4 ms·

What is needed is consistent enforcement. People speed because, most of the time, there are no repercussions. Speed traps feel unfair because they are so rare

What is needed is consistent enforcement. People speed because, most of the time, there are no repercussions. Speed traps feel unfair because they are so rare and arbitrary. A simple solution, blanket our roads with camera speed enforcement everywhere making it consistent and objective. Equip cars with warning lights giving people a chance to slow down before getting the ticket.

fooblitzky 7y ago
This is absolutely correct. If you want people to start obeying the speed limit, start enforcing it with automated cameras. It works in countries that do it. I still don't really understand the whole revenue-raising argument against enforcing speed limits. If you didn't break the law, you wouldn't have to pay the fine. No one is forcing you to speed.
rcoveson 7y ago
Consistent enforcement is an essential element of the rule of law. It's hard to balance against privacy concerns; it's definitely not obvious which is worse: A police force that can fine almost anybody on the road at any time because almost everyone is breaking the law, or a police force that always knows where your car is. Emotionally, I don't feel as strongly that I have a right to not be tracked when I got out in public as I do that I have a right to equal enforcement. The former seems like a detail of how law enforcement is carried out, the latter seems like a key difference between law and tyranny.
- francisofascii 7y ago
  I think the privacy concerns are valid but honestly can be mitigated. I think it is worth trying anyway. If things got out of hand, enough people would complain, and the legislature would reverse it.
topspin 7y ago
"A simple solution, blanket our roads with camera speed enforcement everywhere" I can't think of any problem with our traffic system that is bad enough to make your solution desirable. Not traffic deaths, arbitrary enforcement, efficiency... nothing.
- francisofascii 7y ago
  For me, speeding vehicles and distracted drivers represent the greatest threat to me and my family on a day to day basis. Why not mitigate it? Why it is not desirable to you? What are your concerns?
  - topspin 7y ago
    > Why not mitigate it? I encourage you to mitigate it. Drive less; that's a great way to mitigate your risk.
MrMorden 7y ago
In the US governments are only interested in photo enforcement when it's profitable. When laws permit cameras but prevent them from being a revenue source, the cameras go away every time.

fooblitzky 7y ago

This is absolutely correct. If you want people to start obeying the speed limit, start enforcing it with automated cameras. It works in countries that do it. I still don't really understand the whole revenue-raising argument against enforcing speed limits. If you didn't break the law, you wouldn't have to pay the fine. No one is forcing you to speed.

rcoveson 7y ago

Consistent enforcement is an essential element of the rule of law. It's hard to balance against privacy concerns; it's definitely not obvious which is worse: A police force that can fine almost anybody on the road at any time because almost everyone is breaking the law, or a police force that always knows where your car is. Emotionally, I don't feel as strongly that I have a right to not be tracked when I got out in public as I do that I have a right to equal enforcement. The former seems like a detail of how law enforcement is carried out, the latter seems like a key difference between law and tyranny.

francisofascii 7y ago
I think the privacy concerns are valid but honestly can be mitigated. I think it is worth trying anyway. If things got out of hand, enough people would complain, and the legislature would reverse it.

topspin 7y ago

"A simple solution, blanket our roads with camera speed enforcement everywhere" I can't think of any problem with our traffic system that is bad enough to make your solution desirable. Not traffic deaths, arbitrary enforcement, efficiency... nothing.

francisofascii 7y ago
For me, speeding vehicles and distracted drivers represent the greatest threat to me and my family on a day to day basis. Why not mitigate it? Why it is not desirable to you? What are your concerns?
- topspin 7y ago
  > Why not mitigate it? I encourage you to mitigate it. Drive less; that's a great way to mitigate your risk.

MrMorden 7y ago

In the US governments are only interested in photo enforcement when it's profitable. When laws permit cameras but prevent them from being a revenue source, the cameras go away every time.