new 40kph speed zone around emergency lights

[Superdad]

I had an interesting experience last week and am interested in thoughts.

I was driving down the Hume towards Goulburn at 110kph when i came around a corner and saw a police car on the side of the freeway with its lights flashing. In order for me to get down to 40kph (per the new laws in NSW) i would have had to have slammed on the brakes as hard as i could which, given there were trucks in my rear view mirror, was something i elected not to do for safety reasons.

After fairly hard braking i passed the police vehicle doing about 80kph so i broke the law but had to do so or risk a very serious accident.

has anyone been confronted with anything similar? Seems to me the police should now be obligated to only put their lights on in places that provide enough visibility to traffic to allow a safe deceleration to 40kph, not just after a tight corner

 

[rogerazz]

I had an interesting experience last week and am interested in thoughts.

I was driving down the Hume towards Goulburn at 110kph when i came around a corner and saw a police car on the side of the freeway with its lights flashing. In order for me to get down to 40kph (per the new laws in NSW) i would have had to have slammed on the brakes as hard as i could which, given there were trucks in my rear view mirror, was something i elected not to do for safety reasons.

After fairly hard braking i passed the police vehicle doing about 80kph so i broke the law but had to do so or risk a very serious accident.

has anyone been confronted with anything similar? Seems to me the police should now be obligated to only put their lights on in places that provide enough visibility to traffic to allow a safe deceleration to 40kph, not just after a tight corner

Check out the other thread for comments.
https://4x4earth.com/forum/index.ph...les-or-cop-a-448-fine-3-demerit-points.44514/

 

[mikehzz]

The law isn't in effect yet. Not until 1st September

 

[Chatty]

Yeah, I suspect it's the Highway Patrol gorillas getting in early for some "proactive education" of drivers.

I support the theory of this law, but having been nearly rear-ended twice in SA by slowing down to the legal 25 km/h when the clown behind me decides he's going to stay at freeway speed - I have issues with its practicality and enforcement.

(My apologies to any gorillas I may have upset - I do realise that a dumb gorilla is at last 20 IQ points ahead of a smart Highway Patrol officer)

 

[Jackolux]

The law isn't in effect yet. Not until 1st September

It came into effect in Vic last year , it wasn't very well advertised , a recent trip to Melbourne I had to slow to 40kph 3 times
it seems less that half the drivers must not know about it
It created minor chaos , cars jumping on the brakes to avoid running up the arse of the car in front , others changing lanes with out indicating or slowing , a accident waiting to happen ,
I just hope the police use some common sense and realise sometimes having to slow from 100 or 110 quickly is not the best thing to do .

 

[Colly18]

I had an interesting experience last week and am interested in thoughts.

I was driving down the Hume towards Goulburn at 110kph when i came around a corner and saw a police car on the side of the freeway with its lights flashing. In order for me to get down to 40kph (per the new laws in NSW) i would have had to have slammed on the brakes as hard as i could which, given there were trucks in my rear view mirror, was something i elected not to do for safety reasons.

After fairly hard braking i passed the police vehicle doing about 80kph so i broke the law but had to do so or risk a very serious accident.

has anyone been confronted with anything similar? Seems to me the police should now be obligated to only put their lights on in places that provide enough visibility to traffic to allow a safe deceleration to 40kph, not just after a tight corner

Is there any chance you perhaps should have been driving a bit slower if you didn't have an adequate view of the road ahead/around the corner? Or is it a case of you had a good view of the road but the police and flashing lights were well off the road? Tricky stuff!?
Personally, I'm a great believer in 'defensive driving' and always try to think about, 'What if the road was blocked by a stalled semi-trailer or accident?', when approaching corners and crests where I don't have adequate vision of the road ahead. I also believe that I should never let a following vehicle dictate how fast I should travel, unless it is safe to speed up a little to be courteous.
I empathise with you about trucks in the rear view mirror and I'm sure many do it to get one to hurry along if you aren't going fast enough in their opinion. I just hope they have a better view of the road ahead than I do, so are safe in what they do?
There is a 'can of worms' here in the discussion you raise.

