Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next

A couple thoughts:

On surface streets if a community really wants traffic to go slower then they need to engineer the streets to make a specific speed the most comfortable speed for drivers. One city in California engineered harmonics into their streets - these are a series of humps and dips in the road surface that are of no consequence if you pass over them at the posted speed limit. Around 5mph faster the combination of the two gets uncomfortable and at 10mph faster your car bottoms out and then jumps into the air.

In Sacramento about ten years ago they redid the downtown 'grid' of streets to include traffic calming measures. Three lane, one way streets were changed to two lane, two direction streets. Most streets no longer allow travel for more than ten blocks in a given direction, forcing faster traffic onto selected streets or onto the freeways. Pedestrian 'islands' have been built in several intersections to slow down traffic and to reduce pedestrian fatalities.

(For several years now you're more likely to get run over and killed in Sacramento than you are to get murdered.)

On the freeways I have to say that Canada's speed limits are ridiculously slow. Similar freeways in the US will usually have speeds posted that can be 24% to 40% faster.

In the USA since the national 55mph speed limit was lifted in 1994 traffic deaths have declined in almost every year.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mo ... S._by_year

Traffic engineers at CalTrans (California Dept. of Transportation) attribute this effect to the reduction in the difference of speeds on the freeways.

With freeways in the US (by law) being engineered to be safe to drive at 75mph it's not uncommon for traffic to travel at 75mph especially in rural areas. Even when the speed limit was 55mph traffic still flowed at the 'natural' speed of 70 to 75.

With the speed limit in rural areas now set to 70 or 75 there are fewer deaths as most traffic travels at that speed instead of some vehicles moving at 55 and others at 75.

In short, Canada's highways would be safer with speed limits that reflect the speed the roads were engineered for as opposed the speeds some bunch of pantywaisted anti-car nitwits want to impose on everyone.

   

I believe a lot of the opposition to photo radar back when it was prposed by the NDP government in the 90s was the invasion of privacy aspect. Seems quaint some 20 years later when we are pretty much resigend to the fact that wea reall on camera all day every day and there is a multi-billion dollar security system in palce wiht the sole purpose of spying on us.

   

Don't you think it's about time for you to get out of those awful pajamas and get dressed for work?

   

Here in Australia they have speed cameras all over the place, or as the government likes to politely call them, "Traffic Safety Cameras."

Which is utter bullsh*t, because they don't make traffic any safer, they just tag a car that is speeding and then you get a fine in the mail.

It doesn't make anything "safe" at the time and only punishes someone after the fact... Usually days later

And we're not talking about a speeding fine for only going 7-10km over the limit, you will get a hefty fine if the cameras catch you going more than 3km over the limit. Though I heard rumors that they plan to drop it down to 2km.

So basically if you leave your foot on the peddle on a bit more of an angle than usual to cause your car to slowly go over the limit for a couple of seconds, and that moment is when you pass a camera, you get a fine.

They argue that these cameras save lives and make drivers be more careful, but they don't. Here I am trying to drive on an 8 lane freeway going 100kph with idiot drivers flying into my lane with barely half a flash of their indicator light up, having almost all road signs being several lines of wording rather than quick glance graphics/icons, and big honking billboards that span across the freeway overhead with big bold text stating "DISTRACTIONS LEAD TO DISASTER"..... And I have to keep looking down at the speedometer ever 5 seconds to make sure I don't go so much as a km over the speed limit just in case the cameras or my car isn't registering the exact speed due to calibration or something....

The majority of Australians, at least all the ones I have spoken to while being here, all believe these are mere revenue generators for the government and they're right.

Meanwhile, for a city like Melbourne, you would think you would see a lot of police cars driving around keeping the place safe, and yet I probably only see about 1/3 the amount of police cars driving around daily here in Melbourne as I would have seen back in Halifax.

