I dont plan on slowing down either way.

I run a radar and i know what a legit threat is, plus when you drive on the same road everyday with a drone you know its a drone.

This will not change anything.

ps. A lot of new radars have GPS and a lock out system to just reject this false alert.

I'm pretty sure we've all seen the ads on TV which demonstrate how much more fatal an accident can be at 120kph as opposed to 100kph. This should be more than enough deterent for most people to slow down, the thought that you could walk away with a broken arm at 100kph in comparison to a broken neck at 120kph. The same goes for the person you hit!!

Also I'm all for better driver training, but lets not fool ourselves into thinking we can all be Michael Schumacher if we take a bloody driving course!! A little over confident and arrogant I think...no ones perfect we all get distracted everynow and again.

I reckon all the people that complain about revenue gathering (not really the point of this article but people harp on regardless) should consider the alternative. How else can you reasonably punish someone for speeding? Send them to jail? I'd like to see them moan having to take a day/week off work for community service as a punishment for speeding. There really are morons in this country...

Re-none #65. Agree totally except one important issue. Whatever "training" we endorse, it will only be as good as the "assessment." Today, all new drivers (no matter what age group we talk about) are "trained" to pass a "test". If that"test" is less than adequate for current road conditions, all we will achieve is allowing "less than competent" drivers to have access to the roads and to believe that they are in fact"good drivers" because they have passed a test and got their license. For many, this is far from the truth. So we allow many many incompetent drivers onto the roads and then spend a fortune trying to take them off!

Dolly #104 Banning radar detectors is a stupid idea. The real killers on our roads are the slow drivers who refuse to pull over to let people past because they are so selfish and think they own the roads which leads to people taking uneccesary risks to overtake.

Look this is great. The only people moaning here are the ones who have a need to speed. Don't do the crime if you don't want to fine. It's not rocket science. But I think that Acc could go one further than this and market to schools or community groups, or other interested parties, the opportunity to purchase 'drones' to install themseles in areas they are concerned with. This could easily recoup the projects cost (a mere $10k is well worth it compared to the social cost of speed-tards) and could nicely target cover over potentially sensitive areas.

just slow down you losers!

@102 - These are not about revenue gathering at all. If that was the case 70 REAL (NB: real means not a fake like the ones in this article) speed cameras would have been put in around the country. I say good on ACC for doing this. $10,000 on keeping the public a bit safer or $10,000 on fixing some tool because they were going too fast and ended up wrapped around a tree. I know where I'd rather spend my tax money...

Police radar speed dectection devices use different frequency bands to detect the speed of motorists. Police cameras installed in vans use the "K" band and police patrol vehicles use "Ka" band to detect speed. According to recent comments the dummy police radars being installed use the K band. Therefore, radar dectector users that disable the K band to avoid the dummy police radars will be unable to detect police camera vans.

A revoluntionary way to gather certain revenue from motorists by cops... Put simply, all motorists must provide bank account details to NZ Police and regular and compulsory deductions be made to help pay for and feed the ever burgeoning police force. Of course, such deduictions will eb written into law and non-contestable or recourse to court whatsoever.