Photo Radar Back in TO?!

[Dayao12]

http://www.cp24.com/news/blair-considers-return-of-photo-radar-to-save-cash-1.1106595 [Video]

Well...time to downgrade before the tickets start coming in. =P

I see both sides of the coin here, and in the end, I'm for PhotoRadar. I'll just have to take my trollage outside city limits.
Other than traffic violations, I see alternative uses for this, such as increasing the chances of catching hit and runs.

What are your thoughts?

 

[conundrum]

If they wanted to do photo-radar like it is done in Britain then I might be ok with it -- ie. place them in areas where speed has caused a large number of accidents and/or deaths, and place signs/post the locations on the Internet warning people they are coming up on a camera. This in effect gets people to slow down at these points and reduce the number of accidents/deaths, and makes a person an idiot for speeding in an area where they know there is a camera/trap.

If they plan on doing it like before, with randomly parked nondescript trucks/vans (or in some other places/countries, even garbage cans) set to target anyone and everyone doing 10km/h over the limit, then I hope this gets voted down completely. The point of a speed trap should be to get people to slow down, whereas the point of this type of photo-radar is simply to increase revenue and make everyone paranoid to even pass a car by going 10 over the posted limit (what's next -- GPS which auto-tickets if a car exceeds the posted limit for the road it's on for more than 5 seconds??).

 

[GentlemanRacer]

Absolutely not. If a cop sees something or is called to assist someone who has, he is a citizen who may exercise the discretion to intervene and enforce a law. Building machines to control people's behaviour is just repression.

I read Bill Blair's comments on this in the newspaper and this is just political blackmail over his budget being capped. When the police can threaten to impose totalitarian systems if they aren't given more money, we have a real problem.

 

[fastar1]

At least they're being honest about it's real purpose; revenue generation.

I've always said they should put cameras on emergency vehicles that capture oblivious drivers people blocking their path in emergencies.

 

[LePhillou]

Well i can see it being alright like the red light cameras.
Like theyre OBVIOUS and warn you.

They have some in quebec and there are like 2 big signs before you get to the actual camera, so yes, i you get caught you deserve the ticket for not being able to see the warning signs.

Random stealth ones... le no agree

 

[Paul1000RR]

Ummm no.
The police's job is to protect the public and enforce existing laws, not to generate revenue for themselves. I am not surprised at this however coming from the doofus that is Blair.
This isn't about safety and only about cash. They will put them in a place where the speed drops drastically and you will get ticketed over 5km/h which is ridiculous.
Put up one of these at any given highway in ontario and 99.9% of the cars will receive a ticket since the speed limits of 100km/h are ridiculous.

Baby Blair is just crying about his budget and he wants to get these cameras to generate more money and keep the existing officers.
If its about our safety and saving money then for every camera fire one cop from the traffic division.

 

[LePhillou]

Ummm no.
The police's job is to protect the public and enforce existing laws, not to generate revenue for themselves. I am not surprised at this however coming from the doofus that is Blair.
This isn't about safety and only about cash. They will put them in a place where the speed drops drastically and you will get ticketed over 5km/h which is ridiculous.
Put up one of these at any given highway in ontario and 99.9% of the cars will receive a ticket since the speed limits of 100km/h are ridiculous.

Baby Blair is just crying about his budget and he wants to get these cameras to generate more money and keep the existing officers.
If its about our safety and saving money then for every camera fire one cop from the traffic division.

I agree and disagree at the same time.

Police's job is to protect. If theyre busy waiting for speedsters at known spots where a machine could do the same job (with warning signs before the spot like ive seen them done in other provinces/states), theyre not out on the streets stopping real problematic thefts or disturbances or be reassigned to other situations that are more pressing.

The places ive seen them in are places where say its a highway that goes from 100 to 80... then 1 or 2 km later, they put 2 BIG SIGNS at like 800m (ish) and 500m respectively in HUGE LETTERING saying "speed radar" and the word SPEED is in huge letters. So honestly yes it makes cash, but if at this point you cant lower your speed in this "dangerous" zone when youve been warned..
you kinda deserve it.

 

[Rossi86]

If this goes into effect, I'm packing my crap and getting the FUUUU outta here!

 

[Blank]

Would a ticket from photo radar effect your insurance rates like a regular speeding ticket does now?

My friend got a ticket from a red light camera and it was a fine and did not affect insurance because it doesnt really prove who was driving the vehicle.

 

[Macs]

Ummm no.
The police's job is to protect the public and enforce existing laws, not to generate revenue for themselves. I am not surprised at this however coming from the doofus that is Blair.
This isn't about safety and only about cash. They will put them in a place where the speed drops drastically and you will get ticketed over 5km/h which is ridiculous.
Put up one of these at any given highway in ontario and 99.9% of the cars will receive a ticket since the speed limits of 100km/h are ridiculous.