 

[mikehzz]

It came into effect in Vic last year , it wasn't very well advertised , a recent trip to Melbourne I had to slow to 40kph 3 times
it seems less that half the drivers must not know about it
It created minor chaos , cars jumping on the brakes to avoid running up the arse of the car in front , others changing lanes with out indicating or slowing , a accident waiting to happen ,
I just hope the police use some common sense and realise sometimes having to slow from 100 or 110 quickly is not the best thing to do .

He was in NSW near Goulburn, so I was wondering why he slowed.

 

[Jackolux]

He was in NSW near Goulburn, so I was wondering why he slowed.

I was thinking the same it's not actually law yet in NSW .
In SA its been 25kph for years .

 

[MikedOut]

In my opinion it's a bloody stupid law, fair enough if there was a prang that they were stopping for, but if it's just to pull someone over if it's that unsafe they should find a better place to stop.

 

[Aaron Schubert]

I think its going to cause a lot of accidents. I witnessed it first hand a few weeks back where a car managed to get down to 40km/h and a whole pile of traffic behind locked wheels up.

There will be times where its not safe to get down to 40km an hour in the distance you've been given, and the location of the flashing lights isn't always chosen.

You just have to make the best choice in each moment, I guess. I'd do the same as what you did

Aaron

 

[Superdad]

The law isn't in effect yet. Not until 1st September

yeah, my bad, i had heard about it but didn't realise the it wasn't in effect when the above incident occurred. Doesn't change the issue though. In my view, the police need to be very careful about where they pull over, especially in high speed zones.

 

[mikehzz]

The last few days, I've seen quite a few police cars stopped on the side of the road, on their own, with the lights flashing. I've seen two today. I can't recall seeing that before, only when they've pulled someone over.

 

[Choook]

The last few days, I've seen quite a few police cars stopped on the side of the road, on their own, with the lights flashing. I've seen two today. I can't recall seeing that before, only when they've pulled someone over.

And this will be the tactic they will use to fill quotas (don't tell me they don't have them) and raise revenue. And they will position themselves with the least amount of visibility.

 

[Colly18]

The last few days, I've seen quite a few police cars stopped on the side of the road, on their own, with the lights flashing. I've seen two today. I can't recall seeing that before, only when they've pulled someone over.

I'm tempted to cut the police a bit of slack on this one and suggest they were just being extra safety conscious warning drivers they had pulled over to attend to other matters, like answering their mobile phone. Or am I just dreaming here?
Choook!, I had an interesting conversation a few years back, with an ex South Australian and ex pommy Police Officer who came over to SA from the UK, joined the SA Police Force, but left after a few years very disillusioned about their role as revenue raisers, compared to/rather than community policing. So I'm with you on the likelihood of 'em having quotas.
Some of the conversation here reminds me of a guest speaker (RAA) we had at the local 4WD Club a year ago, refreshing us on road rules. Of note were conversations about the responsibility of a driver to travel a safe distance behind traffic and safe stopping distances. Being a fairly conservative driver I had no problems advocating for suitable safe (larger) distances between vehicles, which prompted a fellow 4WD Club member to comment, "leave that distance and someone else will cut in in front of you" (referring to travelling in multi lane traffic). My response was, "So what, not a problem, just back off and give yourself more room (safe following distance)"
My conclusion is driver behaviour/impatience/unsafe driving will more likely be the cause of any issues, rather than where the emergency vehicles stop and/or where the flashing lights are.

 

[2luxes]

I'm tempted to cut the police a bit of slack on this one and suggest they were just being extra safety conscious warning drivers they had pulled over to attend to other matters, like answering their mobile phone. Or am I just dreaming here?

I have heard many people complaining on talk back radio about police using mobile phones while driving but its against the law for the rest of us. The explanation given by senior police officers when contacted by the radio announcer is the phones are often used in some jobs when it is necessary to maintain radio silence because the crooks are either known to have a radio scanner or may have one.

