3 ms·

> I'm saying if police weren't allowed to pull people over I honestly don't see how installing speeding cameras prevents this. Could you elaborate for me what

> I'm saying if police weren't allowed to pull people over I honestly don't see how installing speeding cameras prevents this. Could you elaborate for me what you mean here? > And perverse incentive for speeding is only a problem with cameras? Is that also a joke? No? But speeding cameras can issue a lot more tickets per day without needing to sleep, draw benefits, pension, etc. This particular incentive scales much more quickly for cameras. > 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? Also no? I don't think I implied that. If anything, speeding cameras can free up officer's time to do worse things, e.g. asset forfeiture as you mentioned. > 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? Time for officer to write a ticket / time for ticket recipient to contest Vs. Time for camera to write ticket / time for ticket recipient to contest. It takes a lot longer for an officer to write a ticket. As a result, the asymmetrical effort of ticketing vs. contesting or otherwise dealing with tickets is significantly worse at scale.

BoorishBears 6y ago
> Time for officer to write a ticket / time for ticket recipient to contest > vs > Time for camera to write ticket / time for ticket recipient to contest. Think about this for a second. The numbers are not very different because the denominator is so much larger than the numerator The camera and officer are vastly different but they both pale in comparison to the time in court. And the time in court is what ruins the most vulnerable people! Average traffic stop is 20 minutes from stop to citation say 5 minutes for the camera. (Most times manual verification is required by law) If you compare 20 minutes to 5 minutes, it sounds like a mountain for time... Last time I fought a ticket (before I wised up to the fact paying the judge's friend who is a lawyer reverses time in such a way you never sped?) it took 2 full days off work. 1 day to wait in line so I plead not guilty, 1 to actually contest, and officer was a no-show. So compared to 16 hours, the difference between 1 second and 20 minutes is meaningful only for a moment. Especially when you consider, not everyone has a job where they can just take 2 days off. The police target people who cannot afford the ticket, and cannot afford the two days off. They are literally stuck between a rock and a hard place - This all buries the real issue I mention in another comment. You're comparing ticket to ticket, but they're not the same. If an officer stops you they can give you a warning because they like your tone (you speak like them, or you're kind of pretty, or you don't look the type who'll do this again). Or they can give you a reduced speed. Or they can give you an additional ticket because you they don't like your tone, or rather... you didn't full stop at that stop sign. The other cars going through it didn't either, but they weren't the marks. Or they can say they smell weed and start pushing the boundaries of your rights and take advantage of the fact they target the populations with the least experience with their legal rights due to systemic failings in education You compared time for the camera to time for the officer. How many innocent people do you think took plea deals sending them to jail for what started as a traffic stop? That would still be free today if a camera had sent a ticket by mail? - Your other comments also imply a lack of understanding in the role traffic stops play in modern policing. Not being able to stop people for speeding and even other minor traffic infractions would remove so much power from them that they consider it a non-starter (having cameras doesn't mean they can't stop people for speeding it needs it's own legislation) You say it frees up time for stuff like asset forfeiture... traffic stops are the leading springboard for all of these ills: https://leelofland.com/josh-moulin-the-importance-of-traffic-stops/ https://leelofland.com/josh-moulin-the-importance-of-traffic... In part because traffic stops combined with extremely dense traffic laws have essentially turned driving into an invitation for stop and frisk. Cops do not hide the fact they tail people to create invitations to stop them. It is all to easy to find even the most law abiding citizen break a law. And additionally in part because the leeway cops have during a traffic stop