Comments on: “Is it possible to have the road rules revised for clarity …..?” http://www.coasttocoast100.com.au/motorist-letters/is-it-possible-to-have-the-road-rules-revised-for-clarity/ Communities Against Semi's Tailgating Wed, 07 Jan 2009 08:28:52 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1 By: Rhonda http://www.coasttocoast100.com.au/motorist-letters/is-it-possible-to-have-the-road-rules-revised-for-clarity/#comment-2143 Rhonda Mon, 21 Jul 2008 08:22:50 +0000 http://www.coasttocoast100.com.au/motorist-letters/is-it-possible-to-have-the-road-rules-revised-for-clarity/#comment-2143 Hey Westy, With all those beers mate we could have a great party! After reading the last posts from yourself and Dave, you really have to wonder, the one thing that needs regulating seems to be commonsense. Safe Travelling Rhonda Hey Westy,
With all those beers mate we could have a great party! After reading the last posts from yourself and Dave, you really have to wonder, the one thing that needs regulating seems to be commonsense.
Safe Travelling
Rhonda

]]> By: Westy http://www.coasttocoast100.com.au/motorist-letters/is-it-possible-to-have-the-road-rules-revised-for-clarity/#comment-2140 Westy Fri, 18 Jul 2008 12:06:39 +0000 http://www.coasttocoast100.com.au/motorist-letters/is-it-possible-to-have-the-road-rules-revised-for-clarity/#comment-2140 <p><p>I replied to this letter last week, and, I attacked the usual 'political double speak', and I hope you all appreciated the 'diplomatikal' way I handled it. I could have just told the truth and labelled it the political crap that it really is. The time it takes for all these 'plans in the pipeline' or 'action pending' answers to actually occur bewilders me, well they would if they weren't coming from the 'pollies'.<br /><br /> Anyway, further to that, I have to say, David DJ got it right, because some of you may have noticed that Today Tonight actually did show all the footage and he got it in one.<br /><br /> Now to the point of this reply to Mr Smith, I would, as has been said before so many times, ask him to come and walk in our shoes, just a little mile will do.<br /><br /> Mr Smith, the last two days in a row, I had the dubious job of carrying a 3.5 metre wide load up Pennant Hills Road, which is the the connecting (main north south) road between our two freeway/tollway systems.<br /><br /> Now, I'm not sure if you, Mr Smith, are aware of the dimensions of a 3.5 metre load, but that is about a foot and a half, or in modern language, half a metre each side outside the width of the truck. You may imagine then that it would be a reasonably remarkable feat to keep this in one lane, so, as to reduce inconvenience to the motoring public, that is those of the persuasion that they are invincible and have supreme right to the road and inalianable rights not to be held up, I use two lanes to the left and leave the other lane for the use of anyone who wishes to exceed the speed limit. (I hope I've still got you with me here, as I might add that, apart from stopping at lights, I travel at the speed limit and I, too, have paid my registration, fuel excise, more than my fair share of road user charges, insurances and also the wide load permits which allow me to share that road).<br /><br /> Having taken care of all that, I now have the challenge of getting from Sydney to where ever the load may be destined, without taking the top off the NUMEROUS motorists who figure, instead of changing lanes and overtaking me, the quickest way past is under.<br /><br /> Mr Smith, if tailgating trucks concern you that much how would you rate driving under a wide load.<br /><br /> What kind of escapes me, right at the moment, is the mentality of those who berate truck drivers for their inadaquacies and yet take risks like this for the sake of just getting in front of the truck, for crying out load, they are still just in front when we reach the freeway!<br /><br /> And you want sympathy and apologies from us Mr Smith, may I suggest you remove your head from where I suspect it has been for sometime, wipe the excess from your eyes and look at the real world.<br /><br /> As for your fellow motorists, heres a challenge for you, if a truck left one truck length, (not enough according to common sense but too much in reality), between it and the car in front of it for a distance of, say, two kilometres, in city traffic, and you shouted me a beer for every car that cut into that gap, so shortening my space and forcing me to back off, I'll bet, and I'll bet against myself here, I couldn't drink all the beers in one session, and I don't mind a drink!