"Targeted Enforcement Area"

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Sorry, those are the ones that I'm referring to.

You get double fines for a non construction area?

that's messed up. But in this case I really do think it is for safety.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Sorry, those are the ones that I'm referring to.

You get double fines for a non construction area?

that's messed up. But in this case I really do think it is for safety.

In NJ, fines are doubled on most or all highways with speed limits of 65 mph. See, the state police realized that everyone was going 65+ in 55 mph zones anyway, and they let it slide. But they were concerned that when they raised the limits to 65 everyone would go 75+. So the double fines were a sort of compromise - they raised the speed limits, but discouraged people from going any faster than they already were. Now they don't care if you go 75 on the interstates though. (we've only had 65 mph limits for about 5 years)

There are also designated "safe corridors" where fines are doubled. I don't know who designates the safe corridors, and I do not know if it's the same people who get the revenues from the tickets. The only safe corridor I regularly drive through is pretty deserving of the designation though.

 

[sao123]

Originally posted by: 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.

<- employee of penndot LL

In Pa, we have the signs stating Targeted Enforcement Area.
We also have saftey corridors with double fined areas... however these are only in residential or business districts with speed limit of 45mph or lower and in construction areas.
Municipalites and townships do not set speed limits, safety corridors, and double fine zones. Those are controlled by the state department of transportation.
Additionally on federal highways (interstates) municipal police are not permitted to enforce speed.

 

[Baked]

There's a stretch of road between my house and work/school that's really long and straight. Speed limit is 35, but everybody goes 45-50. There's never been any speed enforcement on that road until last week. There were probably 6-7 motorcycle cops waiting on the cross street in the middle of that stretch of road just waiting to flash people. It's good business. I saw 3-4 people pulled over when I drove by. What a bunch of amateurs.

 

[StarGazerVSP]

Here we don't have signs that say "Targeted Enforcement Area". but we do have signs that read "Maximum Enforcement Zone" "CHP on Duty"

 

[DivideBYZero]

In the UK there must be a sign stating that cameras are in the area and the cameras MUST be painted bright yellow if the revenue is returned to the local govenment.



99.9% of the f**kers are painted bright yellow...

 

[dainthomas]

Originally posted by: 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).

Someone needs a ride in the whaaaaambulance.

It's not like that law was a big secret or something. You should have left sooner and slowed down.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: dainthomas

Originally posted by: 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).

Someone needs a ride in the whaaaaambulance.

It's not like that law was a big secret or something. You should have left sooner and slowed down.

:roll:

 

[allisolm]

Originally posted by: 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:

No joke. I was thinking that anyone who was still speeding after seeing that sign DESERVED a ticket.