is immense, and they're extremely well versed in taking advantage of ambiguity in people's rights and even basic psychology such as fearing police, into getting into people's lives well past a ticket. Compared to all this, cameras end up having shortcomings that police have, but with a fraction of the terrible abuse that can come from it. - Also, this isn't the point of the comment, but cameras don't sleep, but they can be turned off. Here in New York City speed cameras are not on 24/7. They only operate during school opening and closing hours when kids are likely to be coming and going And not every state allows them everywhere (in fact I don't know of any that do, but some might). Virginia, notorious for some of the most brutal speed enforcement in the country (https://insurify.com/insights/states-with-the-most-speeding-tickets-2020/ https://insurify.com/insights/states-with-the-most-speeding-...) only allows them in school zones and highway construction. Legislation that would attempt to limit where police go would be almost untenable, but legislation limiting speed cameras is popular with motorists and much easier to pass (it's sad but true, it's easier to convince motorists to be anti speed enforcement than anti overpolicing)
- ppseafield 6y ago
  > The numbers are not very different because the denominator is so much larger than the numerator True for an individual case. However, my argument was that, at scale, the difference is massive, and adding speeding cameras doesn't stop cops from pulling people over. You just have police AND speeding cameras, both of which have problems, and the problems of neither are mitigated by the presence of the other. > And the time in court is what ruins the most vulnerable people! > Last time I fought a ticket (before I wised up to the fact paying the judge's friend who is a lawyer reverses time in such a way you never sped?) it took 2 full days off work. 1 day to wait in line so I plead not guilty, 1 to actually contest, and officer was a no-show And when this is much easier at scale, municipalities can create more of these headaches with less work on their part. > Your other comments also imply a lack of understanding in the role traffic stops play in modern policing. Not being able to stop people for speeding and even other minor traffic infractions... How do speeding cameras prevent this?! I ask a second time. > Traffic stops are the leading springboard for all of these ills How do speeding cameras prevent this? > Compared to all this, cameras end up having shortcomings that police have, but with a fraction of the terrible abuse that can come from it. I again don't understand how having speeding cameras prevents police from pulling people over. > Also, this isn't the point of the comment, but cameras don't sleep, but they can be turned off. Here in New York City speed cameras are not on 24/7. They only operate during school opening and closing hours when kids are likely to be coming and going And are pull-overs allowed outside of those times? > And not every state allows them everywhere (in fact I don't know of any that do, but some might). And are pull-overs allowed outside of those zones?
  - BoorishBears 6y ago
    > However, my argument was that, at scale, the difference is massive, and adding speeding cameras doesn't stop cops from pulling people over. So somewhere along the line you came up with your own point that wasn't mine and argued against it? Because literally in the comment you replied to: > Not being able to stop people for speeding and even other minor traffic infractions would remove so much power from them that they consider it a non-starter (having cameras doesn't mean they can't stop people for speeding it needs it's own legislation) The entire comment chain is about something that has never been done before, using camera based enforcement to replace large classes of traffic stops. You literally managed to miss the entire point of the conversation yet replied so confidently? Half the contextomies you're bringing up make 0 sense if you understood that. Yes they're allowed to pull people over outside those times and inside them, that's the whole damn problem. You literally don't understand the most basic issue here and you keep replying by quoting tiny parts of a comment and ignoring their context and going "gotcha!" I'm glad I replied for the benefit of others who might read these comments because it's stuff more people need to hear, but I'm done wasting my time with this.

