Speed-camera threat — Doug Ford shows he's the irresponsible driver's best friend
-
Speed cameras are a regressive tax until the fees are proportionate to net worth (income is too easy to cheat with here in Canada).
Same with parking tickets.
The studies in the article have shown that they are reducing speeding in the city. Hopefully that translates to fewer fatalities and injuries, as well as reduced greenhouse gas emissions.
I agree that fines should be proportional to income (or net worth).
-
cross-posted from: https://sh.itjust.works/post/45991302
Ford calls speed cameras “nothing but a tax grab.” As do many reckless drivers. But surely he knows that speeding fines are not taxes. Even if they were, they’re voluntary: If you don’t want a speeding ticket, don’t speed.
…
In Ottawa, compliance with speed limits rose from from 16 per cent before speed cameras to 57 per cent after only three months, and to more than 80 per cent after three years. Instances of speeding at more than 15 km/h above the posted limit dropped from 14 per cent, pre-speed cameras, to less than one per cent after three years of the city using them.
A survey of more than 1,000 Ottawa residents, meanwhile, determined that of the 35 per cent of respondents who had been dinged with an speed camera fine, 69 per cent said it changed their driving behaviour. That’s what we want from these cameras.
And of course:
A study conducted by SickKids hospital in Toronto and published in July in the British Medical Journal’s Injury Prevention journal found that the use of speed cameras in school zones led to a 45 per cent reduction in speeding motorists, while the 85th percentile speed — the speed at or below which 85 per cent of the drivers travelled — dropped by almost 11 km/h. “The observed reduction in speed is likely important in reducing collisions and injuries,” the study noted
Nobody in this province follows the speed limit, so on the contrary to most commenters and especially Doug Ford, I’d much rather have automated enforcement be made more widespread, especially in areas with higher road-related fatalities.
Also, unlike a cop being assigned to do random speed checks, speeding cameras dont have a racial bias.
-
The article shows some of the positive effects speed cameras are having on drivers. Feel free to disagree, but it’s nice to see interventions that make roads safer.
Well it doesn’t actually say that. There’s no measurments of accidents or injuries here. The only metrics are reduced speeding in the measured areas. I don’t tend the speed much, but I do now avoid the areas with cameras - I just cut through smaller residential streets more. How do we know this is any safer?
-
It’s a minor offense until it kills someone. These aren’t cameras on freeways, they’re in school zones and next to parks.
-
Well it doesn’t actually say that. There’s no measurments of accidents or injuries here. The only metrics are reduced speeding in the measured areas. I don’t tend the speed much, but I do now avoid the areas with cameras - I just cut through smaller residential streets more. How do we know this is any safer?
There are three instances of positive change in the original post.
-
Nobody in this province follows the speed limit, so on the contrary to most commenters and especially Doug Ford, I’d much rather have automated enforcement be made more widespread, especially in areas with higher road-related fatalities.
Also, unlike a cop being assigned to do random speed checks, speeding cameras dont have a racial bias.
I completely agree. Good point about racial bias - I hadn’t thought of that.
-
But it’s been in place for decades in other cities already? Winnipeg has had speed radar since early 2000s. The cameras only cover the roads. The cameras are marked in Google and apple maps, and it’s just part of life; of you speed or blow a red light, you get a ticket in the mail with a pic of your plate.
I’m not advocating for surveillance here, but I think there are better uses for this energy.
-
There are three instances of positive change in the original post.
It’s all measured speed reduction in the camera zones. That doesn’t mean people are driving safer, or slower on average even. That people have changed their behavior doesn’t mean it’s safer. More use of smaller residential roads that don’t have cameras is probably not safer. Allowing rich people to speed as much as they want and just pay a fee probably isn’t safer either.
-
It’s all measured speed reduction in the camera zones. That doesn’t mean people are driving safer, or slower on average even. That people have changed their behavior doesn’t mean it’s safer. More use of smaller residential roads that don’t have cameras is probably not safer. Allowing rich people to speed as much as they want and just pay a fee probably isn’t safer either.
Collisions at lower speed generally result in less serious injuries. Bringing drivers back down to posted speed limits should provide safety benefits. That has shown a direct reduction in collisions and injuries.
Allowing rich people to speed as much as they want and just pay a fee probably isn’t safer either.
Fees should definitely scale with income or wealth. I’m not sure I’ve seen anyone on Lemmy argue against that.
-
cross-posted from: https://sh.itjust.works/post/45991302
Ford calls speed cameras “nothing but a tax grab.” As do many reckless drivers. But surely he knows that speeding fines are not taxes. Even if they were, they’re voluntary: If you don’t want a speeding ticket, don’t speed.
