Speed cameras - big brother is here

[DealMonkey]

The cameras would also be gone if an angry and vocal mob of voters threatened to hunt down the lawmakers and hang them in the town square.

We don't need anymore violent and angry ignorant mobs. We already have the tea-baggers and frankly, that's enough.

 

[StageLeft]

Enforcing speed laws only makes sense when the laws make sense. As most of us realize, most speed limits are simply too low for many cars, drivers, and situations. I ALWAYS speed. Only exception being inclement weather. I in fact don't know a single person who doesn't always speed. I would not drive with them if they didn't because it would show they actually have no idea what they are doing and are surely too scared of the road to be at all safe. The sh*tiest drivers I know, those who have no idea what's going on, tunnel-vision, etc. are in fact the slowest drivers i know because their lack of confidence poisons everything about their driving.

Most cops also speed because they realize that the majority of posted speed limits are stupid. This is because the de facto rules governing driving are speed limit + percentage. When transportation departments put down speed signs they know that nobody will follow them, so they set them accordingly. If they think 70 is safe they'll put down 60 or 65 knowing that everyone will go above it anyway. And in turn only the most unusual and ahole cops actually give a ticket to somebody doing 70 in a 65 anyway. This is just the natural ebb and flow. Sometimes I'll see a 20 zone. Nobody in the world actually goes at 20 in that zone. They go 30. And when the sign was made the people who put it there knew they'd go 30. If they posted 30 they know people would go more like 40.

BTW this is also why most photo traps don't ding a 70 in a 65, they only ding more egregious speeds like 75 or 80 (not that they are egregious, but you get my point; none are dinging the second you cross the limit).

 

[ahurtt]

I live in Montgomery County where the OP is talking about and I can't help but laugh at the whole thing. The cameras would all be gone in a month if people STOPPED SPEEDING! No speeding = no money = no incentives for lawmakers to place more of these annoying cameras.

They'll just move them around but they won't go away. These things work because of the element of surprise. Once people are used to their presence they get attuned to slowing down near them. A given camera in a fixed location will probably generate the most "hits" (and therefore money for the coffers) right after it is erected. Over time the number of citations issued by that camera probably steadily decreases as people who travel the route most often become accustomed to its presence. So they'll just pick up the cameras every couple months and move them to new locations.

 

[soccerballtux]

We've had em here in AZ for quite some time. I read something here recently that only about 30% ever get paid. Another thing, if it catches you 30+ over, you can get it overturned, as at that speed the crime requires a witness, and a camera isnt one. Interesting politics behind these.

So, I just need to drive faster, right?

 

[bl4ckfl4g]

Where do I go to sign that petition? I live in AZ and only petitions I've ever seen were the ones the anti-gay nuts had that were everywhere before the 2008 election.

I want to sign this one though.

 

[ZzZGuy]

One problem with the red light cameras is that they can cause a slew of rear-end collisions if paranoid drivers start slamming on the brakes whenever they approach a stale green light or it suddenly turns yellow on them. They are dangerous IMHO and cause a large negative unintended consequence.

In Alberta, Canada, on high speed roads often used by heavy vehicles such as semi trailers or flatbeds with heavy/large loads a extra light ahead of the intersection is added which flash yellow indicating that the light ahead is going to change, thus giving drivers lots of time to start slowing down. Where I live, if they where to install red stop lights I'd demand they install one of these lights to avoid what you have mentioned (though they don't have them at many red stop lights in Alberta).

 

[Painman]

It amuses me that people are bitching about getting busted for unlawful activity on public property.

It's about revenue, idiots. You vote to cut or repeal every damned tax you can think of, yet you expect smooth roads (to go speeding on) and productive schools for your kids
(who you're too busy to teach anything to yourselves).

Geez, if you don't like the speed limit on state property (ie. the Interstate), then lobby the state gov't to raise the limit.

If they refuse, throw the bums out in favor of a bunch of pro-speeders.

Local politics are relatively cheap... It's still a democracy, but candidates need money.

 

[Thump553]

We have the cameras up but don't have this kind of ticket here in CT (yet). I'd take one statement the OP made with a huge grain of salt, though-that these tickets supposedly won't affect your insurance rates. Heck these days even your credit rating affects your insurance rates.

 

[Ausm]

Wear a gorilla suit and claim you weren't the driver.

 

[ahurtt]

Wear a gorilla suit and claim you weren't the driver.

I live in Montgomery County where we have been dealing with these cameras for a long time. What you said isn't how it works. It wouldn't help. The citation is issued to the owner of the car as determined by MVA records when compared with the license plate number. It doesn't matter who was driving it. For this reason you can't get points on your license and it is not supposed to be able to affect your insurance premiums if you receive a citation from a speed camera.

