5 ms·

How is it virtue signaling lol. I'm someone who speeds. I should work on it, but I have a habit of speeding. But I'm the first person in line wishing we had e

How is it virtue signaling lol. I'm someone who speeds. I should work on it, but I have a habit of speeding. But I'm the first person in line wishing we had extensive speed cameras and stopped letting cops pull people over. A speeding camera is impartial, it's not going to pull me over and grill me about who really owns the car as if a black guy can't own a nice car (and before you say it, standard operating procedure for cops is asking if it's your car, it's not asking if it's your car then insisting it's probably not) A speeding camera isn't going to unholster a weapon because my 2 seat car doesn't have a glovebox where they expected it to be A speeding camera doesn't care that "I'm not from around here" and isn't going to ask why I'm there and maybe give me a ticket because it was having a bad day and doesn't like the outsiders. - Whether we should ID for flights is it's own thing, but as long as we're doing it, I'm very for removing humans from the loop when it comes to unsophisticated enforcement. ie. AI shouldn't tell us who to stop, but it should be used when everyone is subject to the same stop

throwaway0a5e 6y ago
>A speeding camera is impartial, it's not going to pull me over and grill me about who really owns the car as if a black guy can't own a nice car Impartial like the bureaucrats who put the speed cameras in the poor neighborhoods but not the rich ones?
- leetcrew 6y ago
  source for this? in my area, speed cameras seem to correlate with schools more than anything else. if anything, there are more of them in wealthy areas.
  - throwaway0a5e 6y ago
    My point was that using speed cameras doesn't remove the potential for enforcement bias.
- BoorishBears 6y ago
  Below you say your point is "cameras don't remove enforcement bias, so your complaint is really that they don't remove racial bias at a systemic level in the legal system... Did it really need to be pointed out camera won't remove racial bias from the entire legal system? They remove bias at the "give a person who is speeding a ticket" level and more importantly they limit the damage that can be done at the moment of enforcement. Cameras don't get to go "I think I smell drugs" and have your car torn to bits. Cameras can't exploit a poor understanding of your rights and accidentally consent to a search that would have been illegal otherwise. Cameras don't "fear for their lives" and shoot someone. Bias in the places enforced needs something more than a camera, but that's common sense. By limiting the bias in who is targeted by a biased police enforcement structure and the strength of that enforcement at the moment of the infraction, you take away a lot of the power that is being given to a biased legal system. Right now they end up in those same neighborhoods, except instead of giving anyone who speeds a ticket, they pull over people who fit a profile of who they want to pull over. They turn "speed enforcement" into stop and frisk with a pretense. And to add insult to injury, their targets are usually the people who can afford this sort of attack the least. You need more than a camera to stop police from being out there, but by seriously raising the barrier for them to be able to stop people, you force them onto back footing in their harassment, which is a start.
ppseafield 6y ago
No, speeding cameras don't have the same problems as US police folk. That could be improved by having less shitty police. But that's not to say cameras don't have problems. Often they take grainy photos, and only a photo. Still images aren't proof that you were speeding, just proof that something triggered the camera. Plenty of things can trigger it, including software faults. Additionally it creates a horrible incentive for local government as a revenue stream with little to no incentive to fix something. Speeding cameras are unmanned, cheap, and just make money. And contesting a speeding camera ticket is so much more difficult than issuing it. All of this makes it easy to undermine due process.
- BoorishBears 6y ago
  Leave it to HN to miss the forest for the trees in such spectacular fashion. I'm not saying speeding camera are perfect, I'm saying if police weren't allowed to pull people over I would face less discrimination and avoid situations where armed people approach me prepared to shoot me for moving Compared to that grainy pictures is a joke. You're talking about false positives, do police not have false positives, and more importantly, hundreds of false negatives? The false negatives are what allow them to discriminate so readily, when most traffic is breaking a law it's easy to pick who you want. - And perverse incentive for speeding is only a problem with cameras? Is that also a joke? You think police departments don't have even worse incentives to stop people and seize their goods with little recourse? That's in addition to getting to write tickets? When 20% of a cities prosecution budget comes from forfeiture like Philadelphia's did in 2018 it should be no surprise cops are extremely happy to pull people over for reasons other than public safety... And contesting a speeding camera ticket is so much more difficult than issuing it? What does that even mean, is spending a day to multiple days contesting a speeding ticket not harder than it is for an officer to write a ticket? Even when the officer doesn't show up to court you've spent at least a day, if not more fighting it. - Of course, speeding tickets regardless of source show the true reality of our culture, that money changes the rules. So you can just pay an attorney who knows the judge personally and somehow your infraction is less serious...
  - ppseafield 6y ago
mulmen 6y ago
I am not eager to submit to a robot. What you are saying here is that it is more important to you to punish other people for breaking a rule than it is for you to take responsibility for your own behavior. You are seeking an outcome that is worse for everyone. Speed cameras perpetuate bias in painfully obvious ways. 1) Where do we put the cameras? This is susceptible to the same bias as individual police. 2) How do we apply the fines? Can some people get them reduced/waived? The legal system is the same and still biased.
- leetcrew 6y ago
  > What you are saying here is that it is more important to you to punish other people for breaking a rule than it is for you to take responsibility for your own behavior. You are seeking an outcome that is worse for everyone. I don't get this from GP at all. seems to me they are open to being held responsible for their behavior, but currently are not. I'm no fan of speed cameras, but would consider them an improvement over traffic stops for minor infractions. it has always struck me that speed limits are unreasonably low on US highways/arterials (but unreasonably high on surface streets). I suspect most people just don't care because enforcement is so inconsistent that they mostly just get away with whatever speed they choose. perhaps if the rules were more consistently enforced, there would be more interest in reforming them.
  - mulmen 6y ago
    I don't see how speed cameras can be considered an improvement. It seems the same to me with the added problem of being more scalable. Yes, cops are biased, but so are cameras.
    - BoorishBears 6y ago
      Did you read my reply and seriously not understand how cameras are better than police? How even if cameras were subject to all the biases police are (they're not, they're subject to a subset of those biases, and are subject in a much more quantifiable and combat-able way) Cameras are not able to kill people in self-defense. Cameras are not able to trump up or discard charges and offenses based on mood or inclination, or prejudice. (And before you miss the point and retort, but they can do that in court!!! Yeah... just like they can with the police officer's ticket. The point isn't "cameras fix the biased legal system!" it's cameras ferret out one facet of the legal systems biases) Cameras are not able to try and push an illegal search or exploit ignorance to convince someone to give up their rights Cameras are not able to seize assets on suspicion someone has too much cash on them. Cameras can't falsely detain people. - Seriously, again, there are real people in jail, rotting, for everything from having a ounce or two of weed on them, to literally nothing at all (see: plea deals) off what started as a routine traffic stop. Cops want people to think we need traffic stops because it's what allows them to stop murderers and rapists, for every murderer caught in a traffic stop 10 more people are inserted into the legal system on much lesser charges, who will be chewed up and spit out and experience an exponential chance of becoming a much more violent criminal It's blowimg my mind, do you really not see how cameras are less biased than humans in a meaningful way or are you being a contrarian for the sake of being contrarian?