<br /><br /> You point out that there is no mention of the two second rule in Vic Road Rules, and for that matter, I haven't seen it in Australian Road Law either, but then again, I can't find 'on road common sense', 'driver courtesy', or just staying out of the way of larger vehicles, if for no other reason than they need more space and they are going to hurt you if you make a mistake, either!<br /><br /> As has been concurred by an alarming number of contributers on this site, we don't need clearer laws half as much as we need DRIVER EDUCATION.<br /><br /> Sorry, Mr Smith, but you just tried to open an old wound at a real bad time, and I'm allergic to pain.<br /><br /> Cheers<br /><br /> Westy</p></p> <p>I replied to this letter last week, and, I attacked the usual ‘political double speak’, and I hope you all appreciated the ‘diplomatikal’ way I handled it. I could have just told the truth and labelled it the political crap that it really is. The time it takes for all these ‘plans in the pipeline’ or ‘action pending’ answers to actually occur bewilders me, well they would if they weren’t coming from the ‘pollies’.<br />
Anyway, further to that, I have to say, David DJ got it right, because some of you may have noticed that Today Tonight actually did show all the footage and he got it in one.<br />
Now to the point of this reply to Mr Smith, I would, as has been said before so many times, ask him to come and walk in our shoes, just a little mile will do.<br />
Mr Smith, the last two days in a row, I had the dubious job of carrying a 3.5 metre wide load up Pennant Hills Road, which is the the connecting (main north south) road between our two freeway/tollway systems.<br />
Now, I’m not sure if you, Mr Smith, are aware of the dimensions of a 3.5 metre load, but that is about a foot and a half, or in modern language, half a metre each side outside the width of the truck. You may imagine then that it would be a reasonably remarkable feat to keep this in one lane, so, as to reduce inconvenience to the motoring public, that is those of the persuasion that they are invincible and have supreme right to the road and inalianable rights not to be held up, I use two lanes to the left and leave the other lane for the use of anyone who wishes to exceed the speed limit. (I hope I’ve still got you with me here, as I might add that, apart from stopping at lights, I travel at the speed limit and I, too, have paid my registration, fuel excise, more than my fair share of road user charges, insurances and also the wide load permits which allow me to share that road).<br />
Having taken care of all that, I now have the challenge of getting from Sydney to where ever the load may be destined, without taking the top off the NUMEROUS motorists who figure, instead of changing lanes and overtaking me, the quickest way past is under.<br />
Mr Smith, if tailgating trucks concern you that much how would you rate driving under a wide load.<br />
What kind of escapes me, right at the moment, is the mentality of those who berate truck drivers for their inadaquacies and yet take risks like this for the sake of just getting in front of the truck, for crying out load, they are still just in front when we reach the freeway!<br />
And you want sympathy and apologies from us Mr Smith, may I suggest you remove your head from where I suspect it has been for sometime, wipe the excess from your eyes and look at the real world.<br />
As for your fellow motorists, heres a challenge for you, if a truck left one truck length, (not enough according to common sense but too much in reality), between it and the car in front of it for a distance of, say, two kilometres, in city traffic, and you shouted me a beer for every car that cut into that gap, so shortening my space and forcing me to back off, I’ll bet, and I’ll bet against myself here, I couldn’t drink all the beers in one session, and I don’t mind a drink!<br />
You point out that there is no mention of the two second rule in Vic Road Rules, and for that matter, I haven’t seen it in Australian Road Law either, but then again, I can’t find ‘on road common sense’, ‘driver courtesy’, or just staying out of the way of larger vehicles, if for no other reason than they need more space and they are going to hurt you if you make a mistake, either!<br />
As has been concurred by an alarming number of contributers on this site, we don’t need clearer laws half as much as we need DRIVER EDUCATION.<br />
Sorry, Mr Smith, but you just tried to open an old wound at a real bad time, and I’m allergic to pain.<br />
Cheers<br />
Westy</p>

