Originally Posted by sgtsmile
She likely had no demerit points assigned at all. IF the laws there work like they do here, the photo radar cameras are nothing more than a money grab. They cannot be used to assign demerit points, since they nail the owner of the car with no attempt made to identify the driver due to privacy concerns (when they were introduced here, this was pointed out, and the government said they knew that, so that was why they would assign no demerit points since there was no proof of who was actually driving...) About the only good thing that was done when the neocon twerps were elected here in the mid 90s was to eliminate these cameras, although they are starting to creep back in again (they did not do as they claimed which was to reduce traffic fatalities on the highways where they were being used, fatalities actually went up that year...). As well, I would not be suprised if they would be thrown out of court based on the fact that they cannot prove she was driving (unless a, she admitted to it, and b, the law is written in such a way as to prevent such an appeal).
Be that as it may, she has a problem, but is not any worse than anyone else really - static photo radar site will catch a habitual speeder a significant number of times for any amount over the slack allowed by the camera setup if they pass it frequently enough. Here, it is common for people to go 60kmph in a 50kmph zone. If the camera was static, and set up for 55kmph, a person could net many tickets a day if they pass by it enough, even though they are not speeding significantly, and their speedo might be out just enough so it appears they are barely speeding at all. However, in the real world, people are given more latitude than that since there is so much variance in speedo accuracy. What I would like to see (or at least see publicized) is how many people are pulled over for tailgating, dangerous lane changes, crowding other road users, and speeding where there is a significant speed differential between them and the rest of traffic (which are offences that are actually dangerous...)
Now imagine if such a system was in place to nail cyclists breaking the laws they love to break. Some cyclists in areas where bikes = vehicles would find themselves buried in fines so fast it would make your head spin. Go the wrong way on the road? BAM fine. Run a red or stop sign? BAM a fine. I would support that kind of system as wholeheartedly as one like it for cars.
One of the problems with speed limits, is that many people have forgotten that the limit is the maximum, speed your vehicle is permitted to legally travel at. If that is 50km/h then technically at 50.000001 km/h your breaking the law. Heck if your flying downhill on a skateboard at 50.000001km/h your breaking the law, and skateboards (along with bicycles, roller blades and feet do not typically come with speedometers). The fact that police will not pull you over for going 20% over the limit, is stupid, but it's an enforcement issue.
As for cyclists and traffic violations, yes I think they should be pulled over, riding on a sidewalk is probably the one that urks me the most, especially since the riders are often teens in loose fitting pants on a BMX style bike, and they will not hesitate to take you out, if you happen to be on their sidewalk. There are also the old pooters, but they are usually travelling below a walking pace anyway. Traffic lights, I always stop, the only real stickler is the stop sign. Often because the stop sign is used, to slow down traffic, even though there are other techniques that work just as well. For example on one street near me, there are 7 stop signs, only one is actually needed for traffic engineering, the rest are simply so that someone who puts the pedal-to-the-metal, only gets up to about 60km/h before they need to skreetch to a stop for the next stop sign. even though it's a 40km/h zone.