4 ms·

I personally agree, but there has to be a time frame allowed... e.g. cameras at an intersection that had an accident: It probably would take 'a day or two' at

I personally agree, but there has to be a time frame allowed... e.g. cameras at an intersection that had an accident: It probably would take 'a day or two' at least for such a request to get to the camera operators to request they send a copy. I'd also personally prefer speed cameras that are not point-in-time records. This just encourages police to put them where they know people are more likely to violate the law, like at the bottom of hills, where there's not really a danger, but it generates more revenue. I'd want speed cameras that are miles apart... and the determination that you get a speeding ticket is that you traveled several miles at high speed.

wcoenen 2y ago
> I'd want speed cameras that are miles apart... and the determination that you get a speeding ticket is that you traveled several miles at high speed. That's what SPECS does: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPECS_(speed_camera) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPECS_(speed_camera) There are similar systems in other countries. Here in Belgium we have "trajectcontrole".
try_the_bass 2y ago
> This just encourages police to put them where they know people are more likely to violate the law, like at the bottom of hills, where there's not really a danger, but it generates more revenue. Judging by the number of accidents I've seen at the bottom of hills, I'm skeptical of your statement that "there's not really a danger" there. I don't think posting up at the bottom of a hill is a revenue-generating thing, it's simply an exercise of going to where the crime happens. In this case, it's at the bottom of a hill that makes it easier for drivers to reach excessive speeds and thus are an increased danger to everyone else on the road. This is exactly where you want to deter people from behaving dangerously, and where you want to punish the people who fail to pay enough attention to avoid getting a ticket in such an obvious scenario.

wcoenen 2y ago

> I'd want speed cameras that are miles apart... and the determination that you get a speeding ticket is that you traveled several miles at high speed. That's what SPECS does: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPECS_(speed_camera) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPECS_(speed_camera) There are similar systems in other countries. Here in Belgium we have "trajectcontrole".

try_the_bass 2y ago

> This just encourages police to put them where they know people are more likely to violate the law, like at the bottom of hills, where there's not really a danger, but it generates more revenue. Judging by the number of accidents I've seen at the bottom of hills, I'm skeptical of your statement that "there's not really a danger" there. I don't think posting up at the bottom of a hill is a revenue-generating thing, it's simply an exercise of going to where the crime happens. In this case, it's at the bottom of a hill that makes it easier for drivers to reach excessive speeds and thus are an increased danger to everyone else on the road. This is exactly where you want to deter people from behaving dangerously, and where you want to punish the people who fail to pay enough attention to avoid getting a ticket in such an obvious scenario.