Speeding Cameras

AJ · 02-13-2007

http://www.myfoxtwincities.com/myfox...Y&pageId=3.1.1

I'm 100% for this.

A//// Guy · 02-13-2007

Why not just raise the speed limit? lol

I dont like that idea, $$$ project.

JustROLLIN · 02-13-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by DSMStyle

http://www.myfoxtwincities.com/myfox...Y&pageId=3.1.1

I'm 100% for this.

Why?

Dont you ever do more than 11mph over the speed limit? I know I do and would much rather run my chances with patrols than a camera.

AJ · 02-13-2007

"Drivers got the message and the average speed dropped from 73 miles an hour to 64. The accident rate was cut nearly in half and police say that reduction in collisions has translated into a savings between $10 and $11 million."

That right there is enough to make me enjoy this idea and the first place I'd love to see this is on 94/35w around downtown. Crazy fucking drivers at all times during the day. Just last week I was heading home from bowling and some fuck in a honda must of blasted though the Lowry tunnel at 80+ just loving the sound of his exhaust. He alsmost clipped a car with 2 kids in the back.

While it's true, many people can control their cars at higher speeds, many can't. And the way we are today everyone is in a hurry. If we have these I think it will give the cops more revenue to put more froce on the streets to worry about crime and everything else that needs attention.

I say go for it and if you don't like it, don't speed by over 10 mph. If I get a ticket from speeding it's my own fault isn't it? The speed limit is the speed limit. You still have your 10mph safe zone which is pretty standard for drivers today. The weird thing is I find myslef setting the cruise at around 4-5 mph over the speed limit on most days when I'm not in rush hour traffic.

But this is just my opinion, you guys feel free to have your own but don't playa hate for me having my own thoughts on this one.

**asshanson** · 02-13-2007

The catch is that the photo has to match your driver's license before they can send you a ticket. That way if someone else is driving your car you don't get the ticket.

Limo tint in the front FTW! Or I guess you could drive with a mask on.....

I'm pro-cameras instead of traffic cops on the interstates in the cities.

92EvilTalon · 02-13-2007

Granted I dont live there anymore but.... I love to see this happen. I am for this too. Yes I speed hell I do five over all the time. So if you don't speed then why say no to this idea. I also like the photo matching to get the ticket. If you think about it..have your wife register your car in her name. And then there you are out of a ticket. But why speed it only gets you in trouble.

rst95eclipse · 02-13-2007

Okay. So you install these camera which cost a ton of taxpayer money. Then you'll have smart people like me who cheat the system by driving 20-25mph over and wear a mask/glasses, because there are not any cops on the roads and I could get away with it. That isn't safe.

AJ · 02-13-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by rst95eclipse

Okay. So you install these camera which cost a ton of taxpayer money. Then you'll have smart people like me who cheat the system by driving 20-25mph over and wear a mask/glasses, because there are not any cops on the roads and I could get away with it. That isn't safe.

Well considering we have unit already installed form the red light carmeas that will work for this it won't cost all that much. And it will pay for itself in no time.

And come one, be realistic, your not going to drive around with a fucking mask on to prevent from getting caught. And if you are, I'd like to know the route you take on a daily basis so I can either avoid it or find a nice picnic spot to sit and watch you drive by someday.

I'm sure this will have support and opposition just like everything else. So it's fine that everyone has some thoughts and opinions on it that may go either way.

If it happens I'll embrace it. If not, no big stress lifted or gained on my part.

rst95eclipse · 02-13-2007

No doubt that it will be a money maker, as long as the media doesn't do a segment showing how to beat the system. If it takes wearing a mask to get out of it, I'm sure a ton of people would do it and face it you would too - if you were a speeder. My opinion is that it might cause more harm than good. At first it would make a ton of money, then people would end up using roads with the cameras not installed or again wear masks, which is not safe.

The question is: is speeding really that bad in the cities? There are certainly a few people that go way too fast. It might cause more harm than good. I would certainly be one to throw a wrench in this. Soon there will be cameras everywhere. I really don't want to be watched everytime I'm outside my house. To me, it's a privacy issue, not that I don't want speeders off the road.

FYI, I don't speed that bad, but I do go 10 over quite a bit.

JustROLLIN · 02-13-2007

I am looking at it from a strictly self-involved level. The fact that I have a radar detector and a sharp eye have saved me from any speeding tickets to date. "Knock on wood." But, with the new system I would not have a chance at avoidiing the ticket if I am speeding. From a "good for society" standpoint, yes, it sounds great. But, for me personally, I would rather not see it.

curt_gendron · 02-13-2007

I caught part of the fox 9 story last night. I really hate the idea of more cameras. Those things are damn expensive. If you only put a few of them up, everyone will know where they are and just slow down in those spots. If you put a bunch of them up, it will cost a fortune to run and maintain.

later,
Curt

rst95eclipse · 02-13-2007

Money isn't the issue. They'll definately make money in the long run, which is why many people won't like them.

