Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Data journalism busts speeding cops, wins Pulitzer

articles.sun-sentinel.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 158 posts

Re: Data journalism busts speeding cops, wins Pulitzer

#91

Post by eru »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #85
joseph_cooney wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would have thought dealing with the consequences of speeding in their jobs (notifying families of the death of loved ones, seeing the terrible injuries caused) would have stopped them. I know a few people who work in that area and that stuff stays with them. For example - they've assured me I should never buy a motor bike.

(Shrug) There aren't any "consequences of speeding." If you hit something or kill somebody, you were doing something wrong besides speeding.

People are making small mistakes all the time. Lower speed gives you more time to correct your own and other people's mistakes.

Re: Data journalism busts speeding cops, wins Pulitzer

#92

Post by mmanfrin »

corwinstephen wrote: post #26
jere wrote: post #10

>The reporters found nearly 800 officers who reached speeds of 90-130 mph, many of them while off duty. The accidents caused by officers driving at high speeds had caused at least 320 crashes since 2004, killing or maiming 21 people. That's such a horrifying statistic if true. Even at their peak, homicide offending rates in the US were at around 20 per 100,000; assault rates about 10 times as high: http://bjs.gov/con…

Frustrating? Yes. Shocking? No. Did anyone really believe that taking a job as a police officer somehow suppressed these people's natural desire to drive fast? Hell, that's probably what make them join the force in the first place. Sure, it's irresponsible and illegal for off-duty officers to speed, but it's also irresponsible and illegal for regular citizens to speed, and yet that doesn't seem to stop them from doin…

  Do you hold them to a higher level of moral responsibility during their off time because of what they do for a living?
Absolutely.

Re: Data journalism busts speeding cops, wins Pulitzer

#93

Post by eru »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #65
fyi80 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Number of times I have stopped for gas on a 30-mile stretch of local toll road: 0. Why would someone stop, just to get an excuse to speed later, at the same average? The few people drag-racing, maybe. Not the vast majority who want to to arrive at destination ASASP. You are conjuring up a ridiculous hypothetical and claiming it is the common case.

>Why would someone stop, just to get an excuse to speed later, at the same average? You do understand that there are service plazas on toll roads. People stop for gas because they need gas, not because they want to speed. But once someone has stopped, or intends to stop before the toll booth, they're no longer subject to the timer and end up creating a dangerous speed differential against the drivers who are.

If you stopped, nobody forces you to speed up. (And they could still put some police people on the beat, just to check up on the stoppers.)

Re: Data journalism busts speeding cops, wins Pulitzer

#94

Post by eru »

catshirt wrote: post #66
fyi80 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Number of times I have stopped for gas on a 30-mile stretch of local toll road: 0. Why would someone stop, just to get an excuse to speed later, at the same average? The few people drag-racing, maybe. Not the vast majority who want to to arrive at destination ASASP. You are conjuring up a ridiculous hypothetical and claiming it is the common case.

number of times you've not stopped for gas which are relevant: 0 the point is that if you intend to stop, or must stop, you are free to speed without fear of automatic ticketing.

So how's that worse than the current situation?

Re: Data journalism busts speeding cops, wins Pulitzer

#95

Post by biot »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #85
joseph_cooney wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would have thought dealing with the consequences of speeding in their jobs (notifying families of the death of loved ones, seeing the terrible injuries caused) would have stopped them. I know a few people who work in that area and that stuff stays with them. For example - they've assured me I should never buy a motor bike.

(Shrug) There aren't any "consequences of speeding." If you hit something or kill somebody, you were doing something wrong besides speeding.

Yes, you were doing something wrong like not understanding physics involving the coefficient of friction, acceleration formulas, and the inability to see through solid objects to know that a child is about to step out on the road in front of your car at a distance where you could have stopped had you not been speeding.

Re: Data journalism busts speeding cops, wins Pulitzer

#96

Post by nitrogen »

dllthomas wrote: post #49
samolang wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regarding a (at least in the US) I think a big part of the problem is a system of laws that people generally agree is unjust (i.e. the drug laws)

In my mostly uninformed opinion, drug laws are a huge part of the problem in terms of public interfacing with the police. That said, while people may complain about particular speed limits, I don't think very many would call a cap somewhere below 120mph "unjust".

The maximum safe speed really depends on the road, current traffic, weather, and the capabilities of the car. I could imagine some locations permitting safe travel at 120+. Maybe the revenue currently earned from speeding tickets can be gained by offering a "license to speed" instead, with increased driver training, insurance, and vehicle inspection requirements.

Re: Data journalism busts speeding cops, wins Pulitzer

#97

Post by timthorn »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #52
RyJones wrote: post #12

John Allen Paulos has been pushing using toll data for speeding citations for decades, most recently here: http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/WhosCounting/t/story?id=979...

There are a number of problems with doing things like this. The first is that significant speed differentials are extremely dangerous. Uncalibrated speedometers are very common and very inaccurate. Anything that causes guaranteed enforcement is going to reduce safety because people will start religiously following their speedometer instead of the normal flow of traffic, so now you have people driving all different sp…

Average speed cameras are common in the UK. The flow of traffic adjusts so that the body of traffic is at the limit - we don't keep our eyes on the speedo, as enforcement only kicks in at limit+x mph, and a short duration deviation from speed isn't a problem. Most people have cruise control, and they won't need to check the speedo once set.

I've no empirical evidence, but driving on main roads with average speed cameras feels safer.

Re: Data journalism busts speeding cops, wins Pulitzer

#98

Post by MertsA »

sfall wrote: post #81

ok I really am not getting this it says: "the technical challenges were daunting because the raw information does not allow speed calculations,'' Maines said. "We came up with some neat tricks to overcome that, and it's great that the judges recognized our hard work."" I am crazy to think that the raw data would be something like: account#, toll location, time And this would be the bare minimum. How would determining…

Yea but you can't even begin to imagine how big the excel spreadsheet was.

Re: Data journalism busts speeding cops, wins Pulitzer

#99

Post by eru »

biot wrote: post #95
CamperBob2 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Shrug) There aren't any "consequences of speeding." If you hit something or kill somebody, you were doing something wrong besides speeding.

Yes, you were doing something wrong like not understanding physics involving the coefficient of friction, acceleration formulas, and the inability to see through solid objects to know that a child is about to step out on the road in front of your car at a distance where you could have stopped had you not been speeding.

Also, even if the kid (or someone else) is completely at fault, they shouldn't have to die for their mistakes.

Re: Data journalism busts speeding cops, wins Pulitzer

#100

Post by CamperBob2 »

biot wrote: post #95
CamperBob2 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Shrug) There aren't any "consequences of speeding." If you hit something or kill somebody, you were doing something wrong besides speeding.

Yes, you were doing something wrong like not understanding physics involving the coefficient of friction, acceleration formulas, and the inability to see through solid objects to know that a child is about to step out on the road in front of your car at a distance where you could have stopped had you not been speeding.

So how does a number on a sign at the side of the road have anything to do with any of those things?
Post reply on HN