21–30 of 186 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
the poor simply can respect the rules like the rich, right?
Nice idea in theory, but the fines aren't proportional to your income and in a lot of places people will point out the speed cameras are in a poor area - so whilst theoretically a rich person speeding would be fined too, they'll just never go past the camera.
"Some protesters feel speed cameras are solely a revenue-generating measure which takes money from the poor." This is also the case in Central and Eastern Europe. EDIT: Please read what I cited properly. The citation includes the "Some protesters feel ..." part, which is what I meant - that many people in central and eastern Europe feel the same, not that I feel they're right (what I think is irrelevant).
"Some protesters feel speed cameras are solely a revenue-generating measure which takes money from the poor." This is also the case in Central and Eastern Europe. EDIT: Please read what I cited properly. The citation includes the "Some protesters feel ..." part, which is what I meant - that many people in central and eastern Europe feel the same, not that I feel they're right (what I think is irrelevant).
In the Bay Area (San Francisco etc.), it's not necessarily "from the poor", but I've been punished in excess of $500 for not coming to a complete stop at a red light (only having slowed down). It's like this everywhere - it's a tool for extortion. And it's terrible.
But yeah, they're installed by 3rd parties and are usually just there to make money.
"Some protesters feel speed cameras are solely a revenue-generating measure which takes money from the poor." This is also the case in Central and Eastern Europe. EDIT: Please read what I cited properly. The citation includes the "Some protesters feel ..." part, which is what I meant - that many people in central and eastern Europe feel the same, not that I feel they're right (what I think is irrelevant).
I have very mixed feelings about this. I have been caught by a money-making camera myself(middle of a forest in rural Poland, far away from any houses, and yet it was still a "built-up" area with speed limit of 50km/h, because technically there wasn't a sign ending it after leaving the last town few km back), but on the other hand, there's so many people speeding in cities, frequently doing 100km/h or above on very b…
This is a strange interpretation of the statement. I would've assumed that the point being made is similar to that about the tax on cigarettes - the cost of a penalty charge is less significant to a rich person.
Why the hate for speed cameras? I love speed cameras because they make the roads safer for everyone. (And yes, once in a while I get a ticket as well, which is always a good reminder to drive safely.)
Then (and sorry, I know it's a tired thing to say) I had a kid.
And my god, the people who will go FAR over the limit right down your street where people are pushing prams, kids are walking along, etc. is astounding. It's enough to make you hate all drivers, though a moment of reflection reveals that even if 1 out of 100 drives dangerously, you'll remember that 1.
We need car control every bit as much as gun control, and speed cameras are a big part of that. People die when drivers are left unchecked. Disproportionately, it's people not inside cars.
Of course, people also die from the emissions coming out of the tailpipe, which is what these protesters seem to want to do freely. "Oh, your grandma has emphysema and lives near the road? Tough shit, I want my cheap diesel."
Why the hate for speed cameras? I love speed cameras because they make the roads safer for everyone. (And yes, once in a while I get a ticket as well, which is always a good reminder to drive safely.)
I'm personally generally dubious on speed limit based policies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean, if the speed limit says 50km/h, then you should be doing 50km/h, regardless of the size of your bank account. If someone hits a pedestrian and kills them because they were doing twice the speed limit, "yeah but I'm poor" is not a valid defence.
That's not the point. It costs a poor person more to speed because they have less money. Conversely it costs a rich person less to speed.
"Some protesters feel speed cameras are solely a revenue-generating measure which takes money from the poor." This is also the case in Central and Eastern Europe. EDIT: Please read what I cited properly. The citation includes the "Some protesters feel ..." part, which is what I meant - that many people in central and eastern Europe feel the same, not that I feel they're right (what I think is irrelevant).
In the Bay Area (San Francisco etc.), it's not necessarily "from the poor", but I've been punished in excess of $500 for not coming to a complete stop at a red light (only having slowed down). It's like this everywhere - it's a tool for extortion. And it's terrible.