well that would stop me from going WOT, usually on the morning commute, its around the ex that it opens up (traffic wise) so iiiiiim goin. i guess ill get to work 1 minute later now lol
|
|
|
The return of photo radar...
- Thread starter DJM
- Start date
80 zones? Pretty hard to find any around here any more. Most of them have been NIMBY'd down to 60-70, with as Brian said, the obligatory "taxes doubled in this area for increased pleasure" signs.
Last edited:
You know what I mean, any road that's not a 400 type is an 80 road imho. One thing I did learn tho, couple tickets back, never say to the cop "90? so what the limit here anyway?"
I would think with the technology available they could implement it, for mobile installations, so that it only gets you if you're doing something abnormal. i.e. on the 401 if most drivers are at 120 and you bust by the camera at 140, you get nailed. If conditions are bad, most people would be slower so the camera's controller should be able to detect that and recalculate the threshold above which a ticket would be issued. With that kind of system in place, I wouldn't have an issue with it. For permanent installations near schools etc. with time constraints in place (during the school day and special events etc.) zero tolerance would be OK.
Kri$han
Well-known member
So what you (and most people here) are saying is that you wouldn't have an issue if the system is implemented (by the government, that is) with some level of tact, intelligence and appropriateness, it would be okay?
yeah, don't count on that.
I'm not counting on it, I've seen way too many governments come and go with nothing useful or intelligent having happened during their tenure.
-D-
Banned
uhm fail, government + intelligence = fail (gas plant)
If anyone does not think your insurance will be effected then you might want to think again...a small 10 over ticket counts against you.
They will say it's your car we are insuring and taking the risk on therefore you are responsible to who you let use the item we are insuring...notice they leave out the part of what you are paying for.
If you get 2 of these a year or in 6 months, the insurance company will make a case that you are a speeder (you prove that you were not driving the car, to them you are guilty first) and raise your rates.
just my 2 pennies
Yeah, it is just a fine.
And there was signage, truth be told. There were markings on the road, too. It was entirely my fault for not noticing, as I wasn't looking out for it. I had mostly interpreted the signs and markings as construction, or an indication that the road was changing (went from highway to city street). There wasn't a soul in sight, I hadn't been overly concerned at the time. That, and all the french.
And then when speeds get reduced by another 10km/h?
It'll get to you, every time
That's the way it was here as well when PR was province wide.
I always suggested that those who scream "cash cow", the system could be setup the other way around - get nailed for points, but minimal or no dollar penalty. Needless to say nobody is excited about that option either.
Photo enforcement 99% of the time becomes all about MONEY, so it's in the interest of revenue that they will just apply a fine and no points (as is the case now) because then most people won't fight the tickets, so it saves on court costs, too.
If the consequence is only "money" and not driver's license or points or insurance then it's a very simple question of economics whether I bother fighting the ticket or not: Probability of success in court, amount of the fine, amount of time at my hourly after tax earnings rate ... if the amount of time I will have to take off work at my hourly rate exceeds the amount of the fine factoring in the probability of success then it's cheaper to just pay it.
With the current system I fight ALL tickets with the objective of consuming as much of the court's resources and time as possible.
In your opinion maybe. Measured results in other locales appear to suggest that the end effect is less about money and more about speed compliance resulting in greater road safety.
http://ec.europa.eu/transport/road_...e/speed/speed_limits/speed_enforcement_en.htm
Automatic enforcement
The best estimate is that automatic speed enforcement results in an accident reduction of 15 to 20% [20]. Individual evaluation studies differ widely in the reported effects. For fixed speed cameras, the effects varied from a 5 to 69% reduction in accidents, a 12 to 65% reduction in injuries and a 17-71% reduction in fatalities [51]. The actual effectiveness depends on many factors, such as the actual enforcement effort, the initial speed and safety level and the type and amount of supporting publicity. In addition, not all evaluation studies take sufficient account of the regression-to-the-mean effect, which may lead to an overestimation of the effect.
It has been claimed that fixed, visible speed cameras may lead to dangerous traffic situations, because of sudden deceleration at the approach of a camera and acceleration after having passed it: 'the kangaroo effect'. While one can actually see this happen, so far there is no scientific proof that this leads to dangerous situations or accidents.
Reported effects of (generally hidden) mobile speed cameras range between 15 and 35% [27]. The advantage of mobile cameras is that drivers are less aware where exactly they will be applied. The disadvantage is that they require more manpower.
Trajectory control is still very new, not yet widely applied and not yet evaluated on substantial scale. The first indications are very positive with hardly any speed violations left at the enforced section [52].
