Australia records highest road toll in over a decade

[Franco Cozzo]

Australia records highest road toll in over a decade

Australia’s states and territories can’t begin sharing their road safety data fast enough, according to the peak body for local motoring groups, as the national road toll has reached a sobering marker.

Data released by the Bureau of Infrastructure and Transport Research Economics (BITRE) shows 1310 people died on Australian roads between May 1, 2023 and April 30, 2024.

This is not only an additional 132 deaths over the May 1, 2022 to April 30, 2023 period, but it’s also the highest 12-month death toll figure since 30 November 2012, which had an identical number of fatalities.

Road deaths surged 31.2 per cent in New South Wales, 35.3 per cent in the Northern Territory and 12.4 per cent in Victoria.

https://www.carexpert.com.au/car-new...-over-a-decade

What a conundrum,

Current strategy doesn't work at all, but big *** hole in the economy which needs filling, and the current strategy helps prop it up.

Its still low - 1270 deaths nationally out of 26M people, compared to how many trips Australian drivers make, its good odds.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

https://www.carexpert.com.au/car-new...-over-a-decade

What a conundrum,

Current strategy doesn't work at all, but big *** hole in the economy which needs filling, and the current strategy helps prop it up.

Its still low - 1270 deaths nationally out of 26M people, compared to how many trips Australian drivers make, its good odds.

How serious are governments on a plan when they won’t even share road trauma data.
It would be interesting to know the breakdown of Single Vehicle Accidents vs multi car crashes
how many pedestrians, motor bikes, trucks ect…..how do you target issues without that?
Queensland does this, so a start… https://cars.tmr.qld.gov.au/Static/d...ort_Latest.pdf



By comparison the USA had 40,990 road fatalities last year and 42,514 in 2022.
Yes they have like 340 million population but that fatality figure is x32 of ours
and they have a big issue with mobile phone use while driving.

https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases...er%20of%202022.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by jpd80

How serious are governments on a plan when they won’t even share road trauma data.
It would be interesting to know the breakdown of Single Vehicle Accidents vs multi car crashes
how many pedestrians, motor bikes, trucks ect…..how do you target issues without that?
Queensland does this, so a start… https://cars.tmr.qld.gov.au/Static/d...ort_Latest.pdf



By comparison the USA had 40,990 road fatalities last year and 42,514 in 2022.
Yes they have like 340 million population but that fatality figure is x32 of ours
and they have a big issue with mobile phone use while driving.

https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases...er%20of%202022.

Thats because it'll show up whose strategy is bullshit and doesn't work.

[roKWiz]

No doubt people falling asleep at the wheel of these boring modern air fryers.

Remember when you actually drove the car using the right and left foot, both hands and eyes, no relying on electronics to beep at you while you take your eyes off the road looking at a giant TV monitor in the middle of the dashboard.

[DJM83]

Originally Posted by roKWiz

No doubt people falling asleep at the wheel of these boring modern air fryers.

Remember when you actually drove the car using the right and left foot, both hands and eyes, no relying on electronics to beep at you while you take your eyes off the road looking at a giant TV monitor in the middle of the dashboard.

Having cars from both sides (high tech and no tech) i agree with you, younger drivers being 'bought up' driving these cars with all the tech then relying on it. Seen a few driving company cars with the lane departure warning light in the mirror. They (instructor cars, instructors) are part of the problem imo. Those features should be turned off/disabled during lessons/tests, or use cars that dont have it.
Although i dont know how much they contribute to the toll, but im sure google would tell me if i bothered.

[whynot]

Originally Posted by DJM83

Although i dont know how much they contribute to the toll, but im sure google would tell me if i bothered.

A good source of traffic safety reports is the Accident Research Centre based in Monash University. A list of there reports is here

https://www.monash.edu/muarc/researc...ations-by-year

This paper might be worth a read.

https://www.monash.edu/__data/assets...-361-final.pdf

Report No.361
Report Date: April 2021
Release Date: November 2022
ISBN ISSN 978-1-925413-31-1 1835-4815 (On-Line)
Pages: 76


Title and sub-title:
VSRG Research Program: Benefits of additional vehicle safety technology to novice drivers - Australia and New Zealand

Author(s)
Budd, L., Keall, M., & Newstead, S.