…
In Ottawa, compliance with speed limits rose from from 16 per cent before speed cameras to 57 per cent after only three months, and to more than 80 per cent after three years. Instances of speeding at more than 15 km/h above the posted limit dropped from 14 per cent, pre-speed cameras, to less than one per cent after three years of the city using them.
A survey of more than 1,000 Ottawa residents, meanwhile, determined that of the 35 per cent of respondents who had been dinged with an speed camera fine, 69 per cent said it changed their driving behaviour. That’s what we want from these cameras.
And of course:
A study conducted by SickKids hospital in Toronto and published in July in the British Medical Journal’s Injury Prevention journal found that the use of speed cameras in school zones led to a 45 per cent reduction in speeding motorists, while the 85th percentile speed — the speed at or below which 85 per cent of the drivers travelled — dropped by almost 11 km/h. “The observed reduction in speed is likely important in reducing collisions and injuries,” the study noted
I suppose that would be great as long as the the speeding fines are proportional to income.
-
cross-posted from: https://sh.itjust.works/post/45991302
Ford calls speed cameras “nothing but a tax grab.” As do many reckless drivers. But surely he knows that speeding fines are not taxes. Even if they were, they’re voluntary: If you don’t want a speeding ticket, don’t speed.
…
In Ottawa, compliance with speed limits rose from from 16 per cent before speed cameras to 57 per cent after only three months, and to more than 80 per cent after three years. Instances of speeding at more than 15 km/h above the posted limit dropped from 14 per cent, pre-speed cameras, to less than one per cent after three years of the city using them.
A survey of more than 1,000 Ottawa residents, meanwhile, determined that of the 35 per cent of respondents who had been dinged with an speed camera fine, 69 per cent said it changed their driving behaviour. That’s what we want from these cameras.
And of course:
A study conducted by SickKids hospital in Toronto and published in July in the British Medical Journal’s Injury Prevention journal found that the use of speed cameras in school zones led to a 45 per cent reduction in speeding motorists, while the 85th percentile speed — the speed at or below which 85 per cent of the drivers travelled — dropped by almost 11 km/h. “The observed reduction in speed is likely important in reducing collisions and injuries,” the study noted
It’s all honky-dorey, perfectly legitimate, completely okay until you get your first speed camera ticket in the mail.
Makes a lot more sense if, by law, these speed cameras have to be paired with an instant feedback sign that shows your speed, just before the photo is taken, so you are not caught unawares several weeks later.
-
It’s all measured speed reduction in the camera zones. That doesn’t mean people are driving safer, or slower on average even. That people have changed their behavior doesn’t mean it’s safer. More use of smaller residential roads that don’t have cameras is probably not safer. Allowing rich people to speed as much as they want and just pay a fee probably isn’t safer either.
It’s all measured speed reduction in the camera zones. That doesn’t mean people are driving safer, or slower on average even.
Few months back City of Barrie released some info that showed the reduction in speed was long lasting, well after the removal of the speed cameras. This shows a positive change on drover behaviour, even if it is only for the school zone, that’s a big win in my books.
More use of smaller residential roads that don’t have cameras is probably not safer.
Ignoring the assumption that traffic cameras cause decreases in AADT, when the alternative is people speeding through school zones, yes it is likely much safer. Fewer pedestrians, particularly kids which are notorious for not paying attention and are more likely to wander into lanes, means that it is a net positive for those areas.
Allowing rich people to speed as much as they want and just pay a fee probably isn’t safer either.
Is this any different than it currently is? Definitely isn’t making things worse.
-
The studies in the article have shown that they are reducing speeding in the city. Hopefully that translates to fewer fatalities and injuries, as well as reduced greenhouse gas emissions.
I agree that fines should be proportional to income (or net worth).
I’m pretty skeptical of those studies. In my city these cameras are everywhere yet every night I can walk outside and hear The Fast and The Furious wannabes screaming through the city at 200km/h, loud enough to wake the dead.
My dad has gotten nailed multiple times for going 41 in a 30 zone, thanks to these cameras being positioned to spot and ticket you the instant you cross a speed limit boundary. The $100 ticket wipes out his entire day’s earnings driving for Uber eats.
-
It’s all measured speed reduction in the camera zones. That doesn’t mean people are driving safer, or slower on average even.
Few months back City of Barrie released some info that showed the reduction in speed was long lasting, well after the removal of the speed cameras. This shows a positive change on drover behaviour, even if it is only for the school zone, that’s a big win in my books.
More use of smaller residential roads that don’t have cameras is probably not safer.
Ignoring the assumption that traffic cameras cause decreases in AADT, when the alternative is people speeding through school zones, yes it is likely much safer. Fewer pedestrians, particularly kids which are notorious for not paying attention and are more likely to wander into lanes, means that it is a net positive for those areas.