As for slowing down to 40 when you see red or blue lights but not having enough room to get down to that speed, I was taught many years ago that you should always be able to stop in the distance you can see. If you don't stick to that rule you are asking for trouble. 40 is not stopped so getting down to it should be easy.

 

[Choook]

.....I was taught many years ago that you should always be able to stop in the distance you can see. If you don't stick to that rule you are asking for trouble.

Ummm sorry but there are sections of the Hume Hwy that still follow (roughly) the original alignment. This is a dual carriage way 110km/h road with parts that approach crests that you cannot see over until you get to the top of the crest. So following what you were taught you should be slowing down as you approach these crests until you can see the road ahead??? You would have a B-double on the horn up you arse in no time at all. I'm not going to slow down on a dual carriage way where two lanes are travelling in the same direction approaching a crest, but there could very well be a copper on the otherside just 100m down hill which you will not see until you crest that hill. At 110km/h that to me is a very drastic, very rapid and very dangerous reduction in speed and if this scenario occurs will result in an accicent. There are far more dangerous places that this same scenario could occur and (as mentioned in another thread) the Mitchell Hwy is one of them, and that is not a dual carriage way. It is (mostly) two lanes and virtually no shoulder and Dubbo being a freight hub between NSW, NT, SA and WA this road has a rather high level of heavy vehicle traffic. There needs to be some serious consideration on the Police side as to where and when they pull vehicles to the side of the road, from what I've seen with well over 1mil km under wheels, the cops do more than their share of dumb things. If they have concluded their business with an offender and let them depart and are finalising paperwork or making phone calls or whatever and they are not going to be alighting from their vehicle any more, then the lights should be off.

 

[Chatty]

As for slowing down to 40 when you see red or blue lights but not having enough room to get down to that speed, I was taught many years ago that you should always be able to stop in the distance you can see. If you don't stick to that rule you are asking for trouble. 40 is not stopped so getting down to it should be easy.

The issue for me isn't my ability to slow down or stop - it's the ability of other drivers to do the same.
In SA where the law is that you have to slow down to 25 km/h, you're not that far off coming to a complete stop and I have been nearly rear - ended twice on the freeway because of the lack of ability/attention/knowledge/whatever of the other drivers. If it was a serious accident scene with vehicles on the road, I could live with that outcome. But if it's just a cop who has pulled a speeding driver up and who is 15m off the road I would be seriously pissed off. And if it's just the cops revenue raising then I would be livid.

Oh, and a big vote for what @Choook said!

 

[Choook]

....it is necessary to maintain radio silence because the crooks are either known to have a radio scanner or may have one.

What a crock! Just making excuses, I know for a fact that Vicpol have had encrypted radio commumncations since at least 2006 and I'm pretty sure NSW have had encrypted radio comms for the last 7 or eight years at least.

Or am I just dreaming here?

Wake up!! You're have a nightmare.

 

[Paddler Ed]

What a crock! Just making excuses, I know for a fact that Vicpol have had encrypted radio commumncations since at least 2006 and I'm pretty sure NSW have had encrypted radio comms for the last 7 or eight years at least.

Regional NSW isn't encrypted... I often end up with the scanner on when there's a lot of noise in town, or you see a few ambo's etc heading off on the highway.

 

[Neil Watts]

Actually stopped and asked at a Police Station yesterday after seeing some sort of sting happening on the Frankston Freeway, one highway patrol parked on the entrance to the freeway, lights on, then further down the freeway 2 x Police on bikes and 2 more highway patrol cars pulling people over.

Said officer of the law told me that they understand all the hypotheticals but left me with the impression that as long as you are making the effort to slow down safely ( as opposed to not slowing down at all) they are satisfied. Applies to all lanes, 1,2 or 3 lane freeways, all lanes must slow down.

"Slowing down safely" pretty open to interpretation though, I must be even less attentive than I though I was as I can't recall seeing any media advertising on this law.