Sponsoring Organisations - This project was funded as contract research by the following organisations:

Transport for New South Wales, New South Wales State Insurance Regulatory Authority, Royal Automobile Club of Victoria, NRMA Motoring and
Services, Victorian Department of Transport (VicRoads), Royal Automobile Club of Western Australia, Transport Accident Commission, New Zealand
Transport Agency, Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads, Royal Automobile Club of Queensland, Royal Automobile Association of
South Australia, South Australian Department of Infrastructure and Transport , Accident Compensation Corporation New Zealand, the Australian
Government Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications, and the Road Safety Commission of Western
Australia.

Abstract:

Recent years have seen the increased availability of a number of new driver-assist systems that have been proven to reduce crash risk.

Furthermore, previous research has shown that young drivers are at a high risk of injury crash involvement and would possibly benefit from driverassist systems.

Three vehicle safety systems becoming commonly available and likely to provide young driver benefits were investigated: autonomous emergency braking (AEB), lane keep assist / lane departure warning (LKAA/LDW) and electronic stability control (ESC).

Novice and experienced driver crash profiles were compared using crash data from five Australian jurisdictions over the crash years 2006 to 2017, and New Zealand over the crash years 2008 to 2018. The effectiveness of ESC, AEB and lane keeping systems were sourced from literature and used to estimate the crashes saved through current and 100% fitment. These savings were adjusted to reflect the relative effectiveness of each technology associated with driver experience which was estimated through generalized linear regression of the light vehicle set of crashed vehicles manufactured from 2013.

Based on literature sourced real-world effectiveness alone, a greater proportion of crashes were estimated to be saved for Australian young
drivers than for experienced drivers under current fitment scenarios of ESC, AEB and LDW, with large savings when fitment was maximised.

Overall, the estimated additional proportion of young driver injury crashes saved under 100% fitment was 14%, which is 75% higher than that for
experienced drivers. Compared with effectiveness in the experienced driver crashes of the same type, AEB was found to be up to 60% more effective in young driver targeted crashes depending on the vehicle type, crash severity and crash type. This greater effectiveness of AEB for young drivers corresponded to a further 2% of injury crashes to be saved for this group. Given current fitment rates of the technologies studied in the New Zealand crashed vehicles of novice and non-novice light passenger vehicles, around 2% of recent injuries arising from non-novice crashes would be expected to have been prevented by the three technologies. A somewhat smaller proportion can have been expected to be prevented in young drivers’ crashes, around 1.7%. This is largely due to a higher prevalence of older vehicles driven by young drivers, which do not have the safety technologies fitted. The additional proportion of injuries preventable by 100% fitment for non-novice vehicles was estimated to be 24%, 18% and 16% for fatal, serious and minor injuries respectively. For young drivers, the equivalent estimates were 28%, 23% and 21%.

Although ESC, AEB and LKAA/LDW have clear safety benefits for all drivers, this report presents evidence of greater benefits for young drivers which supports policies that encourage uptake or mandate these technologies for young drivers.

Key words: ESC, AEB, LDW; Autonomous Automatic Emergency Braking; young drivers

[Itsme]

Not surprise with higher road tolls with many drivers these days with poor driving skills and ignoring basic road rules.

[prydey]

What was the percentage of cars on the road compared to previous years?

I think you'll find if all the factors are correlated it will show that the death toll is fairly static.

Population increases. More cars on the roads.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by prydey

What was the percentage of cars on the road compared to previous years?

I think you'll find if all the factors are correlated it will show that the death toll is fairly static.

Population increases. More cars on the roads.

Curious to compare 'per capita' stats - would cover exactly what you're saying.

Even then, cars are a lot safer in crashes now than 20 years ago, so if the death toll stays the same, cars are a lot better at protecting their occupants so its not ideal.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

Even then, cars are a lot safer in crashes now than 20 years ago, so if the death toll stays the same, cars are a lot better at protecting their occupants so its not ideal.

The govt will never come out and credit car safety improvements with lowering or helping to lower the road toll as it would be basically admitting to fraud, however it's my personal belief that car safety is almost 100% responsible for any reduction in road toll.
In fact I believe there are statistics out there to show that while deaths are trending down (you'll have years that increase but overall it's trending down) road related trauma is actually increasing. The number of crashes hasn't reduced. People are just surviving crashes that once would have been fatal.
This is purely down to safer cars.

