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.

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.

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

Yes, a regressive tax on poor people. That’s why it’s going to be cancelled at the provincial level.

You said yourself that your dad is speeding on a 30 km/h zone lol that’s why it shouldn’t be cancelled

But if you want to push for having higher fines for the upper tax brackets, count me in. I agree that the fines should scale with income otherwise the rich can just pay to stay negligent.

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.

No, he’s driving a normal speed in a residential zone (40) and then the limit suddenly changes to 30 because a school is nearby but he doesn’t know that because he’s a food delivery driver who doesn’t know the area, so he gets a ticket instantly when the speed limit changes.

It’s a trap designed to collect revenue for the city. The fines can’t scale with income because the city doesn’t know your income (no city income tax).

This is a Pigouvian tax that has a conflict of interest between changing behaviour and collecting revenue. These are some of the worst sorts of laws. If they actually want to change behaviour then it’s simple: spend money to make the roads physically impossible to speed on. That means narrow 1 way streets, street parking to make it even narrower, etc.

Cities brought the problem on themselves by building suburbs with giant 2-lane stroads (streets that are really roads). Now they want to blame drivers for their mistake and punish them by collecting a tax. It’s classic pass-the-buck adversarial city planning. Total bullshit.

Frankly, at the fundamental root of the problem, is the fact that it is far too easy to ‘speed’ in a car. The basic design of the control system and the speedometer is to completely give the driver a completely erroneous feedback of the estimate of the speed of the car, and completely inadequate information on when and by how much the peed limit is being exceeded by. Not to mention the design of the road. Some roads are designed to give completely faulty feedback on the actual speed you are going. A driver should not have to completely keep watch on a sometimes inconspicuous speed indicator to know how fast they are going. That is why my suggestion for far more automatic radar signage that gives direct feedback on the speed the car is going at, compared to the established speed limit. especially in high-risk zones.

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?

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.

No, he’s driving a normal speed in a residential zone (40) and then the limit suddenly changes to 30 because a school is nearby but he doesn’t know that because he’s a food delivery driver who doesn’t know the area, so he gets a ticket instantly when the speed limit changes.

In so many words, he’s speeding through a school zone, so hopefully he’ll eventually learn to pay attention to school zone signs. If the school zone sign is occluded or for some reason not visible, he should take that to the city and easily use that to dispute the ticket.

The fines can’t scale with income because the city doesn’t know your income (no city income tax).

That’s not really an impediment. The city can know your income, even if they currently don’t.

has a conflict of interest between changing behaviour and collecting revenue

This is very easily fixed via policy, i.e. by forcing via legislation that automated enforcement revenue has to be dedicated to traffic calming projects.

This is very easily fixed via policy, i.e. by forcing via legislation that automated enforcement revenue has to be dedicated to traffic calming projects.

It could be, but it isn’t and it never will be. Governments never do this. They never accept limits on their own power. They always look to expand their power and fight against checks on it.

Whenever you think “maybe a government program for this would be great” you should follow up with “what if bad actors got elected?” and then recognize that bad actors are more likely to get elected due to the personality traits that politics select for.

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?

Aren’t residential streets lower speeds too, so unless you’re speeding there you’re going slower on purpose?

And if you don’t speed, why do you avoid areas with cameras?

It’s when they drop more arterial roads to low speeds like 50km/h or even less that taking shortcuts through residential roads becomes more enticing. And doing 55km/h or 60 in 50 zones is pretty normal when there’s no camera. Yes it’s technically speeding, but very common.

Sure but you haven’t actually answered either question

Frankly, at the fundamental root of the problem, is the fact that it is far too easy to ‘speed’ in a car. The basic design of the control system and the speedometer is to completely give the driver a completely erroneous feedback of the estimate of the speed of the car, and completely inadequate information on when and by how much the peed limit is being exceeded by. Not to mention the design of the road. Some roads are designed to give completely faulty feedback on the actual speed you are going. A driver should not have to completely keep watch on a sometimes inconspicuous speed indicator to know how fast they are going. That is why my suggestion for far more automatic radar signage that gives direct feedback on the speed the car is going at, compared to the established speed limit. especially in high-risk zones.

I think the reference to ‘shortcut’ explains the first. And accidentally going a few km/h over the limit is too great a risk if one might get a ticket, so that’s why it’s best to avoid the road with the camera even if you’re nominally trying to go at the speed limit. Do I have to spell it out any more?

And accidentally going a few km/h over the limit is too great a risk if one might get a ticket, so that’s why it’s best to avoid the road with the camera even if you’re nominally trying to go at the speed limit. Do I have to spell it out any more?

Yes please, because “going a few km/h over the limit” doesn’t trigger those cameras, there’s quite a generous threshold (manufacturers give it a healthy margin to not have it within measurement error variances). Generally you need to be 10km/h or more above the limit to get a ticket.

So if you are not speeding, there’s no reason to avoid routes with cameras. So do spell it out why would you prefer going 30 to 50km/h through a residential zone instead of going 50km/h through a normal arterial just because there are cameras.