Appropriate limits with strict enforcement for the edge cases that are gross violators.
Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk
Speed camera update (Sept.11)
- Thread starter TK4
- Start date
Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk
But that's what laws are generally speaking. The whole premise of the police force is based on group punishment aka law enforcement. Otherwise we'd be able to just have social workers telling us to be better and improve ourselves amirite
There's a time and place to speed. Peopple are tired of experiencing it on their street. so this is where we are.
For this you have my vote, your majesty
Mad Mike
Well-known member
I wish that happened around here.
York Region sets speeds in my city, Markham. They do it based solely on the work of a small committee and what they call "citizen inputs" -- code for the pressure they feel from a handful of anti-car zealots. They are notorious for solving problems that don't exist. For example, a pedestrian group complained that drivers made too many dangerous right-on red turns so the traffic committee eliminated right-on reds at lots of major intersections, then they dropped speed limits on all arterial roads by 10 kmh, now ther're adding stoplights at every intersection of a res street and an arterial road. The group complained traffic on 16th Ave was too fast, the response was to de-synchronize stoplights so drivers not stop at every second intersection.
My 10km journey from Hhy 48 to the 404 took 12 minutes a few years ago, it's 30 minutes today.
Perfect.
Now how do we build our police forces by 50% to accomplish this level of enforcement in any meaningful way? Because what we have now isn’t remotely capable of routine traffic enforcement- pretty much all police forces are reactive now, not proactive. There’s not enough officers or cars to accomplish this.
So how is this accomplished?
And do you think that people getting pulled over for 70 in a 50 zone won’t still screech “cash grab!”?
We eliminate police from jobs they shouldn't be doing and add in much lower paid bylaw type officers. This works for 80 percent of what the police are doing you could have 2x the staff at the same price. We don't need full blown police standing around at construction sites or filling in paperwork. Hell the lower paid new level could even do the majority of speed enforcement.
Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk
The law doesn’t allow this.
So. Change the law, right? Harder done than said. Convince Ford on the need to start.
But, I would totally support this if it meant actual traffic enforcement on our roads. It works in the states, go for a drive in upstate New York for example and you’ll notice that there is a lot less insanity on the roads. Because there’s actual enforcement in the form of highway patrol and actual proactive in city enforcement as well in many area.
But expect the “cash grab!” arguments to be loud. And those sorts of things tend to cost politicians their job in the next election, so they tend not to be popular moves. And since we have a populist premiere right now, don’t expect this to ever become reality.
So here we are.
What do we do?
I guess in that scenario you fix the speed limits to the correct and reasonable levels and let Jesus take the wheel. Photo radar where needed not where it makes the most money.
Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk
I think you're onto something here.
It makes the most money where it's the most needed.
Bingo.
If it wasn't needed, it wouldnt make any money.
But clearly there are a few gaps between road design, enforcement, and driver behaviour
Jesus has had the wheel for the last 5-10 years.
And here we are where our roads have become a free for all.
So that isn’t working out so well.
Next option please.
Make engineering changes so that people don't drive fast near pedestrians or cyclists because they can't or it's uncomfortable. Option 1 separate them and allow high speeds, option 2 allow them together on curvy narrow streets where you can't comfortably drive fast and with houses and schools on dead-end streets so there's no thru traffic. Never the two shall mix. No stroads.
Getting there from here, is expensive.
Getting there from here, is expensive.
TK4
Well-known member
As of January 3rd - Speed & Red Light Camera Map
Pedestrians and cyclists aren’t the only issue.
In a timely (to this thread) incident that I just witnessed about 20 minute ago, sitting at Lansdowne and Monaghan road here in Peterborough, car blasted through the intersection northbound (50 zone IIRC) doing probably north of 80. Seconds later, almost T-Boned someone coming out of the plaza on the NE corner because they didn’t expect a car to be blasting along at that speed and were pulling out to go south.
So, “only” 20 or 30 over, but the potential for a huge side impact wreck that could absolutely send someone to the hospital with serious injuries, all because someone didn’t think the rules apply to them.
Is someone like that Ok to ticket with a photo radar?
Or is that still a cash grab?
Or shall we instead victim blame the person who pulled out, not expecting the car that was still on the other side of the intersection seconds before to be doing 60% over the speed limit?
No lefts out of plazas if you have to cross more than a single lane would be a great place to start. That is a high crash situation and no speed limit will eliminate morons turning left in front of other cars.
1/ Simply not realistic. A lot of these sorts of “build better roads” suggestions are simply impossible unless we start with them when a town is first laid out, and even then, not realistic in many ways as for every solution a dumb or determined person finds a way around it. People will then just do U-Turns instead for example in this scenario.
2/ A 50kph t-bone is going to yield less injuries than 80kph. So why not just work on getting people to follow speed limits again?