Anyone who thinks human behaviour can be changed to reduce the road toll is living in a fantasy land ie.. Govco. A large majority of crashes are caused by impatience and irrational behaviour and have been since cars were invented. (likely before then too but horses don't tend to run in to each other) These human traits can not be eradicated.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by prydey

The govt will never come out and credit car safety improvements with lowering or helping to lower the road toll as it would be basically admitting to fraud, however it's my personal belief that car safety is almost 100% responsible for any reduction in road toll.
In fact I believe there are statistics out there to show that while deaths are trending down (you'll have years that increase but overall it's trending down) road related trauma is actually increasing. The number of crashes hasn't reduced. People are just surviving crashes that once would have been fatal.
This is purely down to safer cars.

Anyone who thinks human behaviour can be changed to reduce the road toll is living in a fantasy land ie.. Govco. A large majority of crashes are caused by impatience and irrational behaviour and have been since cars were invented. (likely before then too but horses don't tend to run in to each other) These human traits can not be eradicated.

I find attitudes on the road around Melbourne are significantly worse than other places I've driven.

Did an interstate trip for work recently (as in last weekend), was driving in both VIC and NSW, people in NSW are significantly more courteous on the road to other road users than Victorians, thats for sure.

I did a bit over 600km escorting an oversize load from Cootamundra region back into central VIC, and the people in NSW were way more willing to create space for the truck than the VIC section of the trip.

Especially worse when you go out to northern or western suburbs of Melbourne - I go out to die instead of pilot when I'm doing those runs.

[simon varley]

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

Curious to compare 'per capita' stats - would cover exactly what you're saying.

Even then, cars are a lot safer in crashes now than 20 years ago, so if the death toll stays the same, cars are a lot better at protecting their occupants so its not ideal.

most of that information is available in the public domain. BITRE and CrashStats are two examples. Sometimes you need to dig a bit. For example, the ABS runs a motor vehicle census every year. Take the raw BITRE data from here

https://www.bitre.gov.au/statistics/...crash_database

and divide by the ABS data here

https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/in...data-downloads

and you have exactly what you are asking for. I've been doing a lot of this, for my own interest.

example

[prydey]

Originally Posted by simon varley

most of that information is available in the public domain. BITRE and CrashStats are two examples. Sometimes you need to dig a bit. For example, the ABS runs a motor vehicle census every year. Take the raw BITRE data from here

https://www.bitre.gov.au/statistics/...crash_database

and divide by the ABS data here

https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/in...data-downloads

and you have exactly what you are asking for. I've been doing a lot of this, for my own interest.

example

image

The introduction of seatbelts resulted in an obvious trend downward. Not as obvious, but still there is the introduction of passive and active safety systems to mainstream cars in the mid 90's. ABS, airbags, stability control etc.

I note you have the introduction of speed cameras listed however I would suggest that would be a case of correlation not equalling causation.

[russellw]

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

Curious to compare 'per capita' stats - would cover exactly what you're saying.

Even then, cars are a lot safer in crashes now than 20 years ago, so if the death toll stays the same, cars are a lot better at protecting their occupants so its not ideal.

I did these a little while ago in another thread but here we go again for 2023.
Nationally, there were 4.7525 deaths per 100k of population up from 4.5898 in 2022 and 4.3721 in 2021 but half what it was at the start of the century when it was 9.575 and well down on the peak in 1970 of 30.3663.




The States are a a mixed bag.
Victoria recorded 4.345/100k in 2023, up substantially from 3.650 in 2022 but it was 8.652 in 2000 and peaked at 30.799 in 1970.
NSW recorded 4.209/100k in 2023, up substantially from 3.588 in 2022 but it was 9.354 in 2000 and peaked at 28.945 in 1970.
Queensland recorded 5.074/100k in 2023, down from 5.582 in 2022 but it was 9.033 in 2000 and peaked at 32.102 in 1972.
SA recorded 6.319/100k in 2023, up even more substantially from 3.898 in 2022 but it was 11.085 in 2000 and peaked at 30.901 in 1974. In fairness, the 2022 was the lowest on record and a better comparison is probably the 5.492 in 2021.
WA recorded 5.454/100k in 2023, down from 6.268 in 2022 and also creating a new record low. It was 11.336 in 2000 and peaked at 35.404 in 1970.
Tas recorded 5.936/100k in 2023, down from 8.931 in 2022 but it was 9.934 in 2000 and peaked at 33.316 in 1973.
ACT recorded 0.857/100k in 2023, down from 3.939 in 2022 and also creating a new record low. It was 5.628 in 2000 and peaked at 23.574 in 1970.
NT recorded 11.486/100k in 2023, down from 18.783 in 2022 and also creating a new record low even though it's more than most States were 20 years ago. It was 25.609 in 2000 and peaked at 68.914 in 1974.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by russellw