And while these speed cameras tag people going 3km or more over the speed limit and make people paranoid about going over the limit, these cameras do not do anything for all the reckless driving I encounter every single time I drive on the roads.

People flying between cars without indicating, people flying through red lights 2 seconds after they turned red simply because they're in a hurry, people driving onto sidewalks and curbs to get past the line of cars stuck on a red light and who are blocking their lane they want to get to that is 20m or more down the road.... People during rush hour not wanting to wait to merge off the ramp and onto the freeway like a normal person, and drive over the curb, over the grass and nudge their way between cars like they have the right of way.

U-Turns are legal here too by the way.... And on busy streets, I can not count how many times I have seen cars simply do a 180 out of the blue.

Going off a ramp and onto the freeway, you'd think you need to yield to the traffic already on the freeway, but nope.... You just slide right on in as if there were no cars there, they will slow down for you.

And pedestrians aren't much better. Jaywalking seems to be a common thing. Red light and red hand? That's ok, if you think you can make it, go right ahead. One busy street I lived on for the first year being here would have dozens over people the whole way down the road just walk out from wherever they feel like it and stroll across..... When one lane has the space, walk on through. If the other lane has a pile of cars flying along, don't worry... Just stand on the centre line and wait for those cars to leave enough of a gap to stroll through again.

They just stand there on the centre line with both lanes of cars zipping around them and they have this "what the fuc'ever" expression on their faces. My mother came to visit this past October and I took her down this street to pick some things up and by the time we got back, she was a nervous wreck from me driving inches away from people just standing in the middle of the road.... She's a nurse and has been for many years... Not much disturbs her.

And this is all just from the top of my head..... These are all things I have to deal with every single day.

.... Yet the Speed Cameras are the real things that save lives and speeding is the real problem.

You want to know what the real problem is?

The government relying on speed cameras to suck in the money while thinking they can save money by not having more police officers out on the roads catching all of these other problems.... Because they have Speed Cameras.

And you know what?

Most GPS/Navigator systems in cars have alerts on them telling you where the speed cameras are in the first place... And most phones have apps that do the same thing in real time while you drive. This defeats the purpose of having speed cameras in the first place.

Canadians should not be relying on these cameras.... Nobody should be.

   

Aussies tho, are maniacs behind the wheel. They set the speed limit at 100kph no matter what the road, 4 lane highway or narrow, twisty two lane back road. They were starting to talk about it the last time I was there, guess this is their answer.

   

You guys realize that most cop cars do not do traffic and that there is a traffic unit. Take the City of Red for example, they usually run with around 12 marked cars, of those, 2 would be traffic, the rest are General Investigation. If there's no traffic cops on at all, these other guys aren't writing speeding tickets unless it's something really stupid that they see.

   

I realize that. Which is why I said "It's just a matter of having the will to do it."

There used to be many more vehicles dedicated to traffic enforcement, and they even co-opted the Sheriff service to help out with highway safety. Now it's a matter of putting more cars on the road, especially when the need is greatest.

   

Always got a kick from the story of the guy who got a photoradar speeding ticket in the mail and replied with a photo of the fine money. They sent him back a photo of a pair of handcuffs....
but seriously
DUE PROCESS
that's what it's about. You're not nailed at the time of the violation, you may have been completely unaware. How do you appeal a week later to a camera that your wife was having a baby, or stung by a bee and in shock. What if you go thru the zone seven times in seven days without knowing until you get the first ticket in the mail?

   

It's theoldest one in the book. If you're a government that wants to intrude more in people's lives--and they all do--then make sure you have the word "safety" in there somewhere.

   

I am not for one miute sucked into the idea that PR is anything but a cash cow. But, like the saying goes, "Don't feed the cow if you don't like cleaning up bullshit"! Fact of the matter is that on the hiways, unless posted otherwise, SPEED LIMIT is 100kph. Unless otherwise posted city streets are 50 kph.And I do know for fact that my vehicles are capable of doing exactly the posted speeds!