**1ViciousGSX** · 02-13-2007

It's just a cat & mouse game anyway. If the government didn't want people speeding they would regulate the max speed of new vehicles to be 70mph off the show room floor with built in shut down for tampering with the car.

READ THIS

I read an article a few years back in Car & Driver about Arizona and it's running the read light cameras. It's all about the $$$, and a little safer roads. They actually moved the sensor further into the intersection so that if the light turned red, they had a better chance of getting a picture of you passing through the intersection. They basically took away the "commited to the intersection" gap.

A little something from another website related to Mesa, Arizona.
"Vendor, and term: The vendor was Lockheed Martin IMS, now ACS. The contract was signed in Nov. 1999 and runs until April 30, 2005.
Fees: Until June 1, 2001, the vendor received $48.50 each for the first 20,000 paid citations (combined red light camera and speed camera) per year (calendar year or contract year?), $39 for the next 20,000, and $21 for those above 40,000.
Beginning June 1, 2001 the two types of cameras have separate compensation schedules. The vendor receives $73 each for the first 900 red light camera tickets paid each month, $65 for the next 300, and $48.50 for those above 1200. For speed camera tickets, the vendor receives $51 for each one paid."

**scheides** · 02-13-2007

F*CK THIS! I saw this story on the news last night too and I think it is STUPID. It's motivated by two things. Number one: MONEY. They think yea, spend a crap-load on this technology and equipment and we will rake in hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines. WHY WHY WHY is this a rational way of being for the better good? Sh*t like this should NOT be motivated by money. It should be motivated by SAFETY, which brings me to number two: SAFETY. They want to cut down on the 'severe' number of traffic deaths. In this story they go on to say there were 150 traffic-related deaths last year in MN, or one death every 2.4 days. How bad of a problem is this? Where's the perspective? Here's some perspective for you: the previous set of stories on the news was about murders in Minneapolis (not MN, just Minneapolis). How many were there? They talked about at least 5, if not more, maybe more like 7. On a Monday.

Which is more of a problem?

On a side note, a word from the UK. They have traffic cameras all over the UK for this very purpose. First, they were unmarked and declared unlawful. So, they put up signs everywhere around them. But guess what someone came up with? A GPS-based fuzz-buster. It alerts you when you near any of the known traffic cameras. It has a small phone port on the side of it so you can update it.

tpunx99GSX · 02-13-2007

a lot of the times at least in Orange County, CA, they have these cameras set up at stop lights that take your picture. but the thing is is that they often are owned and manned by third party companys. So when they send the ticket in the mail you can easily get out of the ticket being that its not handed out by an officer or the city or state. I dont know how it would be in MN but thats the way it is here.

**1ViciousGSX** · 02-13-2007

It's been proven that if you increase the yellow light time from 3 seconds to 4-5 seconds, red light violations drop tremendously.

**JET** · 02-14-2007

I got to experience these cameras first hand in Germany. We were cranking along on the autobahn and 3 cars came whipping by us (we were doing about 60 mph in a 45 mph zone, don't remember what the km's were). They were doing over 100 mph. We cranked it up and got in behind them. They started to change lanes randomly and we followed. About the 2nd lane change we realized they were changing lanes to avoid the cameras! So they probably won't stop people, just make them do erratic lane changes.

At-Least-It's-An-Evo · 02-14-2007

I hate this idea. People who can't drive will still cause accidents. I speed 95% of the time and I have had 0 accidents. :knock on wood: It's mostly all about driver.

AJ · 02-14-2007

I guess all things considered I'd like to see what happens if MN tries it out with the current "red light" camera already installed around the cities.

While I dont' condone the main motivation behind it (revenue) I do like the fact that it could live up to the hype of generating lots of additional funding for training and staffing in other areas of law enforcement. Anything that might get some money to help clean up the Block E area would be nice. Much of the patrol that used to roam the 94 area outside of the cities is now being used downtown to try and keep order. But it's still not enough and there doesn't seem to be money for anymore. Of course, this is speculation since I've never seen a budget for something like this.

FattyBoomBatty · 02-14-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1ViciousGSX

It's just a cat & mouse game anyway. If the government didn't want people speeding they would regulate the max speed of new vehicles to be 70mph off the show room floor with built in shut down for tampering with the car.

Yeah, that'll never happen. No one would buy new cars and sales would plummet. Maybe that's a good thing - global warming would be reduced.

Think of the sales of used cars after that. My quest would be like gold. lol.

I was caught by a red light camera once when I was driving a moving truck for Sorensens. They got the ticket, but transferred it to me since I was driving. Although, it proved that they couldn't tell who the driver was. I think I should get my money back.

They just need to switch to mass transit everywhere in the main city arear. remove all the roads and just have a bunch of bumper cars that only go 20mph. build a wall around the city with big parking ramps and increase 494/694 to 8 lanes per side and straighten that mofackey out. werd.