I did these a little while ago in another thread but here we go again for 2023.
Nationally, there were 4.7525 deaths per 100k of population up from 4.5898 in 2022 and 4.3721 in 2021 but half what it was at the start of the century when it was 9.575 and well down on the peak in 1970 of 30.3663.

image


The States are a a mixed bag.
Victoria recorded 4.345/100k in 2023, up substantially from 3.650 in 2022 but it was 8.652 in 2000 and peaked at 30.799 in 1970.
NSW recorded 4.209/100k in 2023, up substantially from 3.588 in 2022 but it was 9.354 in 2000 and peaked at 28.945 in 1970.
Queensland recorded 5.074/100k in 2023, down from 5.582 in 2022 but it was 9.033 in 2000 and peaked at 32.102 in 1972.
SA recorded 6.319/100k in 2023, up even more substantially from 3.898 in 2022 but it was 11.085 in 2000 and peaked at 30.901 in 1974. In fairness, the 2022 was the lowest on record and a better comparison is probably the 5.492 in 2021.
WA recorded 5.454/100k in 2023, down from 6.268 in 2022 and also creating a new record low. It was 11.336 in 2000 and peaked at 35.404 in 1970.
Tas recorded 5.936/100k in 2023, down from 8.931 in 2022 but it was 9.934 in 2000 and peaked at 33.316 in 1973.
ACT recorded 0.857/100k in 2023, down from 3.939 in 2022 and also creating a new record low. It was 5.628 in 2000 and peaked at 23.574 in 1970.
NT recorded 11.486/100k in 2023, down from 18.783 in 2022 and also creating a new record low even though it's more than most States were 20 years ago. It was 25.609 in 2000 and peaked at 68.914 in 1974.

My interpretation of that is trend over long term is basically significantly down, so its all **** and wind when we come out and talk about road toll, the numbers are higher but taking into account population growth its basically negligible increase, except for on 2022.

Exception being Victoria and the past two years but its an outlier.

Its half of what it was in 2000, its argulable quality of drivers is down but cars have significantly increased safety wise since then and perform way better in crashes.

Be interesting to know the average age of the car parc in 2000 vs 2023 and that will give you hints.

Some of those states with the high figures in this day and age, demography and socioeconomic status of the state and its population would be interesting to overlay.

The more Franco's a state has the more deaths behind the wheel there's going to be

[LTDHO]

Originally Posted by Itsme

Not surprise with higher road tolls with many drivers these days with poor driving skills and ignoring basic road rules.

I couldn't agree more.

With 25 years experience in the industry, serious focus need to be moved to driver education and attitude.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by LTDHO

I couldn't agree more.

With 25 years experience in the industry, serious focus need to be moved to driver education and attitude.

I don't spend a lot of time on the road admittedly but from my experience poor driving isn't unique to new drivers. I wouldn't even say it's the majority. Again, from my experience, the worst driving I see is from those on open licences, and often older drivers.


Here's a question.

How many people would drive differently if they had a police officer in the passenger seat, or if there was a police presence nearby?

If you answer that you would drive differently, ask yourself why? Are you someone that can't work unless supervised? You need someone watching to make sure you obey the rules.

Driver behaviour won't change while there is a general lack of respect for authority. And that won't change any time soon.


So while driver education and rule enforcement is important, it's general attitudes that are the problem. Society today is selfish.

[pottery beige]

Imports are shocking drivers.

Had one of them pull up halfway around a roundabout the other day to let another import in.

wtf

[Itsme]

Originally Posted by prydey

I don't spend a lot of time on the road admittedly but from my experience poor driving isn't unique to new drivers. I wouldn't even say it's the majority. Again, from my experience, the worst driving I see is from those on open licences, and often older drivers.


Here's a question.

How many people would drive differently if they had a police officer in the passenger seat, or if there was a police presence nearby?

If you answer that you would drive differently, ask yourself why? Are you someone that can't work unless supervised? You need someone watching to make sure you obey the rules.

Driver behaviour won't change while there is a general lack of respect for authority. And that won't change any time soon.