 

[jpeyton]

Protect yourself next time: http://www.photoblocker.com/

And add traffic camera POIs to your GPS. Don't have a GPS? Get a refurbished Garmin Nuvi 255W; they cost about 1/3rd the price of a red-light camera ticket: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVUlkOopOro

And if you speed 10+ MPH over consistently, get a V1.

All this requires a little investment upfront (~$500 or less), but once you add up the cost of the tickets and insurance premium increases, it makes sense.

 

[ss284]

Fuck you Randolph road.

 

[Painman]

Protect yourself next time: http://www.photoblocker.com/

And add traffic camera POIs to your GPS. Don't have a GPS? Get a refurbished Garmin Nuvi 255W; they cost about 1/3rd the price of a red-light camera ticket: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVUlkOopOro

All this expenditure, on behalf of the locality and you, and you could have just voted in favor of the fucking millage in the first place and gotten the whole thing over with.

...And your community's kids might have learned more in school. What a sin.

 

[Thump553]

I live in Montgomery County where we have been dealing with these cameras for a long time. What you said isn't how it works. It wouldn't help. The citation is issued to the owner of the car as determined by MVA records when compared with the license plate number. It doesn't matter who was driving it. For this reason you can't get points on your license and it is not supposed to be able to affect your insurance premiums if you receive a citation from a speed camera.

I guess I don't understand the law in Alabama-it's illegal to OWN a car that had been speeding? Bizarre. How about this situation: I'm visiting my brother in Alabama, he decides he wants to try out my new ride so we swap cars and drive through the same camera trap at the same speed. He ends up with a ticket for the car I'm driving but I don't get a ticket because he's driving my car registered in CT? Or how about rental vehicles-will I be immune from camera tickets if the car I pick up from the airport is registered outside of AL? I think this has a lot more to do with revenue enhancement than public safety.

We had an analogous situation here when GPS was new. Rental companies would install a hidden GPS in the car ,and bury in the fine print of the rental agreement that you would pay a couple hundred dollar penalty if you exceeded 85 mph (way above the legal speed limits here). The rental company would bill your credit card for these penalties months after the rental based on info from the GPS. Our state's Attorney General took the rental companies to court and beat the pants off the rental companies on this, they had to pay back all the penalties, etc.

 

[Gardener]

These cameras piss me off, they just showed up, no public comment or vote. Clearly about increasing revenues, although here in Seattle they put them in the right spots.

I've hit a few on short-timed yellow to red...no tickets yet, they seem to be set with a greater tolerances.

I will admit that its funny to watch the camera flash at some idiot stuck or blocking the intersection trying to take a late left, the type of driver that mucks up rushhour traffic.

 

[shira]

You can probably find or contribute to a GPS database of where the cameras are located, or use a radar/laser detector to pick up the locations as you approach. If they transmit radar, not much you can do besides slow down. If it's laser based, buy a jammer, and win.

Actually, I purchased and installed a super-expensive radar detector that includes a GPS unit. You gotta continually install the database updates to keep current. It helps when I'm driving on a road I haven't traveled on before, and I get the audible message, "You're approaching a marked location. Speed camera!" Once you know about THAT camera, you don't need the warning the next time. But it's the first-time encounters that result in the tickets.

 

[shira]

Are speed cameras new in the USA or something? We've had them since the beginning of time. I find the best way to defeat them is to drive within marked speed limits. Extreme, I know.

Ridiculous.

Actually, it is ridiculous.

On Connecticut Avenue in Chevy Chase (that 6-lane boulevard I mentioned in the OP), going 45 mph (in the posted 30 mph zone) used to be the norm. The cops just ignored you unless you were actually speeding. Now, they have laser-cameras in both directions. My first two times, I was totally blind-sided (the second time was before I received the notice for the first "offense"). It was like they changed the rules without telling anyone.

 

[nixium]

Enforcing speed laws only makes sense when the laws make sense. As most of us realize, most speed limits are simply too low for many cars, drivers, and situations. I ALWAYS speed. Only exception being inclement weather. I in fact don't know a single person who doesn't always speed. I would not drive with them if they didn't because it would show they actually have no idea what they are doing and are surely too scared of the road to be at all safe. The sh*tiest drivers I know, those who have no idea what's going on, tunnel-vision, etc. are in fact the slowest drivers i know because their lack of confidence poisons everything about their driving.

Most cops also speed because they realize that the majority of posted speed limits are stupid. This is because the de facto rules governing driving are speed limit + percentage. When transportation departments put down speed signs they know that nobody will follow them, so they set them accordingly. If they think 70 is safe they'll put down 60 or 65 knowing that everyone will go above it anyway. And in turn only the most unusual and ahole cops actually give a ticket to somebody doing 70 in a 65 anyway. This is just the natural ebb and flow. Sometimes I'll see a 20 zone. Nobody in the world actually goes at 20 in that zone. They go 30. And when the sign was made the people who put it there knew they'd go 30. If they posted 30 they know people would go more like 40.

