5 ms·
Instead of radar, more and more places are installing ANPR (aka ALPR) cameras here. They measure how long it taked you to drive between two locations, if it's f
by elric 1y ago
Instead of radar, more and more places are installing ANPR (aka ALPR) cameras here. They measure how long it taked you to drive between two locations, if it's faster than the speed limit, the fine will find you. Tiny Belgium already has more than 5k ANPR cameras.
Predictably, the system is being (ab)used for all kinds of monitoring and tracking on top of speed enforcement. And in a certain sense, all those irresponsibly fast drivers with radar detectors are partially responsible for the further erosion of privacy on the road.
- Dylan16807 1y agoIt sure doesn't sound like those systems were built to go after irresponsibly fast drivers.
- elric 1y agoThat was their original intent, but of course, once you have a dense network of cameras that can sort of reliably track individuals, people find all sorts of other uses for them.
- Dylan16807 1y agoYou're sure it wasn't largely to milk fines from people going slightly over? What was the initial threshold for fines? What is it now?
- prmoustache 1y agoNobody is milked. The rules are simple and trivial to follow. Those that are fined are really asking for it. An upper limit is not the desired and accepted speed everybody needs to aim for.
- Dylan16807 1y ago> An upper limit is not the desired and accepted speed everybody needs to aim for. I agree entirely. But while you seem to be thinking about the situation where the speed limit is higher than the natural safe speed range people would intuit without a sign, often it's significantly lower. That's a bad way to design roads and speed limits. In pedestrian areas restrict the roads more, and in non-pedestrian areas let people go a good pace on straight dry roads. > Nobody is milked. The rules are simple and trivial to follow. Those that are fined are really asking for it. How much over is your threshold for "really" asking for it? If it includes people going 2-3 over then I very much disagree.
- elric 1y agoIrrelevant. Speed kills. Slower is better.
- Dylan16807 1y ago1. If you're calling my first question irrelevant, the one about why the system was installed, then why were you the one originally making claims about that, and using it to blame certain people? 2. "Slower is better." is a stupid half argument. Speed limits are a tradeoff between the benefits of going fast and the benefits of going slow. If it wasn't a tradeoff then the speed limit would be walking speed everywhere on every road.
- elric 1y ago1. If people drove the speed limit, there would be no need for privacy invasive traffic cameras. The blame there does lie squarely with the people who can't seem to get that, and who keep killing and maiming thousands of people every year. 2. There are very few benefits to cars going faster. If you want speed, trains are much more efficient at high speed. Fast cars are wasteful and dangerous. Cars being limited to walking speeds in cities would be great. But failing that, I'm happy with the local groundrule: 30km/h if there's no bike path, 50km/h if there's a raised bike path, and 70km/h if there's a bike path that's separated from the road by at least 1 metre.
- tmerc 1y agoThere will always be "good reason" for the invasion of privacy. If you didn't actively oppose their use, you're also to blame.
- Dylan16807 1y agoThe speed limit is not set at exactly 1 below irresponsibly fast. Are all these cameras in cities? Are there any on separated highways?
- technick 1y agoThis is easily managed by hiding your license plates. I haven't shown my real license plate in years (It has a ping identity sticker on it) and no plans on doing so, it's to protect my own privacy.
- maest 1y agoProtecting ones privacy comes with the incidental side effect of making it difficult for society to penalize one for not abiding by the rules. Bank robbers wear ski masks for similar privacy concerns.
- amanaplanacanal 1y agoAlso apparently ICE agents in the US.
- technick 1y agoThen society should do something about the invasion of privacy happening everywhere. Take Flock camera systems in Colorado as an example, Colorado has been trying to limit access to ALPR data to only municipalities within the state for immigration related cases. The state has even went as far as creating a law. Loveland police department gave federal officials (ICE, DEA, ATF) access to states ALPR data, completely bypassing the law on the books. Data like this has been weaponized and if you can't see it, not sure how I can help you.
- mixmastamyk 1y agoHow does this work? I’d like to avoid tracking but stay within the law if possible.
- multjoy 1y agoIt doesn't. It just means that they've not gone at a speed sufficiently egregious for a detective to be handed the packet to work out the vehicle's true identity.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- Klonoar 1y agoI remain amazed that Seattle doesn’t do this for the 99 tunnel that goes under the city. People routinely fly through there at like 40 miles over what the limit is - and due to a bus lane addition going northbound, they exit the tunnel at a high rate into some very varied traffic. The tunnel is a toll road that’s photo enforced. Should be an easy ticket in the mail if your enter and exit time are way too close or something. (I’m guessing it might be the age old “can’t prove it was you driving” defense?)
- potato3732842 1y agoBecause if they did it people would vote for it to be changed.
- Klonoar 1y agoDo you actually live in Seattle, or are you just drive-by commenting? Seattle is very vocal in one direction while often voting in the other. The idea of cameras for catching speeding/etc is not a new concept here and is seemingly one the public is letting police do more of.
- SoftTalker 1y ago> can’t prove it was you driving They don't have to if it is a civil infraction. As I understand it, in many jurisdictions a camera ticket is a fine but no points. They just say "the owner of the car is responsible for who they allow to drive it" same as insurance liability.
- potato3732842 1y agoCivil infractions are a giant end run around people's rights when you're talking about these size fines. They can't push it because if they do that risks ending the gravy train.
- whoamii 1y agoAt least in WA state there’s a “it wasn’t me” option to contest and the thing will just disappear.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]