]]> By: David Niven http://www.coasttocoast100.com.au/motorist-letters/is-it-possible-to-have-the-road-rules-revised-for-clarity/#comment-2133 David Niven Mon, 14 Jul 2008 06:33:03 +0000 http://www.coasttocoast100.com.au/motorist-letters/is-it-possible-to-have-the-road-rules-revised-for-clarity/#comment-2133 Yes!I'm for harsher penalties for all ....but let's bring it in a bit fairer ... same penalties,all motorists. I was heading into the city today and twice I witnessed a suitable person for a labotomy. And guess what? those motorists were car drivers. I'm a car driver and was not at all humoured by their actions. Going in I encountered a car deciding that instead of waiting for the semi [on the roundabout]to speed up and beat the heavy vehicle by a few feet. I don't know who turned the whiter shade, the truck driver or me? Then if that was not enough,coming up to street lights which were red,a car changed lanes twice[right to left then right]and I had a semi behind me which had left considerable safe clearance and a credit to him.Now this car decided to get in front of the semi and directly behind me. That was two incidents in approx 5 mins. .... I tell ya what .... It makes ya want to get out and walk. These are precisely the idiots that should be targetted. I'm not kidding..... bring on euthanasia .. labotomy .... electric current therapy .... cricket bat etc etc. I'm a bloody nervous wreck! C Ya Dave Yes!I’m for harsher penalties for all ….but let’s bring it in a bit fairer … same penalties,all motorists.
I was heading into the city today and twice I witnessed a suitable person for a labotomy.

And guess what? those motorists were car drivers.
I’m a car driver and was not at all humoured by their actions.
Going in I encountered a car deciding that instead of waiting for the semi [on the roundabout]to speed up and beat the heavy vehicle by a few feet. I don’t know who turned the whiter shade, the truck driver or me?
Then if that was not enough,coming up to street lights which were red,a car changed lanes twice[right to left then right]and I had a semi behind me which had left considerable safe clearance and a credit to him.Now this car decided to get in front of the semi and directly behind me. That was two incidents in approx 5 mins. …. I tell ya what …. It makes ya want to get out and walk.

These are precisely the idiots that should be targetted.
I’m not kidding….. bring on euthanasia .. labotomy …. electric current therapy …. cricket bat etc etc.
I’m a bloody nervous wreck!

C Ya
Dave

]]> By: Rhonda http://www.coasttocoast100.com.au/motorist-letters/is-it-possible-to-have-the-road-rules-revised-for-clarity/#comment-2131 Rhonda Mon, 14 Jul 2008 05:00:49 +0000 http://www.coasttocoast100.com.au/motorist-letters/is-it-possible-to-have-the-road-rules-revised-for-clarity/#comment-2131 Although I live in the west these new initiatives bother me as it will only be time before our state gov realises what a great revenue raiser it is! our truck drivers already have more then enough penalties applied to them, but I do like the suspension of vehicle rego's after repeat speeding infringements. A question I have is if a car cuts in front of a truck that is travelling at a safe distance, is that car then going to be charged through the chain of responsiblity? regards Rhonda Although I live in the west these new initiatives bother me as it will only be time before our state gov realises what a great revenue raiser it is! our truck drivers already have more then enough penalties applied to them, but I do like the suspension of vehicle rego’s after repeat speeding infringements. A question I have is if a car cuts in front of a truck that is travelling at a safe distance, is that car then going to be charged through the chain of responsiblity?

regards Rhonda

]]> By: David(DJ) http://www.coasttocoast100.com.au/motorist-letters/is-it-possible-to-have-the-road-rules-revised-for-clarity/#comment-2130 David(DJ) Sun, 13 Jul 2008 12:50:59 +0000 http://www.coasttocoast100.com.au/motorist-letters/is-it-possible-to-have-the-road-rules-revised-for-clarity/#comment-2130 Ahh, the famous ACA crash in the tunnel (ninemsn link above). From where I sit, it appeared that the truck had his blinker on and had started to change lanes before the Mercedes swept across from the far left lane; and actually began to turn back to his lane action before the Mercedes hit him. That is what it looked like when they showed the full incident on ACA. What was the outcome of this incident? Who was eventually found to be at fault. Unfortunately it made "good" television and I'm sure we will see it many more times whenever someone wants show us how "dangerous" trucks are. David (dj) Ahh, the famous ACA crash in the tunnel (ninemsn link above).
From where I sit, it appeared that the truck had his blinker on and had started to change lanes before the Mercedes swept across from the far left lane; and actually began to turn back to his lane action before the Mercedes hit him. That is what it looked like when they showed the full incident on ACA. What was the outcome of this incident? Who was eventually found to be at fault.
Unfortunately it made “good” television and I’m sure we will see it many more times whenever someone wants show us how “dangerous” trucks are.
David (dj)

