Speeding Cameras

[AJ]

http://www.myfoxtwincities.com/myfox...Y&pageId=3.1.1

I'm 100% for this.

[A//// Guy]

Why not just raise the speed limit? lol

I dont like that idea, $$$ project.

[JustROLLIN]

Originally Posted by DSMStyle

http://www.myfoxtwincities.com/myfox...Y&pageId=3.1.1

I'm 100% for this.

Why?

Dont you ever do more than 11mph over the speed limit? I know I do and would much rather run my chances with patrols than a camera.

[asshanson]

The catch is that the photo has to match your driver's license before they can send you a ticket. That way if someone else is driving your car you don't get the ticket.

Limo tint in the front FTW! Or I guess you could drive with a mask on.....

I'm pro-cameras instead of traffic cops on the interstates in the cities.

[AJ]

"Drivers got the message and the average speed dropped from 73 miles an hour to 64. The accident rate was cut nearly in half and police say that reduction in collisions has translated into a savings between $10 and $11 million."

That right there is enough to make me enjoy this idea and the first place I'd love to see this is on 94/35w around downtown. Crazy fucking drivers at all times during the day. Just last week I was heading home from bowling and some fuck in a honda must of blasted though the Lowry tunnel at 80+ just loving the sound of his exhaust. He alsmost clipped a car with 2 kids in the back.

While it's true, many people can control their cars at higher speeds, many can't. And the way we are today everyone is in a hurry. If we have these I think it will give the cops more revenue to put more froce on the streets to worry about crime and everything else that needs attention.

I say go for it and if you don't like it, don't speed by over 10 mph. If I get a ticket from speeding it's my own fault isn't it? The speed limit is the speed limit. You still have your 10mph safe zone which is pretty standard for drivers today. The weird thing is I find myslef setting the cruise at around 4-5 mph over the speed limit on most days when I'm not in rush hour traffic.

But this is just my opinion, you guys feel free to have your own but don't playa hate for me having my own thoughts on this one.

[92EvilTalon]

Granted I dont live there anymore but.... I love to see this happen. I am for this too. Yes I speed hell I do five over all the time. So if you don't speed then why say no to this idea. I also like the photo matching to get the ticket. If you think about it..have your wife register your car in her name. And then there you are out of a ticket. But why speed it only gets you in trouble.

[rst95eclipse]

Okay. So you install these camera which cost a ton of taxpayer money. Then you'll have smart people like me who cheat the system by driving 20-25mph over and wear a mask/glasses, because there are not any cops on the roads and I could get away with it. That isn't safe.

[AJ]

Originally Posted by rst95eclipse

Okay. So you install these camera which cost a ton of taxpayer money. Then you'll have smart people like me who cheat the system by driving 20-25mph over and wear a mask/glasses, because there are not any cops on the roads and I could get away with it. That isn't safe.

Well considering we have unit already installed form the red light carmeas that will work for this it won't cost all that much. And it will pay for itself in no time.

And come one, be realistic, your not going to drive around with a fucking mask on to prevent from getting caught. And if you are, I'd like to know the route you take on a daily basis so I can either avoid it or find a nice picnic spot to sit and watch you drive by someday.

I'm sure this will have support and opposition just like everything else. So it's fine that everyone has some thoughts and opinions on it that may go either way.

If it happens I'll embrace it. If not, no big stress lifted or gained on my part.

[curt_gendron]

I caught part of the fox 9 story last night. I really hate the idea of more cameras. Those things are damn expensive. If you only put a few of them up, everyone will know where they are and just slow down in those spots. If you put a bunch of them up, it will cost a fortune to run and maintain.

later,
Curt

[rst95eclipse]

No doubt that it will be a money maker, as long as the media doesn't do a segment showing how to beat the system. If it takes wearing a mask to get out of it, I'm sure a ton of people would do it and face it you would too - if you were a speeder. My opinion is that it might cause more harm than good. At first it would make a ton of money, then people would end up using roads with the cameras not installed or again wear masks, which is not safe.

The question is: is speeding really that bad in the cities? There are certainly a few people that go way too fast. It might cause more harm than good. I would certainly be one to throw a wrench in this. Soon there will be cameras everywhere. I really don't want to be watched everytime I'm outside my house. To me, it's a privacy issue, not that I don't want speeders off the road.

FYI, I don't speed that bad, but I do go 10 over quite a bit.

[JustROLLIN]

I am looking at it from a strictly self-involved level. The fact that I have a radar detector and a sharp eye have saved me from any speeding tickets to date. "Knock on wood." But, with the new system I would not have a chance at avoidiing the ticket if I am speeding. From a "good for society" standpoint, yes, it sounds great. But, for me personally, I would rather not see it.

[rst95eclipse]

Money isn't the issue. They'll definately make money in the long run, which is why many people won't like them.

[1ViciousGSX]

It's just a cat & mouse game anyway. If the government didn't want people speeding they would regulate the max speed of new vehicles to be 70mph off the show room floor with built in shut down for tampering with the car.

READ THIS

I read an article a few years back in Car & Driver about Arizona and it's running the read light cameras. It's all about the $$$, and a little safer roads. They actually moved the sensor further into the intersection so that if the light turned red, they had a better chance of getting a picture of you passing through the intersection. They basically took away the "commited to the intersection" gap.

A little something from another website related to Mesa, Arizona.
"Vendor, and term: The vendor was Lockheed Martin IMS, now ACS. The contract was signed in Nov. 1999 and runs until April 30, 2005.
Fees: Until June 1, 2001, the vendor received $48.50 each for the first 20,000 paid citations (combined red light camera and speed camera) per year (calendar year or contract year?), $39 for the next 20,000, and $21 for those above 40,000.
Beginning June 1, 2001 the two types of cameras have separate compensation schedules. The vendor receives $73 each for the first 900 red light camera tickets paid each month, $65 for the next 300, and $48.50 for those above 1200. For speed camera tickets, the vendor receives $51 for each one paid."

