There will always be new people that speed. And people not knowing the place that speed.

… Where a human cop would light you up, slowing down all the traffic around you to safer levels, and give you immediate feedback.

But no you’ll just get the same ticket for 10 over 5 days in a row before you notice the camera, and then get 5 tickets in the mail a month later.

Have you considered installing the roundabouts anyway and removing the driving licences of those incapable of manoeuvring around a simple roundabout?

Driving is not a right. If they can’t perform simple manoeuvres without endangering others, they shouldn’t be controlling a machine that can easily accidentally kill.

It doesn’t help if this was a long time ago, but you could contest the ticket with the information you gathered.

I know someone who got a ticket but the sign was obscured by a tree branch. After contesting the ticket, the ticket was dropped and the signage was fixed

I agree. My point is the problem is bad drivers are bad drivers so roundabouts, etc are a waste and won’t do anything to solve the issue.

You get less frustrated on a road with no posted limits anywhere that jsut naturally nakes you want to drive a speed that feels safe, and happens to be 30kph.

Nah, I don’t believe that’s what happens, because we’ve had so many single vehicle crashes because people have no idea what feels safe. They drive like they’re behind a screen, like a video game. Except that screen is a windshield and their face can go through it.

Someone going 100km/h in a 40 zone is an asshole who has no regard for human life. No road design will make them care, and the solution to that problem is to not allow certain people to drive.

Equip vehicles with behaviour sensing tech, and if someone is routinely driving aggressively, not stopping when they should, speeding, and parking in areas that put others in danger, they should lose their license.

No, but $100+ to a poor person could be the difference between literal life and death.

Sure, but nobody is compelling someone to break traffic laws. Someone who can’t afford a fine will probably drive way more cautiously.

But very few poor people can even afford a car these days, so this doesn’t seem like a real concern.

The solution to this is sliding scale fines. The better off you are the more you get fined.

I do agree with that. And more than that, the consequences should include lost time. Imagine some rich asshole who has to do 40 hours of community service. They’d look like a total ass in front of their boss or employees.

Our cameras directly benefit the community, so people who destroy them here are criminals with no redeeming justification.

Surely with Toronto Police Services’ budget they could better protect speed cameras if they wanted to

Fuck it, gotta go fast. It would go faster though if all the office workers just took a bus or train. As a service tech, the traffic caused by unneeded trips is maddening when It takes me 45min to go 10km.

Yes, yes, ban all cars, cars bad, drivers bad, noxious exhaust bad, aggressive drivers bad, and so on and so on, ad infinitum. See y’all in December-March at -40^0^C on your electric scooter that is totally non-polluting (what? is electricity totally non-polluting?) trying to navigate uncleared, dilapidated, pot-holed. roads to get anywhere.

Or better still, let’s spend billions beginning with car-friendly infrastructure destruction; neglect regular road, bridge, and tunnel maintenance; and create nodes of community: 15-min walking cities. (*walking times vary by mobility, weather, and your health).

Well, villages.

Well, enclaves.

Well, compounds.

Do car-haters ever think farther than the end of their noses? Do they know what cause and effect is? Do they understand that 15-min walking cities make NIMBY communities? New mental health facility? NIMBY. New correctional facility? NIMBY. New addictions treatment center? NIMBY. Who gets them? The Untermensch who cannot afford to resist their placement.

All in the name of regressing away from cars and making tribal enclaves of like-minded, equally righteous, and (perhaps, most importantly) fiscally advantaged homogeneity.

Hating on cars is the tissue paper veneer of classism and, by extension, racism.

You really want to fight climate change? Too late: you have missed that during your fixation on one aspect (exactly as the petro-industry wanted) of the fight. Now start looking at how you’re going to survive it’s effects. Cause while you were raging against cars, we have passed the PNR on climate devastation.

And if your scooter doesn’t have A/C, it’s pretty useless in the April-November +40^0^C period as well. Because that’s what climate change is: extremes.

They solve the average driver. A certain number of drivers are jsut shit that need their licences removed, there’s no question about that.

But let’s consider the majority, myself for example.

I’m keenly aware of vulnerable road users, and active at the municipal and provincial levels in improving road safety, I take active and public transportation whenever practical.

When I lived in Montréal, I rarely sped, logs of questionable accuracy show somewhere around 10% of the time. Now that I’m in Kingston it’s around 80% of the time.

I’m even a less aggressive driver in Kingston, but the geometry of the roads here leads me to unconsciously speed a lot.

At no point did the article claim a desire to ban cars, we are just asking cars to go the posted limit. The idea that hating car dependancy is classist and racist is absurd. Providing free public transit can be one of the most effective ways to lift people up in society. Plenty of people would use their electric scooter in the winter. Tons of people have fun all winter in cold conditions riding snow mobiles, the same gear that works for them could keep a scooter rider warm. The bigger issue for scooter riders is our cities refuse to maintain safe infrastructure for them.

Demands citation. Makes claim. Leaves no citation. Stay classy, San Diego.

They just have to pretend that every speed camera is a Millionaire. Considering anticipated revenue they may as well be.

UK we have had speed cameras for ages. There was a trend for people to either spray paint the lens or even firebomb the camera. So they had to put in a second (video) camera mounted as high as possible to protect the first camera, quite amusing that a safety camera has to be kept safe by another safety cameras, its cameras all the way down.

Personally I think speed cameras that monitor a fixed point are pretty dumb unless that fixed point is an accident black spot such as outside a school or a red light camera for dangerous set of traffic lights. Its far better to have average speed cameras for a large section of road but those are more costly as you need way more cameras to make them work outside of motorways as you need to cover all the junctions properly.

Latest cameras we have in testing can see if you do not have your seat belt done up or are using your phone. Just stopping people from using their phone has to be the biggest step forward we can make with modern road safety.

57-50=17? Did you attend school in America, or something? ChatGPT spit that answer out for you?

Best of luck with that. Many drivers don’t like walking. People will fight for the closest parking space to the door of a gym, for crissake.

Instead of wasting money on speed cameras and reducing speeds, we should be aggressively ticketing distracted drivers and pedestrians, and people who struggle to reach the limit in the first place.

Traffic calming designs and devices should be preferred over speed cameras.

Narrow streets, chicanes, pedestrian zone height transitions, narrowing the street at pedestrian crossings, etc.