Baby Blair is just crying about his budget and he wants to get these cameras to generate more money and keep the existing officers.
If its about our safety and saving money then for every camera fire one cop from the traffic division.

Or disband the traffic division (except for collision investigations), remove quotas, remove bonuses for ticketing, impose a salary freeze and start using beat cops again to save money for gas/vehicles.

 

[Paul1000RR]

Or disband the traffic division (except for collision investigations), remove quotas, remove bonuses for ticketing, impose a salary freeze and start using beat cops again to save money for gas/vehicles.

im down with that
only problem is baby blair wants to keep his budget, all the cops AND add photo radar to feed the budget

 

[Paul1000RR]

If this goes into effect, I'm packing my crap and getting the FUUUU outta here!

no need for that, strategically placed plate and you're good to go

 

[espro]

Obligatory "**** the police"

 

[Macs]

im down with that
only problem is baby blair wants to keep his budget, all the cops AND add photo radar to feed the budget

Blair truly pisses me off. It's relatively simple to come into the budget limits AND promote community policing and involvement again. I really can't stand the state of policing in most of Ontario.

Sincerely,
Wants to be a cop. Not in Ontario.

 

[ZX600]

If Toronto is broke, where are we getting the money to do this?

A red light camera costs 100k, I am sure that a photo radar camera will be on the same ball park

The only reason they are honest about revenue generation is because they are using that argument to justify the expense, however if we are broke, we are broke, there is no money for nice things that may or may not return the capital invested

 

[Brian P]

Would a ticket from photo radar effect your insurance rates like a regular speeding ticket does now?

My friend got a ticket from a red light camera and it was a fine and did not affect insurance because it doesnt really prove who was driving the vehicle.

Exactly. A photo radar ticket can only be a fine. It can't go against your driving record and that means the insurance company can't do anything about it, either. Essentially, it's a speeding tax.

If this goes into effect, I'm packing my crap and getting the FUUUU outta here!

Hmmm, let's see.

Photo radar can't fish out a drunk driver the way an officer on the road can.
Photo radar tickets can't go against your driving record and insurance.
Photo radar can't be used to issue a "stunt driving" ticket. (Who was driving?? P.S. they might still be able to seize the vehicle ... but they won't be able to charge you.)
You can see where the camera locations are (if they really do put up warning signs - they didn't do this on the last go-around.)
Photo radar can't ticket people for improper lane changes, careless driving, etc. (but then, the officers aren't doing this anyhow).

The UK has apparently started backing down from the speed-camera-everywhere scenario because it doesn't work.

 

[Rossi86]

no need for that, strategically placed plate and you're good to go

A few speeding pics of you with no visible plate and you'll become Canada's Most Wanted Criminal with those pics posted all over the media. Then it's only a matter of time before one of your neighbours rats you out

Exactly. A photo radar ticket can only be a fine. It can't go against your driving record and that means the insurance company can't do anything about it, either. Essentially, it's a speeding tax.



Hmmm, let's see.

Photo radar can't fish out a drunk driver the way an officer on the road can.
Photo radar tickets can't go against your driving record and insurance.
Photo radar can't be used to issue a "stunt driving" ticket. (Who was driving?? P.S. they might still be able to seize the vehicle ... but they won't be able to charge you.)
You can see where the camera locations are (if they really do put up warning signs - they didn't do this on the last go-around.)
Photo radar can't ticket people for improper lane changes, careless driving, etc. (but then, the officers aren't doing this anyhow).

The UK has apparently started backing down from the speed-camera-everywhere scenario because it doesn't work.

They can't prove it was you, you'll be picking up the bill for everything so what is the difference? You won't pay an increase in insurance but you'll be paying traffic tickets everytime you go over 5 km/h ove the limit, when you add that up in the end it'll be more expensive then paying an inurance hike for a speeding ticket people get from cops once in a while.

The way they're looking at it is like this: "Now we're only making money mostly from people who speed by 20+ km/h over the limit, but with a camera we can make money from EVERYONE!"

 

[V-Tom]

Anyone that takes the time to read and think should be against Photo Radar.

Photo Radar has been shown World Wide to do NOTHING for increasing safety, and can actualy INCREASE the rate of collisions and DECREASE safety.

Here is some interestng reading:

http://photoradarscam.com/lesssafe.php


..Tom

 

[Dayao12]

I never understood the point of a warning sign for a red-light/speed camera up ahead. What is it's purpose? Is there a law that it's abiding to? The only thing I could think of is some sort of privacy statue stating that we have to be informed if we're being taped/recorded.

 

[Macs]

I never understood the point of a warning sign for a red-light/speed camera up ahead. What is it's purpose? Is there a law that it's abiding to? The only thing I could think of is some sort of privacy statue stating that we have to be informed if we're being taped/recorded.

It's to give you a chance to follow the law I guess...stupid imo.

Ontario still has single-party consent. You can record someone without informing them legally.