]]> By: Westy http://www.coasttocoast100.com.au/motorist-letters/is-it-possible-to-have-the-road-rules-revised-for-clarity/#comment-2129 Westy Sun, 13 Jul 2008 04:26:11 +0000 http://www.coasttocoast100.com.au/motorist-letters/is-it-possible-to-have-the-road-rules-revised-for-clarity/#comment-2129 Lyndal, The reply section of this post must surely come into contention for Letter of the Week, Month, year maybe? Best piece of Politic Speak I've read this....., well anyway for a while, not that I get into Political letters. For a start it seems that road safety is below the Minister, so the Chief Executive of something will take care of it. (I'm sorry, there I go again, I must learn some 'diplomatikly' some time). Once again, "a range of measures", (read, another knee jerk reaction,), will be "implemented over twelve months," (read, hopefully by then this will go away or at least give me time to hire a consultant to tell these stupid constituents that they should leave these things to us experts). "A Special Enforcement Programme" (read, another word for knee jerk reaction commonly known as a blitz),on one road, while the rest of the State, and this goes on in every State, is left without adequate, or in most cases, even inadequate, policing. It targets 'speeding heavy vehicles', hang on Mr Chief Executive, I saw that on the news last week and they said they were specifically targeting 'hoons'. If we have to have a reply specific to every news report, can we at least watch the news ourselves so we don't keep giving the same answer with different targets. Yet another National Heavy Vehicle Safety Plan, to reduce deaths in crashes involving heavy vehicles. What about a "National Driver Education Action Plan' aimed squarely at those that cause 75-80% of accidents involving heavy vehicles. That would reduce those deaths by 75-80%, wouldn't it? Wouldn't that make more sense or are my mental calculations wrong. We've been having blitz's on trucks for more than thirty years that I know of, because it was happening a long time before my time, and the only outcome from that is revenue for the government and drivers being stripped of their livelyhood. As for Chain of Responsibility, couldn't wait to see that one rolled out, I can barely wait to see the test case when someone's boss is prosecuted for making his driver, who may be up to 4,000 k's away, speed to get a load done quicker. What a paper tiger. The only one good point is cancelling the rego of any vehicle caught 15 k's overe the limit three times. Hell, we can go to town until we get caught twice then speed limit the truck. What about any truck caught 15 k's over the limit being impounded, loaded or not, until the owner can satisfy the authorities that appropriate action will be taken to make the vehicle compliant. I know a lot of my industry colleagues will scream about that suggestion but the law says 100k's, and if you can do 115 under power, then the truck is clearly not compliant. Good to see some 'Ministerial' action, even if it is only buck passing. Cheers Westy Lyndal,
The reply section of this post must surely come into contention for Letter of the Week, Month, year maybe?
Best piece of Politic Speak I’ve read this….., well anyway for a while, not that I get into Political letters.
For a start it seems that road safety is below the Minister, so the Chief Executive of something will take care of it. (I’m sorry, there I go again, I must learn some ‘diplomatikly’ some time).
Once again, “a range of measures”, (read, another knee jerk reaction,), will be “implemented over twelve months,” (read, hopefully by then this will go away or at least give me time to hire a consultant to tell these stupid constituents that they should leave these things to us experts).
“A Special Enforcement Programme” (read, another word for knee jerk reaction commonly known as a blitz),on one road, while the rest of the State, and this goes on in every State, is left without adequate, or in most cases, even inadequate, policing.
It targets ’speeding heavy vehicles’, hang on Mr Chief Executive, I saw that on the news last week and they said they were specifically targeting ‘hoons’. If we have to have a reply specific to every news report, can we at least watch the news ourselves so we don’t keep giving the same answer with different targets.
Yet another National Heavy Vehicle Safety Plan, to reduce deaths in crashes involving heavy vehicles. What about a “National Driver Education Action Plan’ aimed squarely at those that cause 75-80% of accidents involving heavy vehicles. That would reduce those deaths by 75-80%, wouldn’t it? Wouldn’t that make more sense or are my mental calculations wrong.
We’ve been having blitz’s on trucks for more than thirty years that I know of, because it was happening a long time before my time, and the only outcome from that is revenue for the government and drivers being stripped of their livelyhood.
As for Chain of Responsibility, couldn’t wait to see that one rolled out, I can barely wait to see the test case when someone’s boss is prosecuted for making his driver, who may be up to 4,000 k’s away, speed to get a load done quicker.
What a paper tiger.
The only one good point is cancelling the rego of any vehicle caught 15 k’s overe the limit three times. Hell, we can go to town until we get caught twice then speed limit the truck.
What about any truck caught 15 k’s over the limit being impounded, loaded or not, until the owner can satisfy the authorities that appropriate action will be taken to make the vehicle compliant.
I know a lot of my industry colleagues will scream about that suggestion but the law says 100k’s, and if you can do 115 under power, then the truck is clearly not compliant.
Good to see some ‘Ministerial’ action, even if it is only buck passing.
Cheers
Westy