throwaway0a5e 6y ago

>A speeding camera is impartial, it's not going to pull me over and grill me about who really owns the car as if a black guy can't own a nice car Impartial like the bureaucrats who put the speed cameras in the poor neighborhoods but not the rich ones?

leetcrew 6y ago
source for this? in my area, speed cameras seem to correlate with schools more than anything else. if anything, there are more of them in wealthy areas.
- throwaway0a5e 6y ago
  My point was that using speed cameras doesn't remove the potential for enforcement bias.
BoorishBears 6y ago
Below you say your point is "cameras don't remove enforcement bias, so your complaint is really that they don't remove racial bias at a systemic level in the legal system... Did it really need to be pointed out camera won't remove racial bias from the entire legal system? They remove bias at the "give a person who is speeding a ticket" level and more importantly they limit the damage that can be done at the moment of enforcement. Cameras don't get to go "I think I smell drugs" and have your car torn to bits. Cameras can't exploit a poor understanding of your rights and accidentally consent to a search that would have been illegal otherwise. Cameras don't "fear for their lives" and shoot someone. Bias in the places enforced needs something more than a camera, but that's common sense. By limiting the bias in who is targeted by a biased police enforcement structure and the strength of that enforcement at the moment of the infraction, you take away a lot of the power that is being given to a biased legal system. Right now they end up in those same neighborhoods, except instead of giving anyone who speeds a ticket, they pull over people who fit a profile of who they want to pull over. They turn "speed enforcement" into stop and frisk with a pretense. And to add insult to injury, their targets are usually the people who can afford this sort of attack the least. You need more than a camera to stop police from being out there, but by seriously raising the barrier for them to be able to stop people, you force them onto back footing in their harassment, which is a start.

ppseafield 6y ago

No, speeding cameras don't have the same problems as US police folk. That could be improved by having less shitty police. But that's not to say cameras don't have problems. Often they take grainy photos, and only a photo. Still images aren't proof that you were speeding, just proof that something triggered the camera. Plenty of things can trigger it, including software faults. Additionally it creates a horrible incentive for local government as a revenue stream with little to no incentive to fix something. Speeding cameras are unmanned, cheap, and just make money. And contesting a speeding camera ticket is so much more difficult than issuing it. All of this makes it easy to undermine due process.