Allowing rich people to speed as much as they want and just pay a fee probably isn’t safer either.
Is this any different than it currently is? Definitely isn’t making things worse.
Logically, slower speeds should make safer streets. But it’s not 100% a sure thing. When people are in a hurry, they find other ways and that’s when things get more dangerous.
And no, traffic cams only give monetary fines not demerit points or a criminal record like if you get pulled over by a cop. They don’t assess who the driver is, so they can’t blame it on a particular person. So rich people don’t care at all about going fast in those areas - it’s just a fee to go fast to them. -
Logically, slower speeds should make safer streets. But it’s not 100% a sure thing. When people are in a hurry, they find other ways and that’s when things get more dangerous.
And no, traffic cams only give monetary fines not demerit points or a criminal record like if you get pulled over by a cop. They don’t assess who the driver is, so they can’t blame it on a particular person. So rich people don’t care at all about going fast in those areas - it’s just a fee to go fast to them.When people are in a hurry, they find other ways and that’s when things get more dangerous.
Can you try explaining this? I’ve reread it and can’t make sense of it. Are you saying that speed cameras INCREASE how much people hurry? I disagree. School safety zones are not big areas - if they’re having a notable impact on your length of drive, that’s weird. Forcing people to go 20km/hr slower through those zones via speed cameras shouldn’t add more than a couple of seconds onto a drive. Even if the zone was a km long, that’s a 30s difference going at 60 vs 40. You’re more likely to be caught at a streetlight longer than that.
So rich people don’t care at all about going fast in those areas - it’s just a fee to go fast to them.
Data isn’t showing that. Data, when released, shows top speeds of ~10km/hr over the limit once cameras have been in place. Demerits can’t be assigned until 15km/hr over.
-
When people are in a hurry, they find other ways and that’s when things get more dangerous.
Can you try explaining this? I’ve reread it and can’t make sense of it. Are you saying that speed cameras INCREASE how much people hurry? I disagree. School safety zones are not big areas - if they’re having a notable impact on your length of drive, that’s weird. Forcing people to go 20km/hr slower through those zones via speed cameras shouldn’t add more than a couple of seconds onto a drive. Even if the zone was a km long, that’s a 30s difference going at 60 vs 40. You’re more likely to be caught at a streetlight longer than that.
So rich people don’t care at all about going fast in those areas - it’s just a fee to go fast to them.
Data isn’t showing that. Data, when released, shows top speeds of ~10km/hr over the limit once cameras have been in place. Demerits can’t be assigned until 15km/hr over.
Yes, some people hit the gas just after the camera. They also peel off on smaller streets to ‘make up time’. I suspect these are people who are in a hurry / late, or just impatient. People do this on the highway too after clearing radar traps. Or after overtaking someone traveling slowly. I don’t know if the effect is significant. People are weird and side effects can be unexpected. I’m just not sure that we should totally assume cameras that slow down measured speeds actually increases safety.
I haven’t seen data like you mentioned- it seems strange that there wouldn’t be an array of speeders like anywhere else. I think most people’s complaints about these things are that they trigger at too close to the limit - doing 52 in a 50 zone is not unsafe, and can help with the flow of traffic. It probably depends on the area. I can afford a ticket, but I still avoid areas with cameras. With all the traffic calming stuff and cameras, I actually just avoid going out more and order stuff from Amazon instead of supporting my local stores. -
It’s all honky-dorey, perfectly legitimate, completely okay until you get your first speed camera ticket in the mail.
Makes a lot more sense if, by law, these speed cameras have to be paired with an instant feedback sign that shows your speed, just before the photo is taken, so you are not caught unawares several weeks later.
Trust me, I’ve been caught speeding, but I was a dumb driver. I learned my lesson. The problem isn’t the signage, the problem is people need to slow the fuck down, which I certainly did after paying $500 for my infraction.
-
These are not minor offences, we have traffic fatalities basically every day
-
I’m pretty skeptical of those studies. In my city these cameras are everywhere yet every night I can walk outside and hear The Fast and The Furious wannabes screaming through the city at 200km/h, loud enough to wake the dead.
My dad has gotten nailed multiple times for going 41 in a 30 zone, thanks to these cameras being positioned to spot and ticket you the instant you cross a speed limit boundary. The $100 ticket wipes out his entire day’s earnings driving for Uber eats.
for going 41 in a 30 zone, thanks to these cameras being positioned to spot and ticket you the instant you cross a speed limit boundary
So it’s working as intended, which is great
-
for going 41 in a 30 zone, thanks to these cameras being positioned to spot and ticket you the instant you cross a speed limit boundary
So it’s working as intended, which is great
Yes, a regressive tax on poor people. That’s why it’s going to be cancelled at the provincial level.
