Stop means stop but why stop here?

The intersection of the road we take to town and State Highway 1 used to be controlled by a Give Way sign.

A few weeks ago that changed and it’s now controlled by a Stop sign.

If there was any consultation or advertising about this I missed it and so did a lot of other people, including several who have been ticketed for not coming to a complete stop.

It’s a driver’s responsibility to notice signs. But when you’ve been driving the same route hundreds of times, have a clear view of on-coming traffic for at least a couple of hundred metres and turn to look right for that traffic rather than left where the sign is, it’s easy enough to miss it.

That’s made it easy picking for the cop, or cops, who’ve been issuing tickets.

Not surprisingly those ticketed aren’t very happy. Stop means stop but no-one understands why this one has to be a stop and not a give way. It hasn’t been an accident trouble spot and there’s a merging lane which allows turning traffic to enter the main road without interfering with on-coming traffic.

Given that, it would be much better PR if the police tried education and warnings to ensure people knew the sign had been changed and understood why before they issued tickets. In the absence of this, it is this looks much more like revenue gathering than road safety.

6 Responses to Stop means stop but why stop here?

  1. Fredinthegrass's avatar Fredinthegrass says:

    Morning Hp.
    You raise two quite separate issues here.
    Lets look at your last one first – revenue gathering.
    The late Steve Fitzgerald- a highly respected senior Traffic Inspector – was quoted as saying all tickets are voluntary contributions. In other words break the law, get caught, pay the fine, its your call.

    This can often then raise the second issue – is the law/rule a good one or should it be reviewed/changed. In the case you outlined it appears not good, and brought in for unknown reasons – not to mention the lack of consultations.
    I worked with the Automobile Association for many years, and built a sound working relationship with our local Transit.
    Most problems were solved by sitting down with the relevant parties and discussing the issue and reaching a solution – often a compromise that led to good laws that worked for most. I did find you could never satisfy some folk!!

    Like

  2. homepaddock's avatar homepaddock says:

    “In other words break the law, get caught, pay the fine, its your call.”

    No argument with that. The problem in this case is, as you say, the unknown reasons for the sign change and lack of consultation.

    Like

  3. gravedodger's avatar gravedodger says:

    As a public relations exercise and raising awareness of road safety, it would seem preferable in my eyes to have sent a letter pointing out the sign change to those observed failing to come to a halt. with a warning of future ticketing.That would be the same cost structure, more likely to engender good vibes about the constabulary but of course would circumvent what Fitg pointed out re the voluntary donation part.
    The constabulary bemoan the loss of face and respect among the citizenry, why are they so thick or is it the syndrome alluded to by Barnsley Bill at No Minister.
    Just think back awhile to the roundly applauded result of the Easter road toll attributed to the lowering of the tolerance by 5kph that seemed to be totally ineffective at Queens Birthday when it all turned to custard.
    We really do need to adopt enforcement systems that target poor decision making, poor driving skills, all substance abuse along with dangerous speeding (like 120kph plus) with mufty cars and motorbikes but that would raise costs and devastate revenue returns wouldn’t it so it just aint gunna happen eh.

    Like

  4. pdm's avatar pdm says:

    I doubt the change would have been instigated by the Police – they are just taking advantage.

    The instigators would have been the dolts at Transit led by head dolt Andy Knacksted (sp). I have been amazed over a number of years of how that man keeps his job.

    Like

  5. Simfarmer's avatar Simfarmer says:

    I recently recieved a ‘warning’ notice on an slightly inbred island just south of an Island continent (i’ll let you work it out) for doing 55 km/h through a school zone at 11 am. The usual speedlimit was 60 but they had extended to 40 km/h from the usual school day start and finish times to all day. The officer was very friendly, realised it was a bit rough gave me a warning notice (which he explained I was allowed one per year) and sent me on my way. Just as effective as giving a ticket and left me feeling alot happier about the police here than at home.

    Like

  6. gravedodger's avatar gravedodger says:

    That Continental Island Nation take their school zones very seriously (where I travel anyway) but it was an example of sensible driver awareness and re-education that would have been appropriate in the situation Ele was referring to.

    Like

Leave a comment