Mad Mike
Well-known member
The opposite, the premise of a police force is to punish individuals. For example, if you find 1 in group of 10 rolls a stop sign, you only ticket the one (individual punishment). You can't ban all 10 from that road based on the deeds of one (collective punishment).But that's what laws are generally speaking. The whole premise of the police force is based on group punishment aka law enforcement. Otherwise we'd be able to just have social workers telling us to be better and improve ourselves amirite
If a pedestrian walks a red and gets hit by a car, do you collectively punish all motorists by banning turns in that intersection?
None of this happens with a speed camera or red light camera, so this is a red herring argument for the purpose of this discussion.
Mad Mike
Well-known member
Sort of, except the part about lowering the speed on a road from its designed rate of 60 to its current rate of 40 with the only tangible result being $3m a year in city revenue.
And a few happy NIMBYs.
No it makes the most where limits are inappropriate and too low. It would be needed in the most dangerous area according to statisticsI think you're onto something here.
It makes the most money where it's the most needed.
Bingo.
If it wasn't needed, it wouldnt make any money.
But clearly there are a few gaps between road design, enforcement, and driver behaviour
Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk
My take on Speed cameras:
City has criteria for where they can be. Might need a certain number of complaints, accidents, deaths, and has to be near a school.
They hire a company to administer and maintain the cameras.
The company also has criteria. Has to be high traffic street where the speed limit is artificially low.
Thus instead of getting a camera near a primary school on a hilly, curvy street with blind corners street facing housing and no sidewalks, you get them near a high school on a rail straight street with backyards, that used to be an 80 and is now a 40 and links to a highway on ramp, bonus if the camera faces a slight downhill slope. Cameras run 24/7, not just when students are heading to/from school. Some motorcyclists with flipped plates like to use it as a drag strip most nights during the summer, since there's no police presence. This gets the community complaining more/not less.
It's a win-win-lose proposition. Administrator rakes in the cash, politicians claim it's for safety not a cash grab, community isn't helped, and pays.
In some cases the reduced speed causes students to feel less risk, which increases the number of accidents/interactions, in others the number of speeders increases rather than decreases, which shows that the camera isn't effective at reducing speeds (these cash cows are not removed).
Where I am, the main issue for pedestrian/vehicle interactions seems to be vehicles failing to stop/yield at stop signs, cross walks and red lights.
Would red light/crosswalk/stop sign cameras work better than speed cameras, if we're insistent on an automated solution?
Edit: A secondary issue is people not paying attention. Pedestrians to their own safety, and Pedestrians/Drivers to what’s going on around them.
City has criteria for where they can be. Might need a certain number of complaints, accidents, deaths, and has to be near a school.
They hire a company to administer and maintain the cameras.
The company also has criteria. Has to be high traffic street where the speed limit is artificially low.
Thus instead of getting a camera near a primary school on a hilly, curvy street with blind corners street facing housing and no sidewalks, you get them near a high school on a rail straight street with backyards, that used to be an 80 and is now a 40 and links to a highway on ramp, bonus if the camera faces a slight downhill slope. Cameras run 24/7, not just when students are heading to/from school. Some motorcyclists with flipped plates like to use it as a drag strip most nights during the summer, since there's no police presence. This gets the community complaining more/not less.
It's a win-win-lose proposition. Administrator rakes in the cash, politicians claim it's for safety not a cash grab, community isn't helped, and pays.
In some cases the reduced speed causes students to feel less risk, which increases the number of accidents/interactions, in others the number of speeders increases rather than decreases, which shows that the camera isn't effective at reducing speeds (these cash cows are not removed).
Where I am, the main issue for pedestrian/vehicle interactions seems to be vehicles failing to stop/yield at stop signs, cross walks and red lights.
Would red light/crosswalk/stop sign cameras work better than speed cameras, if we're insistent on an automated solution?
Edit: A secondary issue is people not paying attention. Pedestrians to their own safety, and Pedestrians/Drivers to what’s going on around them.
Last edited:
Shaman
Well-known member
It's more than that. If you post a speed limit dramatically (35% is dramatic to me) lower than the design and purpose of the road, people will ignore the speed limits.
You would lose that bet. Study after study has been done to show that people settle in to a speed that makes sense for the road. They don't automatically do "limit + 20" at all times. The ones that would do that would do it even if the limit was 30. The number of times I have gone into Harrowsmith's school zone going East where it's an 80 zone followed by a 60 zone, then a 40 zone and had the cars in front of me continue to drive 80+ all the way to the intersection is crazy, given the penalties for doing 40+ over the limit now. The reason is, I think, that the road is clearly an 80 zone all the way to the first intersection and the school zone doesn't look appreciably different except for the signs posted at 40kph.
44°23'56.1"N 76°40'08.3"W
maps.app.goo.gl
Again, this is not true. On the highways, the natural speed of the road is what the road was designed for - 120kph. That's roughly what most people drive, and I pass them all day even with my 21' enclosed trailer, because my perception of speed is different from most people (you can probably figure out why).