[FattyBoomBatty]

Originally Posted by 1ViciousGSX

It's just a cat & mouse game anyway. If the government didn't want people speeding they would regulate the max speed of new vehicles to be 70mph off the show room floor with built in shut down for tampering with the car.

Yeah, that'll never happen. No one would buy new cars and sales would plummet. Maybe that's a good thing - global warming would be reduced.
Think of the sales of used cars after that. My quest would be like gold. lol.

I was caught by a red light camera once when I was driving a moving truck for Sorensens. They got the ticket, but transferred it to me since I was driving. Although, it proved that they couldn't tell who the driver was. I think I should get my money back.

They just need to switch to mass transit everywhere in the main city arear. remove all the roads and just have a bunch of bumper cars that only go 20mph. build a wall around the city with big parking ramps and increase 494/694 to 8 lanes per side and straighten that mofackey out. werd.

[rst95eclipse]

Originally Posted by FattyBoomBatty

I was caught by a red light camera once when I was driving a moving truck for Sorensens. They got the ticket, but transferred it to me since I was driving. Although, it proved that they couldn't tell who the driver was. I think I should get my money back.

You should not have been responsible for paying that ticket. Unless you legally consented to pay the ticket, either before such as in your contract or after by agreeing, it is the responsibility of the company you work for to pay the ticket. The truck is there property (although it does not matter), however when you are at work they are responsible for any and all actions which you carry out.

Example: if you are in an accident with another car, it does not matter that you crashed the car. It is the company's insurance policy that picks up the damages, not yours. This same concept can be applied to your instance.

[CDeutsch]

If you want to make the roads safer start with banning cell phones and make it harder to get a license. Fuck these cameras. They're 100% motivated by money not safety.

[CVD]

Originally Posted by CDeutsch

If you want to make the roads safer start with banning cell phones and make it harder to get a license. Fuck these cameras. They're 100% motivated by money not safety.

Exactly. FUCK cameras. They are completely motivated by revenue.
We have the worst most ass backwards setup ever conceived for usage of public roadways. It's really pathetic. Speed does NOT cause accidents, it causes more severe injuries when accidents occur. What causes accidents? Shitty drivers. SO what can we do about shitty drivers? Lets start with a *little* more education. Who here honestly remembers jack shit from their drivers ed. class? Most drivers do not understand the simplest of driving tasks. How to work a 4 way stop, how to use the left lane to pass and keep right at all other times, how to yield to a vehicle that has the right of way, how to signal a turn, etc.
Distractions need to be kept to a minimum. I routinely drive 10-15mph over on the highway, but I do so safely because I am conscientious and pay attention to what the hell I'm doing. I can go miles with the radio turned up and not be able to tell you what song was just playing because I was paying attention to the road. I cant and wont drive while on the phone.
Look at countries like Germany. They have their shit sorted out. Freeways that are built to handle traffic at 100+mph. Cars that are built for such conditions and inspected for safety (especially brakes). A drivers license is much more expensive than it is here and much more difficult to obtain. And a DWI isnt a slap on the wrist and a small fee. In Germany, a country in which everyone drinks beer (it's even served at colleges and drank on lunch breaks from work), the blood alcohol limit for operating a motor vehicle is 0.00 and punishable by revocation of your drivers license for several years.

I take driving seriously, if I didnt I would take the fuckin bus. And BS like this in the name of "safety" really ticks me off. I know tons of people that dislike driving, and because of this they find other things to do while driving, like being on the phone or doing their makeup or whatever. People like this should be offered an alternative to driving to keep them off the roads. Speed enforcement is not only attempting to correct the wrong problem, it's trying to correct that problem the wrong way. I dont need a sign and a camera to tell me what a safe speed is on a given road; thanks, but I can think for myself.

[DoughtCom]

Wait... aren't the red light cameras off because of the whole fact that they can't prove who's driving the vehicle? I thought it was a local state law that prevented camera's like this. I haven't heard about this in a while maybe the changed the law by now, regardless I would like to know.

[scheides]

F*CK THIS! I saw this story on the news last night too and I think it is STUPID. It's motivated by two things. Number one: MONEY. They think yea, spend a crap-load on this technology and equipment and we will rake in hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines. WHY WHY WHY is this a rational way of being for the better good? Sh*t like this should NOT be motivated by money. It should be motivated by SAFETY, which brings me to number two: SAFETY. They want to cut down on the 'severe' number of traffic deaths. In this story they go on to say there were 150 traffic-related deaths last year in MN, or one death every 2.4 days. How bad of a problem is this? Where's the perspective? Here's some perspective for you: the previous set of stories on the news was about murders in Minneapolis (not MN, just Minneapolis). How many were there? They talked about at least 5, if not more, maybe more like 7. On a Monday.

Which is more of a problem?

On a side note, a word from the UK. They have traffic cameras all over the UK for this very purpose. First, they were unmarked and declared unlawful. So, they put up signs everywhere around them. But guess what someone came up with? A GPS-based fuzz-buster. It alerts you when you near any of the known traffic cameras. It has a small phone port on the side of it so you can update it.

[tpunx99GSX]

a lot of the times at least in Orange County, CA, they have these cameras set up at stop lights that take your picture. but the thing is is that they often are owned and manned by third party companys. So when they send the ticket in the mail you can easily get out of the ticket being that its not handed out by an officer or the city or state. I dont know how it would be in MN but thats the way it is here.