BoorishBears 6y ago
Leave it to HN to miss the forest for the trees in such spectacular fashion. I'm not saying speeding camera are perfect, I'm saying if police weren't allowed to pull people over I would face less discrimination and avoid situations where armed people approach me prepared to shoot me for moving Compared to that grainy pictures is a joke. You're talking about false positives, do police not have false positives, and more importantly, hundreds of false negatives? The false negatives are what allow them to discriminate so readily, when most traffic is breaking a law it's easy to pick who you want. - And perverse incentive for speeding is only a problem with cameras? Is that also a joke? You think police departments don't have even worse incentives to stop people and seize their goods with little recourse? That's in addition to getting to write tickets? When 20% of a cities prosecution budget comes from forfeiture like Philadelphia's did in 2018 it should be no surprise cops are extremely happy to pull people over for reasons other than public safety... And contesting a speeding camera ticket is so much more difficult than issuing it? What does that even mean, is spending a day to multiple days contesting a speeding ticket not harder than it is for an officer to write a ticket? Even when the officer doesn't show up to court you've spent at least a day, if not more fighting it. - Of course, speeding tickets regardless of source show the true reality of our culture, that money changes the rules. So you can just pay an attorney who knows the judge personally and somehow your infraction is less serious...
- ppseafield 6y ago

mulmen 6y ago

I am not eager to submit to a robot. What you are saying here is that it is more important to you to punish other people for breaking a rule than it is for you to take responsibility for your own behavior. You are seeking an outcome that is worse for everyone. Speed cameras perpetuate bias in painfully obvious ways. 1) Where do we put the cameras? This is susceptible to the same bias as individual police. 2) How do we apply the fines? Can some people get them reduced/waived? The legal system is the same and still biased.

leetcrew 6y ago
> What you are saying here is that it is more important to you to punish other people for breaking a rule than it is for you to take responsibility for your own behavior. You are seeking an outcome that is worse for everyone. I don't get this from GP at all. seems to me they are open to being held responsible for their behavior, but currently are not. I'm no fan of speed cameras, but would consider them an improvement over traffic stops for minor infractions. it has always struck me that speed limits are unreasonably low on US highways/arterials (but unreasonably high on surface streets). I suspect most people just don't care because enforcement is so inconsistent that they mostly just get away with whatever speed they choose. perhaps if the rules were more consistently enforced, there would be more interest in reforming them.
- mulmen 6y ago
  I don't see how speed cameras can be considered an improvement. It seems the same to me with the added problem of being more scalable. Yes, cops are biased, but so are cameras.
  - BoorishBears 6y ago
    Did you read my reply and seriously not understand how cameras are better than police? How even if cameras were subject to all the biases police are (they're not, they're subject to a subset of those biases, and are subject in a much more quantifiable and combat-able way) Cameras are not able to kill people in self-defense. Cameras are not able to trump up or discard charges and offenses based on mood or inclination, or prejudice. (And before you miss the point and retort, but they can do that in court!!! Yeah... just like they can with the police officer's ticket. The point isn't "cameras fix the biased legal system!" it's cameras ferret out one facet of the legal systems biases) Cameras are not able to try and push an illegal search or exploit ignorance to convince someone to give up their rights Cameras are not able to seize assets on suspicion someone has too much cash on them. Cameras can't falsely detain people. - Seriously, again, there are real people in jail, rotting, for everything from having a ounce or two of weed on them, to literally nothing at all (see: plea deals) off what started as a routine traffic stop. Cops want people to think we need traffic stops because it's what allows them to stop murderers and rapists, for every murderer caught in a traffic stop 10 more people are inserted into the legal system on much lesser charges, who will be chewed up and spit out and experience an exponential chance of becoming a much more violent criminal It's blowimg my mind, do you really not see how cameras are less biased than humans in a meaningful way or are you being a contrarian for the sake of being contrarian?