"Targeted Enforcement Area"

[spidey07]

You know or have probably seen those radar devices on the interstate that show you your speed and flash at you if you are speeding. Police use them in problem areas I suppose.

Well now we have the most unusual sign I think I have ever seen. It is a sign that says "targeted enforcement area", normally accompanied by numerous radar devices.

On one hand, this is probably a good thing as I'm sure the police are just doing it to slow traffic down. And there has been some construction on the 75 mile strip that I drive. There have been a number of bad accidents on this part of the freeway that is essentially in the middle of nowhere (7-9 miles between exits)

Anybody ever seen anything like this?

 

[91TTZ]

I don't know how they can get away with making crap like that, because they only use it as an excuse to generate additional revenue.

Using the police as tax collectors is a conflict of interest.

 

[T3C]

Yep, just another way to get the people who think they have to drive like idiots to slow down.

 

[Mrfrog840]

Only more reasons to have less police on the road


"Hey I can take a break with all those speed cameras! They just get sent speeding tickets in the mail now!"

 

[DrPizza]

Generally, targetted inforcement areas are located in areas where there have been a higher than expected number of accidents due to speeding. The OP pretty much pointed this out. They had two choices for signs:
A) Targetted Enforcement Area
B) Look fvcktards, lots of cars have been in accidents in this area due to speeding. We know you believe it can't happen to you, but it can, so please slow down a little bit.

Obviously, they chose sign (A.)

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ
I don't know how they can get away with making crap like that, because they only use it as an excuse to generate additional revenue.

Using the police as tax collectors is a conflict of interest.

I don't know man. I think in this instance it really is for safety. They're warning you. "targeted enforcment area" is a little different then a cop dug in like a tick behind an obstacle gunning people.

Trying to probably get the overall speedflow of traffic down. And to tell you the truth it is working - the overall flow/speed is down in that area/strip of a couple miles.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: DrPizza
Generally, targetted inforcement areas are located in areas where there have been a higher than expected number of accidents due to speeding. The OP pretty much pointed this out. They had two choices for signs:
A) Targetted Enforcement Area
B) Look fvcktards, lots of cars have been in accidents in this area due to speeding. We know you believe it can't happen to you, but it can, so please slow down a little bit.

Obviously, they chose sign (A.)

The part that seems a little shaky is that they often double the price of tickets in those area. To cash-strapped townships, this gives them a strong incentive to designate more and more areas "Targeted Enforcement Areas".

It's the money that they're after.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: spidey07
Anybody ever seen anything like this?

Yes. The warning signs are required by law in areas where photo radar traffic enforcement systems are working. Without me blowing a gasket over the inherent fascism of those systems, allow me to just say that the sign is the best compromise we can hope for at this time, as they're better than no sign at all.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: spidey07
Anybody ever seen anything like this?

Yes. The warning signs are required by law in areas where photo radar traffic enforcement systems are working. Without me blowing a gasket over the inherent fascism of those systems, allow me to just say that the sign is the best compromise we can hope for at this time, as they're better than no sign at all.

well at least I don't have to worry about that. I think. *cross fingers*

But they are doing laser now.

 

[EKKC]

most of the time, if you go fight a ticket, you can say the traffic flow was over the limit, and most of the time you can have fine reduced, or fien only (no points)
i think the purpose of these signs are that you cannot fight them, it tells you its a targeted enforcement area yet you still chose to violate the law in front of the law enforcement, so you deserve all that's coming down to you

 

[Vic]

I'm still ticked over this issue. Oregon has both photo radar and a few serious screwed up traffic laws and just this month I had to pay $190 bucks for "speeding in a school zone" on a day that wasn't a school day. And of course, just a few days after I got the ticket, the state legislators amended the flaw in the law to fix it to school days only, but of course the judge was just a puppet for the local roadside tax collectors and the Australian company that owns that photo radar machines (and pockets the majority of the revenues).

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ
I don't know how they can get away with making crap like that, because they only use it as an excuse to generate additional revenue.

Using the police as tax collectors is a conflict of interest.

