4 ms·

As a former Phoenix resident, I completely understand the resistance to speed cameras. They are always touted as a public safety measure, but widely regarded as

As a former Phoenix resident, I completely understand the resistance to speed cameras. They are always touted as a public safety measure, but widely regarded as little more than a revenue machine. In my experience, the trigger speed was always perilously close to the natural flow of traffic which (at least in the places where I have lived) is consistently the speed limit + some amount. The net effect was always a sudden, dramatic slowing of traffic in the camera zone followed by a return to business-as-usual. Edit: I should clarify that these were freeway speed cameras. Maybe they are more effective as a safety device in pedestrian-heavy areas, but I have no experience with the cameras is that context.

stephengillie 8y ago
Automation here encourages overreporting and other abuses - it's law enforcement automation, so an alternative would be to hire more officers to apply the law. Automating this work increases the amount of law applied for the same cost.
alexhutcheson 8y ago
The "natural flow of traffic" in Manhattan and other dense parts of the 5 boroughs is dangerously fast, and way over the posted speed limit. I don't think the arguments against freeway speed cameras really hold up in this context.
Flowsion 8y ago
In South Korea, this is taken to an extreme. Every freeway speed camera is indicated on the default Maps app. It beeps (shorter and louder as the camera gets closer) and then stops. So everyone just slows down as their maps beep and speed up again once they pass the camera. But, I think this is accepted practice and my suspicion is that a lot of these cameras aren't even real. Just by having them placed along the freeway every x metres, they force cars to constantly slow down.
- privacypoller 8y ago
  people dramatically slowing down then speeding up is likely more dangerous than everyone maintaining a speed higher than the posted limit, which makes the cameras a net negative from a safety perspective. Highways built for safety and limited speed differential across users is so much safer than limiting top speeds.
  - cimmanom 8y ago
    More dangerous to drivers (especially those inclined to drive at dangerous speeds), maybe. More dangerous for pedestrians? I'm not sure about that -- especially if nobody's obeying the limit in the first place, getting drivers to slow down at all is a good thing. Or do you like to have drivers speeding at 50MPH down the narrow side street (signed at 20MPH) your kids cross every day to get to school?
    - ghusbands 8y ago
      They're talking about freeways and highways, not narrow side streets.
cimmanom 8y ago
The cameras we just lost were in mostly-residential areas on mostly-side streets, and all in school zones. These aren't freeways. Every street in NYC is trafficked heavily by pedestrians, and that goes double near schools - where it's especially important for drivers to stick strictly to the speed limit.

stephengillie 8y ago

Automation here encourages overreporting and other abuses - it's law enforcement automation, so an alternative would be to hire more officers to apply the law. Automating this work increases the amount of law applied for the same cost.

alexhutcheson 8y ago

The "natural flow of traffic" in Manhattan and other dense parts of the 5 boroughs is dangerously fast, and way over the posted speed limit. I don't think the arguments against freeway speed cameras really hold up in this context.

Flowsion 8y ago

In South Korea, this is taken to an extreme. Every freeway speed camera is indicated on the default Maps app. It beeps (shorter and louder as the camera gets closer) and then stops. So everyone just slows down as their maps beep and speed up again once they pass the camera. But, I think this is accepted practice and my suspicion is that a lot of these cameras aren't even real. Just by having them placed along the freeway every x metres, they force cars to constantly slow down.

privacypoller 8y ago
people dramatically slowing down then speeding up is likely more dangerous than everyone maintaining a speed higher than the posted limit, which makes the cameras a net negative from a safety perspective. Highways built for safety and limited speed differential across users is so much safer than limiting top speeds.
- cimmanom 8y ago
  More dangerous to drivers (especially those inclined to drive at dangerous speeds), maybe. More dangerous for pedestrians? I'm not sure about that -- especially if nobody's obeying the limit in the first place, getting drivers to slow down at all is a good thing. Or do you like to have drivers speeding at 50MPH down the narrow side street (signed at 20MPH) your kids cross every day to get to school?
  - ghusbands 8y ago
    They're talking about freeways and highways, not narrow side streets.

cimmanom 8y ago

The cameras we just lost were in mostly-residential areas on mostly-side streets, and all in school zones. These aren't freeways. Every street in NYC is trafficked heavily by pedestrians, and that goes double near schools - where it's especially important for drivers to stick strictly to the speed limit.