81–90 of 284 posts
Can anyone tell me why speeding tickets aren't enforced with video cameras (like red-light tickets are)? It would seem to be much more accurate, much easier to enforce, and much harder to dispute. Irrespective of the rights or wrongs of speed limit laws, I do believe that consistent and efficient enforcement can only be a good thing.
Speed radars are good for speed traps, but not so great to prevent speed related incidents. They share the same fatal flaw with all other single-point speed meters: You can just slow down for a minute, while you pass by the speed trap, and then speed up for the rest of your trip. Instead, a 2-point speed meter (i.e. license plate readers every few miles, measuring time between matching reads) system is superior becau…
Possibly because the cost/benefit just isn't there. In the UK, the data shows that speeding (excessive speed for the conditions above the speed limit) is the primary cause in single digit percentage of accidents. I believe there's data from 1996 and 2007 for this, will dig it out when I'm not on mobile. If you want to spend money on accident prevention, there's much better things to target than speeding.
Speed radars are good for speed traps, but not so great to prevent speed related incidents. They share the same fatal flaw with all other single-point speed meters: You can just slow down for a minute, while you pass by the speed trap, and then speed up for the rest of your trip. Instead, a 2-point speed meter (i.e. license plate readers every few miles, measuring time between matching reads) system is superior becau…
> I can't believe [average speed detector is] not implanted at least in all interstate freeways. They are very common in Australia. It takes a photo of your license plate, then another 10km (or whatever) down the freeway. If the two photos are less than x seconds apart, you get a speeding ticket.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a pretty short summary of a 44 page document. Can you elaborate a little more?
Sure. Do you want to live in a world where every time you violate the letter of the law you're penalized? Before you answer, consider that you're going to have to keep 100-200 years of law hot in memory to ensure your daily compliance.
I confess I was expecting to not care for this. I'm not sure how any of it should be surprising, as it seemed fairly straight forward analysis of the tools. That said, this was a ridiculously fun read. More detailed than expected for some parts, and always informative. I'm glad it did not come across as anti speed detectors. Really more of a "know the limitations."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Possibly because the cost/benefit just isn't there. In the UK, the data shows that speeding (excessive speed for the conditions above the speed limit) is the primary cause in single digit percentage of accidents. I believe there's data from 1996 and 2007 for this, will dig it out when I'm not on mobile. If you want to spend money on accident prevention, there's much better things to target than speeding.
I have yet to get into an accident, but I actively avoid walking across several streets in Seattle because of a combination of entitlement thinking (This road is mine because I'm in a car!), and pervasive speeding. I'm not the only one...I recently found out almost nobody on my side of a local road will cross the road due the same problem. The road, therefore, has become a barrier to commerce and has split a communit…
Can anyone tell me why speeding tickets aren't enforced with video cameras (like red-light tickets are)? It would seem to be much more accurate, much easier to enforce, and much harder to dispute. Irrespective of the rights or wrongs of speed limit laws, I do believe that consistent and efficient enforcement can only be a good thing.
The goal of speeding tickets is revenue generation not lowering speeds. It's essentially random taxation on people who drive quickly. Because of that they need mobile, disguisable, hand held units. Video from a handheld unit wouldn't be great for determining speed. Now, they could easily create combination LIDAR-Video boxes and mount them above traffic for clear speed calculations. But then people would learn where t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure. Do you want to live in a world where every time you violate the letter of the law you're penalized? Before you answer, consider that you're going to have to keep 100-200 years of law hot in memory to ensure your daily compliance.
Why bother asking a question when you word it in such a biased way? Obviously my answer is yes, that is the world I want to live in.
I am biased. To accept the idea of compliance with the law to the letter constantly is unreasonable. Roll 1-3 feet over the white stop line? Ticket. 1-2mph over the speed limit? Ticket.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a common myth. The camera is not your accuser; the state is, using the camera as evidence of your violation. It would be no different than a security camera catching you breaking into a building. The camera doesn't sue, the owner of the building does.
The "right to face your accuser" refers to witnesses. The state is _always_ the prosecutor in criminal cases (in the US, IANAL).
This entire line of reasoning would completely destroy any kind of automated crime detection (security systems, security cameras), which is ridiculous on its face.
Further, what happens when you commit a crime where there are no witnesses? People are rightfully convicted of crimes based on "things" rather than the testimony of a person who saw it, regularly.