They're WARNING people ahead of time that they will be enforcing traffic laws in that area, and you're complaining about that? :roll:

I've seen signs like that around here spidey.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

The part that seems a little shaky is that they often double the price of tickets in those area. To cash-strapped townships, this gives them a strong incentive to designate more and more areas "Targeted Enforcement Areas".

It's the money that they're after.

I don't know about where you live, but here in NJ the areas with doubled fines have signs that say "Safe Corridor" and underneath it says traffic fines are doubled. The sign is white I believe. Targeted enforcement area signs don't say traffic fines are doubled, and the signs are yellow.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: mugs

They're WARNING people ahead of time that they will be enforcing traffic laws in that area, and you're complaining about that? :roll:

Maybe they should put up signs WARNING people that they don't care about their constitutional rights. Then when the people try to sue, the gov can say that they were warned.

You know, they can put up a sign telling people that cops are going to perform random checks on their cars, in violation of the "unreasonable search and seizure" part of the constitution, but they're not liable for their actions because they warned us.

Or, they can warn us that they racially profile people like the NJ State police, and that anti-discrimination laws don't apply where there are signs.

Or, they can put up signs saying that they can imprison you without a trial after they label you a "terrorist".

How about putting up a sign in the state saying that they can barge into your house without a warrant, because they're trying to catch drug dealers.



Naaah, all this stuff is far-fetched, it couldn't happen here.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

The part that seems a little shaky is that they often double the price of tickets in those area. To cash-strapped townships, this gives them a strong incentive to designate more and more areas "Targeted Enforcement Areas".

It's the money that they're after.

I don't know about where you live, but here in NJ the areas with doubled fines have signs that say "Safe Corridor" and underneath it says traffic fines are doubled. The sign is white I believe. Targeted enforcement area signs don't say traffic fines are doubled, and the signs are yellow.

I'm in New Jersey, the Police State.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: mugs
I don't know about where you live, but here in NJ the areas with doubled fines have signs that say "Safe Corridor" and underneath it says traffic fines are doubled. The sign is white I believe. Targeted enforcement area signs don't say traffic fines are doubled, and the signs are yellow.

Same here. Construction areas are double and they make it VERY clear with orange signs.

This "targeted enforcement area" sign is white I believe. Orange around here is always "construction or change in traffic/direction". I've only seen it within the last 6 months, hence why I'm posting. I've seen the sign pop up a couple times in different areas of the state and it's completely new to me.

In fact I'm positive of it now. White with black lettering. Funny that the sign "double fines end" sign is also white with black lettering. This is after an orange construction sign warning you of double fines.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: mugs

They're WARNING people ahead of time that they will be enforcing traffic laws in that area, and you're complaining about that? :roll:

Maybe they should put up signs WARNING people that they don't care about their constitutional rights. Then when the people try to sue, the gov can say that they were warned.

You know, they can put up a sign telling people that cops are going to perform random checks on their cars, in violation of the "unreasonable search and seizure" part of the constitution, but they're not liable for their actions because they warned us.

Or, they can warn us that they racially profile people like the NJ State police, and that anti-discrimination laws don't apply where there are signs.

Or, they can put up signs saying that they can imprison you without a trial after they label you a "terrorist".

How about putting up a sign in the state saying that they can barge into your house without a warrant, because they're trying to catch drug dealers.



Naaah, all this stuff is far-fetched, it couldn't happen here.

Yes, clearly warning people that they will be using legal means to enforce traffic laws is the same as using illegal means. They put the signs up to slow people down in areas where there are a lot of accidents. How dare those bastards do that. :|

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: mugs

Yes, clearly warning people that they will be using legal means to enforce traffic laws is the same as using illegal means. They put the signs up to slow people down in areas where there are a lot of accidents. How dare those bastards do that. :|

My complaint isn't about the police enforcing actual laws that help people, my complaint is about municipalities' increasing use of their police forces to bring in revenue to the township. I think there's a conflict of interest since the same entity is making, enforcing, and profiting from the laws they pass.

What it amounts to is a situation where if a township wants to build a new town hall or something, they crack down on the citizens passing through the townships (using questionable means) to extract the money. Many of these "safe corridors" and "targeted enforcement areas" are not there to improve safety, but to improve revenue.