Factors increasing the effectiveness of national programmes of automatic enforcement include clear guidance on the criteria for enforcement sites, public information that maximises acceptability of the programme, and a short time interval between violation and fine to maximise the educational impact of the sanction [8].
Sweden: a speed camera box every 4.5 km
In Sweden the police and the National Road Administration carried out a trial of automatic speed cameras from 2002. By the end of 2003, about 500 km of the main roads were covered with camera boxes in which cameras can be placed randomly. A further 250 km was completed in 2004. The total number of boxes was then 335. The total road length covered is 750 km, so there will be a box on average every 4.5 km. Forty four road links are involved. 9 500 vehicles were photographed by speed cameras in 2003 but the driver was only identified in 6 000 cases, and legislation does not yet allow the owner of the car to be held responsible. Some efforts are being made to implement this change in law. Normally cameras are installed on accident prone roads with speed limits of 90 km/h. There is however an increasing use of camera boxes at local speed limits of 70 or 50 km/h at intersections etc. The regions of the Road Administration (7 regions) together with the county police (21 counties) decide on the placement and the number of camera boxes.
Early accident studies are consistent with existing models showing the effect of speed on safety. The preliminary effect on fatal accidents is a reduction of 50% and on all injury accidents 25%. The speed reduction is 5-10 km/h.
Common argument, not always the case providing the limits are set to a reasonable level. Griff also provides some good stats above me.
If they're dumping them all over a city set to 1KPH over the limit, yeah, I'd agree - cash grab. If they're putting them on main thoroughfares with (for example) 60K limits and setting them to 81, then fair game IMHO. In school zones, perhaps 10 over - if there's one thing I don't have any patience for is self absorbed people who think other people's kids don't matter, so they blast through school zones, all while worrying about their own precious snowflake being forced to sit out in the cold waiting for them to pick them up a few seconds later than they might otherwise have arrived if they'd follow the speed limit.
Spending as much time on the road as I do, and seeing the shenanigans and sheer asshattery that goes on out there....yeah, I'm pro enforcement so long as it's done within reason.
Everything is about money. The police budget for Toronto is over a billion and 90% of that is staffing.
Heard the debate about counsel cutting the budget so the chief is forced to make the tough decisions.
Then something about cutting off limbs instead of taking a measured approach.
Don't think I've ever heard of the police budget ever being less? And Toronto residents want to keep their taxes in line?
Well here is your answer folks!
Pics of vehicles exceeding the posted limits and revenue streams will flow.
And then what happens when the city gets hooked on the revenue?
No one can complain about those nasty tickets. It's breaking the law and everyone agrees that is bad.
It just not fair how it's done.
As soon as we started automatic impoundment of vehicles for speeding, we started going down the slippery slop folks.
The revenue to too good to pass up.
That is why I ride a Harley. I'm going under the speed limit because it's not fun to go any faster.
Unless I'm on the Buell. Then I'm fooked
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Heard the debate about counsel cutting the budget so the chief is forced to make the tough decisions.
Then something about cutting off limbs instead of taking a measured approach.
Don't think I've ever heard of the police budget ever being less? And Toronto residents want to keep their taxes in line?
Well here is your answer folks!
Pics of vehicles exceeding the posted limits and revenue streams will flow.
And then what happens when the city gets hooked on the revenue?
No one can complain about those nasty tickets. It's breaking the law and everyone agrees that is bad.
It just not fair how it's done.
As soon as we started automatic impoundment of vehicles for speeding, we started going down the slippery slop folks.
The revenue to too good to pass up.
That is why I ride a Harley. I'm going under the speed limit because it's not fun to go any faster.
Unless I'm on the Buell. Then I'm fooked
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
kwtoxman
Well-known member
The 2014 TPS budget shows a total of 13 constables and two sergeants for traffic services radar enforcement. LOL. Not exactly a potential for major savings, to put it mildly. That is out of 2295 staff positions in just the specialized operational command division. For example, there is also the divisional policing command section with another 4303 staff positions. And there are another five other separate sections with additional staff and associated budgeting. The chief of police himself has 13 staff total.
Make no mistake it's about revenue generation.
Make no mistake it's about revenue generation.
kwtoxman
Well-known member
Have a read. Hot off the press.
https://fcpp.org/sites/default/files/documents/Shimizu & Desrochers - Speed or Greed.pdf
https://fcpp.org/sites/default/files/documents/Shimizu & Desrochers - Speed or Greed.pdf
|
|
|
|
|