   

I'm someone who does 130-140 on the expressway (speed limit 100) but I still support photo radar.

Xort's points aren't bad, but I can't agree with 1 and 2 however.

1) Like any other fine or fee, it's perfectly fine for speeding fines generated by photo radar to be used for general revenue. It reduces tax burden so why not? Don't want to make extra contributions to public coffers? Don't speed. Problem solved. You are fully in control of the speed you drive and if you choose to speed in a photo radar zone then you are volunteering to make a donation to the public purse.

And why use excess revenue for foreign aid, instead one of the any other millions of possible public programs? The link between speeding on Canadian roads and foreign aid doesn't exist - I can't imagine Stephen Harper telling Haiti or Afghanistan that their aid budget has been cut because fewer Canadian drivers are breaking local speed limits....Haiti be like: "Huhhh???" Besides, Foreign Aid is Federal jurisdiction and Traffic Laws are Provincial so not really workable.

For Point 2, I understand the purpose but the biggest improvement over past experiments with photo radar would make this a moot point. For some background: here in Ontario, when we first tried photo radar it was used as a "gotcha" program - they were hidden behind bushes, in unmarked vans on the side of the highway, always changing locations,etc. This made them ineffective at recuding speeding because just like human speed traps, drivers always gambled on them not being there so never adjusted their behaviour.

Imagine instead you're driving along on the highway and overhead you see a big sign: "PHOTO RADAR NEXT 15KM - SPEED LIMIT 100 KPH STRICTLY ENFORCED" and you look ahead down the road and you can see the photo radar cameras, in plain sight, conspiciously over the roadway. This would eliminate the "I didn't know" argument (which is what I assume Xort's #2 is based upon). People approaching that stretch of road would have 100% certainty that if they speed they will get ticketed and therefore would slow down (or choose to make a donation as I mentioned).

3 and 4, I fully agree. The photo radar should be strategically and conspicously employed in know problem areas where wreckless driving poses a risk to the public or is known to disrupt the orderly flow of traffic.

Lastly my only other suggestion is that the Photo Radar be set to a forgiving margin - no need to ding people who are doing 101 kph in a 100 zone. Concentrate on say, people driving more than 10% above the posted limit.

   

The same way you do it today...wait to your court date and tell it to the judge. The cop writing the ticket is not the appropriate party to adjudicate your protests of innocence and unless youre a blonde with big tits your attempts to talk your way out of it are futile.

Besides, if your wife is having a baby or you're having some other kind of emergency, woudln't you rather just whiz past the radar, get to the hospital in time and worry about the fine later instead of getting pulled over by a cop who may or may not let you go in time?

As per my last post, there should be conspicous signage wherever PR is in use.

   

Here's a suggestion...

https://www.phantomplate.com/

   

Unapproved Plate Covers are illegal in Ontario. You can buy approved ones, not sure how the cops spot the difference but I have seen people pulled over on the side of the road removing them under the supervision of a police officer.

   

My point for 1 was that it can no longer be used as a source of income for cities and provinces. They only get operational costs. The money leaves the system and is never returned. Once you link the fines to any program that is returned to the lower political entities they will adjust their spending in reply to their expected transferred income and start using this safety program as a cash grab again. Also nations getting aid don't get to say shit if Canada reduces Canada's development funding or not. Cheeky xxxxx. Also the federal government can regulate what happens with fines collected by the police.

As for point 2 it's a matter of fairness. Putting up signs does nothing if the signs are everywhere. People make mistakes in just what and where a speed change happens. Someone I knew picked up 28 tickets in the same location (twice a day for two weeks) ranging from 5 to 10km over the limit and had no idea he was even doing something wrong as he thought he was slowing to the new limit in a safe manner.

How can a safety device claim to promote safety if people don't know their actions are dangerous for weeks after the event? It's just a cash grab being pushed forward by people lying about it's safety measures.

   

Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next