hoping this catches on, pretty please CA…

i like the fact that the money can only go into maintaining the speed cameras or into making the road safer. those are both things desperately needed, especially in LA.

  • Andjhostet@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    So, two concerns with this.

    1. Hasn’t it been shown the cameras actually increase accident rates? Basically it makes people drive less predictably, by slowly really quickly when they realize there’s a camera. I could be thinking of red light cameras, rather than speed cameras but I thought it was both.

    2. I’m pretty sure they aren’t enforceable? If someone doesn’t want to pay one it’s super easy to get out of. Which ends up meaning that the people who need be held accountable, aren’t. And the people that are decent drivers, continue to be decent drivers.

    • dhork@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m pretty sure they aren’t enforceable? If someone doesn’t want to pay one it’s super easy to get out of. Which ends up meaning that the people who need be held accountable, aren’t. And the people that are decent drivers, continue to be decent drivers

      The problem is that any ticket that is issued solely based on a camera (like speeding or red light cameras) can normally only detect the car by its plates, while tickets are normally written against a driver. In some states, this means that points can’t be assessed, and fines punish the poor more than the rich. In others, all the car owner has to do is submit an affidavit saying “I wasn’t driving” to get out of it. If the owner is lying, that’s perjury, of course. But who will bother checking into it?

      A camera that is coupled with a law enforcement presence is much more enforceable, because you pull the car over and issue the ticket to the driver right there, using the camera data as proof.

      • Pseu@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Hmm. When my boyfriend drove under a toll camera in my car, I called to explain that I wasn’t the one driving at the time. The lady on the line asked if the vehicle was stolen, when I said no, she said I had to pay the fine and if I didn’t, I may not be able to register my vehicle. Naturally, I paid the fine.

        We have some precedent with red light cameras and the like repeatedly being held up. Courts are equipped to handle bad actors and if that becomes an actual problem, they’re not going to just shrug if someone has 25 speeding violations that they’re not paying. I could see this working once or twice, but if you’re driving past that camera every day, it’ll be a good idea to start obeying the law sooner rather than later.

    • offthecrossbar@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Regarding #1, the problem lies in the implementation of the cameras. I think the idea of average speed cameras are interesting. Basically, just have multiple cameras and use the time a driver takes to get from one to the other to calculate their average speed. This way you can’t game it by slowing down at specific points.

    • Pseu@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Hasn’t it been shown the cameras actually increase accident rates?

      Most studies find that cameras decrease accident rates: https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD004607.pub4/abstract

      Theoretically, it might cause drivers to drive more unpredictably, but I’d expect that those are typically rear-end colissions as drivers slam their brakes to try to avoid a ticket. Those are the safest type of traffic incident and I’d happily trade a pedestrian getting hit for a couple rear-endings.