So while driver education and rule enforcement is important, it's general attitudes that are the problem. Society today is selfish.

Who saying it is only new drivers?, my comment was for all drivers in general and I'm quite sure LTDHO is saying the same.
If there was police presence nearby don't tell me most people's attitude would not change, they would.
We all also know there is bogan attitude out there, has always been and will be.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by prydey

I don't spend a lot of time on the road admittedly but from my experience poor driving isn't unique to new drivers. I wouldn't even say it's the majority. Again, from my experience, the worst driving I see is from those on open licences, and often older drivers.


Here's a question.

How many people would drive differently if they had a police officer in the passenger seat, or if there was a police presence nearby?

If you answer that you would drive differently, ask yourself why? Are you someone that can't work unless supervised? You need someone watching to make sure you obey the rules.

Driver behaviour won't change while there is a general lack of respect for authority. And that won't change any time soon.


So while driver education and rule enforcement is important, it's general attitudes that are the problem. Society today is selfish.

Its not so much I have an issue with authority, I want to know the reasons behind why they're the rules.

Like why do I have to do 40 in a road works zone when there's no road works, because its on an adjacent road?

There's no reason for the main road to be down to 40, so if there's no police there and no workers, I'm not going to do 40 because I don't see a reason for it.

'Because those are the rules' just isn't good enough, and don't expect me to follow them if thats how you behave.

No different to work, have a customer who makes you sign onto their sites, online, then another sign on on another platform, and then sign on their book.

So I do one and not the other two, why do you need me to sign in three times on your site? Give me the reasons why.

Never read our SWMS and I'm the guy at the company who is responsible for enforcing them, to the point where I've sent them to 30x different customers and only one of them has actually read it and asked me why something irrelevant to the project was in there - it just shows you how its just there to tick the box.

I'm not going to read 11 pages of bullshit, for the sake of reading 11 pages of bullshit - just sign here on the bottom and put the date on it.

We're also not supposed to wear short sleeves and shirts, but I'm not going to enforce it in hot weather on the guys unless customer representative shows up on site. Just keep them in the car, if someone shows up put em on, when they leave take them off.

There's rules and then there's rules - its more about how you play the game than actually doing the right thing.

If you've got a legitimate reason for why something is then I'm happy to hear it and follow the rule book, if its 'just because' then **** you and your rules I'll do what I think is right.

If its not hurting anyone then who cares if we're a bit flexible for the sake of things working well.

I don't think there's a legitimate case for fines circa 10km/h over the speed limit having an impact on road safety - which in Victoria are the vast majority of camera fines.

[b0son]

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

I don't think there's a legitimate case for fines circa 10km/h over the speed limit having an impact on road safety

They'll of course argue that there is. One of the pre-eminent Aus roads safety researchers found crash risk doubles every 10kph over the speed limit. The only problem is that he cherry-picked his data and analysed it in such a way as to show that relationship, but when re-analysed with a more complete dataset, another statistician found that relationship didn't hold true. What a surprise.

But even if it did hold true, so what? Double the crash risk is still 2x of stuff-all. The risk of you dying in a crash, doing average km each year, is once in several lifetimes worth of driving. It's frankly nonsense to be being policed over it.

[383hq]

No doubt they'll consider more fines, higher fines, and more police

Vicpol's social dividend was only $404 million from camera issued speeding fines in 21-22.

I'd be very surprised if agendas did not exist to increase cash flow, all in the name of safety, of course.
I doubt GOvCO would issue friendly reminders to "slow down"...


https://www.vic.gov.au/revenue-fines

[Tonz]

If this offends or upsets you I do appologise but how many ofthe single car crashes are accidents and not an attempt of destroying ones life.

Over here agroup of us are keenly aware of accidents and deliberate crashes

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Tonz

If this offends or upsets you I do appologise but how many ofthe single car crashes are accidents and not an attempt of destroying ones life.

Over here agroup of us are keenly aware of accidents and deliberate crashes

Would be minimal I reckon, like single digits, maybe low double digits tops.

My source is I pulled it out of my ***.

[XR Martin]

Unless someone leaves a note, you can't know for sure if it was an accident or deliberate. But I think the latter is far more common than you think or is reported.


Oh BTW the road toll is anyone who's died on a road or road related area. You trip on the gutter and hit your head and die? You go on the road toll. Jump off pedestrian bridge and land on the road? You go on the road toll.