BTW this is also why most photo traps don't ding a 70 in a 65, they only ding more egregious speeds like 75 or 80 (not that they are egregious, but you get my point; none are dinging the second you cross the limit).

Agree. This is the same reason cops usually are OK with +10 over the speed limit on highways. Unless they happen to be real d*cks... *cough* NJ *cough*

 

[shira]

Protect yourself next time: http://www.photoblocker.com/

And add traffic camera POIs to your GPS. Don't have a GPS? Get a refurbished Garmin Nuvi 255W; they cost about 1/3rd the price of a red-light camera ticket: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVUlkOopOro

And if you speed 10+ MPH over consistently, get a V1.

All this requires a little investment upfront (~$500 or less), but once you add up the cost of the tickets and insurance premium increases, it makes sense.

Photoblocker is a scam, regardless of the testimonials and news reports you might see. I know this from actual, personal experience: I got Photoblocker after my first two tickets, then got two more tickets with this so-called protection in place. Ultimately, I went to a GPS-enabled radar detector.

Edit: If price is no object, the state of the art in radar detectors is the Passport 9500ci. It's undetectable by radar detector detectors, is remotely installed, and has GPS. But it's VERY expensive, and costs another $400 to install.

http://www.escortradar.com/passport9500ci-details.php

 

[shira]

Wear a gorilla suit and claim you weren't the driver.

By default, the ticket goes to the registered owner. Gorilla suits and masks don't have any effect, since the photo is of the rear license plate.

In MD, you can get out of the ticket by asserting that you weren't the driver, but you must tell the County who the actual driver was. Then THAT driver will be sent the ticket. And if you lie to the county, or cite the name of a non-existent driver, you'll be in even more trouble.

 

[shira]

We have the cameras up but don't have this kind of ticket here in CT (yet). I'd take one statement the OP made with a huge grain of salt, though-that these tickets supposedly won't affect your insurance rates. Heck these days even your credit rating affects your insurance rates.

Well, the state law that authorized these cameras bars insurance companies from raising your rates.

In fact, in MD these "tickets" don't show up on your record. I know this for a fact: I was stopped by an actual human cop for making a lazy right turn on a red light. When he checked my record, he didn't see any tickets on my record at all, so he let me off with a warning. This was well after receiving my 4th photo-infraction. If he couldn't see anything on my record, my insurance company can't, either.

So, at least in MD, the system appears to work.

 

[GroundedSailor]

Photoblocker is a scam, regardless of the testimonials and news reports you might see. I know this from actual, personal experience: I got Photoblocker after my first two tickets, then got two more tickets with this so-called protection in place. Ultimately, I went to a GPS-enabled radar detector.

Edit: If price is no object, the state of the art in radar detectors is the Passport 9500ci. It's undetectable by radar detector detectors, is remotely installed, and has GPS. But it's VERY expensive, and costs another $400 to install.

http://www.escortradar.com/passport9500ci-details.php

I would say the state of the state is still the V1.

 

[ElFenix]

One problem with the red light cameras is that they can cause a slew of rear-end collisions if paranoid drivers start slamming on the brakes whenever they approach a stale green light or it suddenly turns yellow on them. They are dangerous IMHO and cause a large negative unintended consequence.

what has happened in houston is that accidents are up in the directions that the red light cameras aren't facing. i suspect it may have something to do with the bright flash for the camera, but no time of day data was released.

 

[KMFJD]

I bet you were that kid in class who told everyone in class to be quiet, because you were trying to learn.

What's wrong with trying to learn while you are at school?

 

[shira]

I would say the state of the state is still the V1.

I haven't kept up since I purchased my Escort, but at the time I purchased, the V1 was acknowledged as the most sensitive HIGHWAY radar detector, slightly ahead of the 9500ci.

However, a MAJOR problem with the V1 is falsing: In the city, the V1 will drive you nuts with all of the false alarms. The 9500ci remembers where it detected a signal (it uses the GPS and stores all alarms), and won't signal you if the same signal in the same location is detected four times in a row. So, over time, you're only alerted to new signals. The V1 just keeps on beeping every time is detects a signal.

Also, the V1 doesn't have the speed-camera database, so you won't know ahead of time whether that signal you're alerted to is just a stray or is a camera.

And the V1 isn't detector-detector-proof. I commute into Virginia and DC, where radar detectors are illegal. The cops will detect your V1 (and confiscate it), but can't detect the 9500ci.

Finally, the 9500ci has a built in laser-jammer. The widely accepted wisdom is: if your detector alerts you to a laser, it's too late. The 9500ci jams incoming laser, so you won't get a ticket. The V1 doesn't jam.

I agree that lots of people swear by the V1. It's a great detector for the open road, but there's a reason people pay five times as much for the 9500ci, installed.