I'll give you a more specific scenario: Burlington Township in NJ has a budget to meet and they adjust the amount of officers they put on traffic detail accordingly, to meet that budget. There isn't a "quota" per se, but there are incentives, and if you don't meet your numbers you won't keep your job for long. If they're below budget, they'll assign more officers to traffic duty.

You know what the sad part is? That I learned of this from my friend who is an officer there.

 

[thomsbrain]

Originally posted by: DrPizza
Generally, targetted inforcement areas are located in areas where there have been a higher than expected number of accidents due to speeding. The OP pretty much pointed this out. They had two choices for signs:
A) Targetted Enforcement Area
B) Look fvcktards, lots of cars have been in accidents in this area due to speeding. We know you believe it can't happen to you, but it can, so please slow down a little bit.

Obviously, they chose sign (A.)

no, actually, when they are concerned about safety, they call it a "Daytime Headlight Safety Zone" or whatever your state's version is, double the fines, and make everyone drive with their lights on.

when they are concerned about making money, they call it a "targeted enforcement area."

obviously, they are only concerned about making money.

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: DrPizza
Generally, targetted inforcement areas are located in areas where there have been a higher than expected number of accidents due to speeding. The OP pretty much pointed this out. They had two choices for signs:
A) Targetted Enforcement Area
B) Look fvcktards, lots of cars have been in accidents in this area due to speeding. We know you believe it can't happen to you, but it can, so please slow down a little bit.

Obviously, they chose sign (A.)

Well sure, otherwise people would crash just trying to read all of Sign B).

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: thomsbrain

Originally posted by: DrPizza
Generally, targetted inforcement areas are located in areas where there have been a higher than expected number of accidents due to speeding. The OP pretty much pointed this out. They had two choices for signs:
A) Targetted Enforcement Area
B) Look fvcktards, lots of cars have been in accidents in this area due to speeding. We know you believe it can't happen to you, but it can, so please slow down a little bit.

Obviously, they chose sign (A.)

no, actually, when they are concerned about safety, they call it a "Daytime Headlight Safety Zone" or whatever your state's version is, double the fines, and make everyone drive with their lights on.

when they are concerned about making money, they call it a "targeted enforcement area."

obviously, they are only concerned about making money.

Again, if they just wanted to raise money they wouldn't WARN you.

Which do you think is more effective at making people slow down - telling them there are a lot of accidents in the area, or telling them they're likely to get a ticket? I think the latter.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: mugs

Again, if they just wanted to raise money they wouldn't WARN you.

Which do you think is more effective at making people slow down - telling them there are a lot of accidents in the area, or telling them they're likely to get a ticket? I think the latter.

Again, they're not warning you because they want to be nice and informative, they're warning you because they have to. That's a condition of having the higher fines.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Again, they're not warning you because they want to be nice and informative, they're warning you because they have to. That's a condition of having the higher fines.

I'm not aware of any higher fines in this aspect. Construction - yes. And as it should be.

You guys know by now that I speed like a freakin' bat outta hell. But I will only do so safely.

But in this respect I like and respect the attempts at safety, because in my mind that is what the police are there for and I believe these are indeed the motives behind this action/warning. I'm all for driving safely for conditions. And if conditions are appropriate then that means 90+.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: mugs

Again, if they just wanted to raise money they wouldn't WARN you.

Which do you think is more effective at making people slow down - telling them there are a lot of accidents in the area, or telling them they're likely to get a ticket? I think the latter.

Again, they're not warning you because they want to be nice and informative, they're warning you because they have to. That's a condition of having the higher fines.

Again, the signs that say "Targeted Enforcement Area" do not mean double fines. The signs that say "Safe Corridor" do (in NJ).

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: mugs

Again, if they just wanted to raise money they wouldn't WARN you.

Which do you think is more effective at making people slow down - telling them there are a lot of accidents in the area, or telling them they're likely to get a ticket? I think the latter.

Again, they're not warning you because they want to be nice and informative, they're warning you because they have to. That's a condition of having the higher fines.

Again, the signs that say "Targeted Enforcement Area" do not mean double fines. The signs that say "Safe Corridor" do (in NJ).

Sorry, those are the ones that I'm referring to.