]]> By: Chris(National Finalist YATD 2007) http://www.coasttocoast100.com.au/motorist-letters/is-it-possible-to-have-the-road-rules-revised-for-clarity/#comment-2124 Chris(National Finalist YATD 2007) Sun, 13 Jul 2008 01:28:08 +0000 http://www.coasttocoast100.com.au/motorist-letters/is-it-possible-to-have-the-road-rules-revised-for-clarity/#comment-2124 I mostly agree with you Mr Smith, however, wouldn't it be nice if we were to target all tailgating drivers not just those who are behind the wheel of larger vehicles? One problem with making the legislation more clear, and I assume you mean to attach a label of safe distance. If this were to be changed from travelling at a safe distance to for example 200m. If someone were to drive inside this 200m distance you're relying on an enforcement officers perception of distance. Whereas the general grey ruling of travelling at a safe distance can be applied to all weather conditions. For example in dry conditions - and I will use mother's 60m gap - may apply, however, if it were to be raining then a distance of 200-300m should be minimum. I also hope that this legislation would be aimed at ALL drivers Mr Smith? To target 1 particular group of people would be disproportionate to the objective. "Initiatives implemented in Victoria to manage speeding heavy vehicles include suspension of the heavy vehicle’s registration after exceeding 115 km/h on the third occasion and penalties for heavy vehicle drivers who exceed the speed limit are greater than those for drivers of other vehicles. <p>1 thing I take a little interest in - why wait for offence #3?? The only thing I disagree with is for the calling of harsher penalties because it's a truck. Speeding no matter what vehicle is stupid, I say suspend the vehicle's registration for ALL VEHICLES. Chris Cartwright National Finalist Young Australian Truck Driver Competition 2007 I mostly agree with you Mr Smith, however, wouldn’t it be nice if we were to target all tailgating drivers not just those who are behind the wheel of larger vehicles?
One problem with making the legislation more clear, and I assume you mean to attach a label of safe distance. If this were to be changed from travelling at a safe distance to for example 200m. If someone were to drive inside this 200m distance you’re relying on an enforcement officers perception of distance. Whereas the general grey ruling of travelling at a safe distance can be applied to all weather conditions. For example in dry conditions - and I will use mother’s 60m gap - may apply, however, if it were to be raining then a distance of 200-300m should be minimum.
I also hope that this legislation would be aimed at ALL drivers Mr Smith? To target 1 particular group of people would be disproportionate to the objective.
“Initiatives implemented in Victoria to manage speeding heavy vehicles include suspension of the heavy vehicle’s registration after exceeding 115 km/h on the third occasion and penalties for heavy vehicle drivers who exceed the speed limit are greater than those for drivers of other vehicles.
<p>1 thing I take a little interest in - why wait for offence #3?? The only thing I disagree with is for the calling of harsher penalties because it’s a truck. Speeding no matter what vehicle is stupid, I say suspend the vehicle’s registration for ALL VEHICLES.
Chris Cartwright
National Finalist Young Australian Truck Driver Competition 2007

]]>