[Falcon SXR8]

Phones are my main gripe. Take notice of people as they pass you and you will be amazed at how many have their faces in their laps. Give me someone a few ks over but watching where they are going over someone looking at their phone any day.

[Citroënbender]

IMO an excessive amount of policing is post-factum, and this emboldens rule-breakers.

There’s so much technology available to improve responsiveness, it’s just not employed - or often not even trialled. What became of the “Passbox” after its brief trial? Five years later, cyclists are no safer.

Why don’t mobile speed cameras have live oversight in an operations room, so if the potentially offending plate is identifiable there’s either an immediate flag put on the rego or if the owner has phone contact details with the registration authority they get a text to present themselves and explain ASAP, within a minute or two?

Why is it acceptable to prosecute littering on a stat dec, yet a driver failing to stop for pedestrians can’t be similarly fined?

Where is the option to “seal” a dash camera and its mounting, so its contents are legally admissible?

And I also believe - the safety campaigns need more real carrot. Imagine being snapped by a speed camera while below the speed limit or correctly stopped at lights and that being noted on your driving record, plus legally admissible as evidence of generally responsible conduct.

Why are the fines for holding a phone in a vehicle with inbuilt Bluetooth, not cripplingly higher than for vehicles delivered without? Why are custodial parents or guardians of school age children, not fined double for speeding in school zones?

And at least in NSW, the Police Assistance Line is all but useless. Wait times are so bad, people don’t bother holding.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Citroënbender

IMO an excessive amount of policing is post-factum, and this emboldens rule-breakers.

There’s so much technology available to improve responsiveness, it’s just not employed - or often not even trialled. What became of the “Passbox” after its brief trial? Five years later, cyclists are no safer.

Why don’t mobile speed cameras have live oversight in an operations room, so if the potentially offending plate is identifiable there’s either an immediate flag put on the rego or if the owner has phone contact details with the registration authority they get a text to present themselves and explain ASAP, within a minute or two?

Why is it acceptable to prosecute littering on a stat dec, yet a driver failing to stop for pedestrians can’t be similarly fined?

Where is the option to “seal” a dash camera and its mounting, so its contents are legally admissible?

And I also believe - the safety campaigns need more real carrot. Imagine being snapped by a speed camera while below the speed limit or correctly stopped at lights and that being noted on your driving record, plus legally admissible as evidence of generally responsible conduct.

Why are the fines for holding a phone in a vehicle with inbuilt Bluetooth, not cripplingly higher than for vehicles delivered without? Why are custodial parents or guardians of school age children, not fined double for speeding in school zones?

And at least in NSW, the Police Assistance Line is all but useless. Wait times are so bad, people don’t bother holding.

Something that makes me laugh is back in the day my older sister used to drive around with no licence, was in her late 20s before she bothered getting her Ps.

Ran a red and t-boned someone, oops.

Anyway, went to court for driving no licence, paid something like $80 for court costs and that was it - magistrate imposed no fine.

When she got her licence renewal she got a discount on good driving history, because she had no licence when she stacked the car driving no licence it didn't count

Driving no licence now carries massive fines/penalties, especially if you've got a suspended/cancelled licence.

[XR Martin]

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

Something that makes me laugh is back in the day my older sister used to drive around with no licence, was in her late 20s before she bothered getting her Ps.

Ran a red and t-boned someone, oops.

Anyway, went to court for driving no licence, paid something like $80 for court costs and that was it - magistrate imposed no fine.

When she got her licence renewal she got a discount on good driving history, because she had no licence when she stacked the car driving no licence it didn't count

Driving no licence now carries massive fines/penalties, especially if you've got a suspended/cancelled licence.

Pointless though, most people driving around with no licence don't care about the fines. They'll just keep racking up the fines, and keep driving anyway.

If I do 145 in a 100 zone, they'll impound my car. (Or crush it)
If I drive without my licence or drunk, I still keep the car.
The reason why a drunk driver keeps their car? Because to keep their licence they are required to have an interlock device. No car? No interlock and licence cancelled.
Maybe instead of impounding a speeder's car, they should instead limit the car to 100kmh or something.

[roKWiz]

With all the electronics and automatics gearboxes fitted to modern vehicles, I guess it will be only a matter of time before they are speed limited by GPS.

Us still driving around in our drug money old sh*tboxes will be getting all the fines to legislate us off the roads.