geocachers have posted about this I believe (hall of shame comes to mind

, however too often ambiguous laws left up to the discrection of overly zealous ("we don't have or set target number of drivers officers need to ping each month, honest!") police can also be just as guilty as those they are trying to make safer for the good of the rest of the community.

This was on ACA so take it with a grain of salt, but the guy claimed he was going 100km/hr and a cop going 100km/hr in the opposite direction saw the driver talking on a mobile phone, he was taking the matter to court over the principal because he claimed he wasn't talking on the phone and had the phone bill to prove he hadn't made an outbound call and it would be up to police to prove there was an inbound one via his phone company.

Dunno what happened, but wouldn't surprise me if the cops dropped it simply because of the bad press. Also I've lost count the number of cops I've personally seen driving while illegally talking on phones without hands free kits too.

roundcircle · Post by **roundcircle** » 25 January 09 8:05 am

team waldron wrote:I can use my UHF radio but not my mobile phone,

</p>
I don't believe this is correct, at least in Vic. I know my brother in law received a ticket for using a CB whilst driving a couple of years ago. (Which we all thought was pretty funny. He couldn't see it though.

)

Bundyrumandcoke · Post by **Bundyrumandcoke** » 25 January 09 8:07 am

Ahh, but police are exempt from following the law. remember not too long ago the police car videoed crossing the railway level crossing directly in from of the Savannahlander, up in Mareeba I think it was. That was only a 2 car railmotor going fairly slowly, so perhaps not too much damage would have occured if a collision happened.

Well, the same thing happened recently at Dingo, in Central Queensland. Only this time it was a police car, with lights flashing, going AROUND the down boomgates- past other traffic, and the train involved was a 10000 ton, 1.6km long loaded coal train, travelling at speed, probably somewhere in the vacinity of 50-70kph. No amount of flashing lights are going to protect the officer inside when a train like that hits them. And this in SINCE the 2 fatal level crossing accidents up North Queensland at the end of last year. The officers excuse, he was heading to an emergency- water across the road- (thats the Fitzroy development road- try and find that one on the map) and he had his lights flashing. Sorry, that doesnt cut the grass with me, it still tramatises the train drivers (been there, done that- is scares the shit out of you with the thoughts of the possible consequences) Excellent example set there by the boys in blue.

All the above (water over the road being an emergency?) yet yesterday I did a return trip from Gladstone to Landsborough, and on the return journey there was water all over the road north of Maryborough (thats the Bruce Highway- also called A1- Australias National Highway- find that one on the map) and it was the first day of the long weekend, yet no police or signs to warn highway users of the hazard ahead. Yet not very much further up the road, the highway patrol were happily attempting to catch people with a mobile radar, in the pouring rain. Most traffic by this time was travelling around the 70kph mark, the rain was that heavy.

Dont tell me its not about revenue raising.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » 25 January 09 8:38 am

Bundyrumandcoke wrote:Ahh, but police are exempt from following the law.

That's the problem with this whole situation of course, people loose respect as a result.

(thats the Fitzroy development road- try and find that one on the map)

Actually I can

A1- Australias National Highway

Longest highway in the world I think, goes by various names in diff parts of the country and circumnavigates the country and even a dirt track in places.

Yet not very much further up the road, the highway patrol were happily attempting to catch people with a mobile radar, in the pouring rain. Most traffic by this time was travelling around the 70kph mark, the rain was that heavy.

What was it they were saying the other day, the road toll is only just now on par with what it was when speed cameras were introduced, and the funny thing is they are called "safety cameras" in the UK, piggy banks more like it and govts everywhere are laughing all the way to the bank because of them.

Dont tell me its not about revenue raising.

Don't know how right it is, but on foxytag.com they claim it only takes about 4 months to recover the cost of a speed camera, regardless of anything else within 6 months they are already profitable for governments.

mark_rattigan · Post by **mark_rattigan** » 26 January 09 12:49 pm

Fuddley wrote:Personally I don't know what all the fuss is about, If I have a good movie on like the classic Pollyanna, I don't get time to look at the GPSr let alone play with the buttons.

Sadly I see too many people who have their GPSr exactly where you have placed yours for the photo, or a few inches to the left. Large enough to obscure a cyclist, pedestrian or motorcycle from view.

I am in favour of enforcement in this regard, as well as all 'trinkets' hanging from rear vision mirrors. The driver's field of vision must be clear from obstructions.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » 26 January 09 1:20 pm

mark_rattigan wrote:Sadly I see too many people who have their GPSr exactly where you have placed yours for the photo, or a few inches to the left. Large enough to obscure a cyclist, pedestrian or motorcycle from view.

Ummm if you are approaching a cyclist, you should already be aware of them directly in front of you long before anything in that photo would obscure your view, as for motorcyclists during training courses we were instructed to sit on the right hand side of the lane, one reason being is it would make you more visible by drivers etc.

A photo may be a moment of time captured, but as a human things are constantly changing and so I disagree with your points, as they aren't entirely accurate, especially as a previous poster pointed out how obstructed the view can be in police vehicles.

mark_rattigan · Post by **mark_rattigan** » 26 January 09 1:24 pm

delta_foxtrot2 wrote:Ummm if you are approaching a cyclist, you should already be aware of them directly in front of you long before anything in that phone would obscure your view, as for motorcyclists during training courses we were instructed to sit on the right hand side of the lane, one reason being is it would make you more visible by drivers etc.

A photo may be a moment of time captured, but as a human things are constantly changing and so I disagree with your points, as they aren't entirely accurate, especially as a previous poster pointed out how obstructed the view can be in police vehicles.

And if the driver is like many on the road and has the attention span and memory of a goldfish, or has not been paying attention to what is ahead, it is just another blindspot into which someone can slip. Surely it is safer whichever way to remove and/or minimise blind spots?

How about a motorcyclist merging from the left, roughly a car length in front of the driver who has such a blind spot? Quite easy for that blind spot to hide them for a few seconds. Just another hazard that can be easily removed.

As a fellow motorcyclist I understand the need to anticipate these idiots, but how about a scooter rider who has had no rider training whatsoever?

Guest · Post by **Guest** » 26 January 09 1:54 pm

mark_rattigan wrote:And if the driver is like many on the road and has the attention span and memory of a goldfish, or has not been paying attention to what is ahead, it is just another blind spot into which someone can slip. Surely it is safer whichever way to remove and/or minimise blind spots?

Actually I was thinking after that post they're more likely to be a distraction, which is worst than interfering with vision.

How about a motorcyclist merging from the left, roughly a car length in front of the driver who has such a blind spot? Quite easy for that blind spot to hide them for a few seconds. Just another hazard that can be easily removed.

Ever been on a motorbike in city traffic? You sure as hell don't screw around lazily drifting between lanes, you get where you want/need to be as quickly and safely as possible.

I have known others that have ended up in accidents, usually t-boned funnily enough, not merged into, but I am lucky enough to have never had an accident with a moving vehicle on a bike, come close a couple of times.

As a fellow motorcyclist I understand the need to anticipate these idiots, but how about a scooter rider who has had no rider training whatsoever?

Funny you should mention scooters, highest rate of motorcycle accidents from memory, although in NSW rider training has been compulsory for 10 years or more, the only exception being rural areas, can't comment on other states but it should be and I directly attribute it to saving my behind on several occasions.