BoorishBears 6y ago

> Time for officer to write a ticket / time for ticket recipient to contest > vs > Time for camera to write ticket / time for ticket recipient to contest. Think about this for a second. The numbers are not very different because the denominator is so much larger than the numerator The camera and officer are vastly different but they both pale in comparison to the time in court. And the time in court is what ruins the most vulnerable people! Average traffic stop is 20 minutes from stop to citation say 5 minutes for the camera. (Most times manual verification is required by law) If you compare 20 minutes to 5 minutes, it sounds like a mountain for time... Last time I fought a ticket (before I wised up to the fact paying the judge's friend who is a lawyer reverses time in such a way you never sped?) it took 2 full days off work. 1 day to wait in line so I plead not guilty, 1 to actually contest, and officer was a no-show. So compared to 16 hours, the difference between 1 second and 20 minutes is meaningful only for a moment. Especially when you consider, not everyone has a job where they can just take 2 days off. The police target people who cannot afford the ticket, and cannot afford the two days off. They are literally stuck between a rock and a hard place - This all buries the real issue I mention in another comment. You're comparing ticket to ticket, but they're not the same. If an officer stops you they can give you a warning because they like your tone (you speak like them, or you're kind of pretty, or you don't look the type who'll do this again). Or they can give you a reduced speed. Or they can give you an additional ticket because you they don't like your tone, or rather... you didn't full stop at that stop sign. The other cars going through it didn't either, but they weren't the marks. Or they can say they smell weed and start pushing the boundaries of your rights and take advantage of the fact they target the populations with the least experience with their legal rights due to systemic failings in education You compared time for the camera to time for the officer. How many innocent people do you think took plea deals sending them to jail for what started as a traffic stop? That would still be free today if a camera had sent a ticket by mail? - Your other comments also imply a lack of understanding in the role traffic stops play in modern policing. Not being able to stop people for speeding and even other minor traffic infractions would remove so much power from them that they consider it a non-starter (having cameras doesn't mean they can't stop people for speeding it needs it's own legislation) You say it frees up time for stuff like asset forfeiture... traffic stops are the leading springboard for all of these ills: https://leelofland.com/josh-moulin-the-importance-of-traffic-stops/ https://leelofland.com/josh-moulin-the-importance-of-traffic... In part because traffic stops combined with extremely dense traffic laws have essentially turned driving into an invitation for stop and frisk. Cops do not hide the fact they tail people to create invitations to stop them. It is all to easy to find even the most law abiding citizen break a law. And additionally in part because the leeway cops have during a traffic stop is immense, and they're extremely well versed in taking advantage of ambiguity in people's rights and even basic psychology such as fearing police, into getting into people's lives well past a ticket. Compared to all this, cameras end up having shortcomings that police have, but with a fraction of the terrible abuse that can come from it. - Also, this isn't the point of the comment, but cameras don't sleep, but they can be turned off. Here in New York City speed cameras are not on 24/7. They only operate during school opening and closing hours when kids are likely to be coming and going And not every state allows them everywhere (in fact I don't know of any that do, but some might). Virginia, notorious for some of the most brutal speed enforcement in the country (https://insurify.com/insights/states-with-the-most-speeding-tickets-2020/ https://insurify.com/insights/states-with-the-most-speeding-...) only allows them in school zones and highway construction. Legislation that would attempt to limit where police go would be almost untenable, but legislation limiting speed cameras is popular with motorists and much easier to pass (it's sad but true, it's easier to convince motorists to be anti speed enforcement than anti overpolicing)

ppseafield 6y ago
> The numbers are not very different because the denominator is so much larger than the numerator True for an individual case. However, my argument was that, at scale, the difference is massive, and adding speeding cameras doesn't stop cops from pulling people over. You just have police AND speeding cameras, both of which have problems, and the problems of neither are mitigated by the presence of the other. > And the time in court is what ruins the most vulnerable people! > Last time I fought a ticket (before I wised up to the fact paying the judge's friend who is a lawyer reverses time in such a way you never sped?) it took 2 full days off work. 1 day to wait in line so I plead not guilty, 1 to actually contest, and officer was a no-show And when this is much easier at scale, municipalities can create more of these headaches with less work on their part. > Your other comments also imply a lack of understanding in the role traffic stops play in modern policing. Not being able to stop people for speeding and even other minor traffic infractions... How do speeding cameras prevent this?! I ask a second time. > Traffic stops are the leading springboard for all of these ills How do speeding cameras prevent this? > Compared to all this, cameras end up having shortcomings that police have, but with a fraction of the terrible abuse that can come from it. I again don't understand how having speeding cameras prevents police from pulling people over. > Also, this isn't the point of the comment, but cameras don't sleep, but they can be turned off. Here in New York City speed cameras are not on 24/7. They only operate during school opening and closing hours when kids are likely to be coming and going And are pull-overs allowed outside of those times? > And not every state allows them everywhere (in fact I don't know of any that do, but some might). And are pull-overs allowed outside of those zones?
- BoorishBears 6y ago
  > However, my argument was that, at scale, the difference is massive, and adding speeding cameras doesn't stop cops from pulling people over. So somewhere along the line you came up with your own point that wasn't mine and argued against it? Because literally in the comment you replied to: > Not being able to stop people for speeding and even other minor traffic infractions would remove so much power from them that they consider it a non-starter (having cameras doesn't mean they can't stop people for speeding it needs it's own legislation) The entire comment chain is about something that has never been done before, using camera based enforcement to replace large classes of traffic stops. You literally managed to miss the entire point of the conversation yet replied so confidently? Half the contextomies you're bringing up make 0 sense if you understood that. Yes they're allowed to pull people over outside those times and inside them, that's the whole damn problem. You literally don't understand the most basic issue here and you keep replying by quoting tiny parts of a comment and ignoring their context and going "gotcha!" I'm glad I replied for the benefit of others who might read these comments because it's stuff more people need to hear, but I'm done wasting my time with this.