pOwned!
- Thread starter wsuffa
- Start date
Ted
The pilot formerly known as Twin Engine Ted
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2007
- Messages
- 30,019
- Display Name
Display name:
iFlyNothing
This maintains my full confidence in the speed camera program - that it exists for the sole purpose of providing further revenue to state and local governments, and has nothing to do with safety.
I like their idea! Maybe if enough people try this they'll have to take the things down. One of my friends in Texas used to run over them with his truck until they got some more substantial rooting in place to prevent such acts.
I really, really hate speed cameras.
I like their idea! Maybe if enough people try this they'll have to take the things down. One of my friends in Texas used to run over them with his truck until they got some more substantial rooting in place to prevent such acts.
I really, really hate speed cameras.
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2006
- Messages
- 5,128
- Location
- Lincoln, Nebraska
- Display Name
Display name:
Jason W (FlyNE)
I dunno, Ted. Seems like you'd only hate speed cameras if you're speeding. Try strapping your four month old baby into a car and heading out on the roads some day. It puts a whole new perspective on things when cars swerve into your lane while the driver is speeding AND texting.
EdFred
Taxi to Parking
TMetzinger
Final Approach
I don't think speed cameras do a thing to improve driving. You get a fine in the mail that's all.
When you're pulled over, you get the little adrenaline bump, the interview with the cop, possibly additional pain if you're guilty of anything else. It tends to make more of an impression.
When you're pulled over, you get the little adrenaline bump, the interview with the cop, possibly additional pain if you're guilty of anything else. It tends to make more of an impression.
el con
Line Up and Wait
Speed cameras are why we all took up FLYING,right?
I will be a little bummed when we start seeing cameras hanging from balloons
.
How about get the police chiefs plate number and put those on.
I agree it's just a money maker. Every car made is capable of exceeding the speed limit. Why don't we just have the government put little transmitters on everyspeed limit sign and have little receivers in all our cars so we can be safe in our little Stepford sedans
.
I will be a little bummed when we start seeing cameras hanging from balloons
.How about get the police chiefs plate number and put those on.
I agree it's just a money maker. Every car made is capable of exceeding the speed limit. Why don't we just have the government put little transmitters on everyspeed limit sign and have little receivers in all our cars so we can be safe in our little Stepford sedans
.
Ted
The pilot formerly known as Twin Engine Ted
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2007
- Messages
- 30,019
- Display Name
Display name:
iFlyNothing
So the people I know must not love or care about their children because they break the speed limit with their kids in the car, including four month old babies, right? I'll think about that next time I'm in the car with one friend of mine who was going 85 in the minivan with pregnant wife, his two other kids, and me.
Sorry, I don't buy it. Speed limits are idiotic laws, because they are based in no way on actual physical limits. Think about this - when you're reading the driver's manual while learning to drive, it specifically says in there that the speed limit may be faster than a safe speed, for example if there is snow, ice, etc. on the road. So, what they're saying there is that it may not be safe to go 65 (example) so you need to go slower, but it is never safe to go faster? And 65 is a physical upper bound for all cars, from my Ford Excursion to my Jaguar XJS to a Porsche 911 Turbo? Furthermore, my mother is unsafe at any speed, whereas, in the right vehicle, I'm safe up to cruising speeds of 120+ mph.
What you stated as the driver who's speeding/swerving/texting should be cited as an impaired driver, because that's what that person is. However the person being impaired has to do with the swerving/texting, and going faster than is safe.
I have no problem agreeing to disagree with you if you can do the same. [/rant]
Ted
The pilot formerly known as Twin Engine Ted
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2007
- Messages
- 30,019
- Display Name
Display name:
iFlyNothing
Why don't we just have the government put little transmitters on everyspeed limit sign and have little receivers in all our cars so we can be safe in our little Stepford sedans
The day that happens is the day I rip it out of the car. This is part of why I prefer driving old cars.
el con
Line Up and Wait
Sorry I forgot a few additions.
I'm 57 two of my 3 kids were never in car seats, and lived.# 3 was in a seat and is the same as the older 2,all alive.
Why is it everybody that flys commercial has to wear a seatbelt except for the little babies that can't hang on.
I grew up never wearing a helmet while riding a bicycle.
I drive my car with my hands at other than the 10 and 2 position.
I've operated a boat without a life jacket on.
I've removed the do not remove labels from pillows
I've swallowed a lot of chewing gum.
I sometimes eat food and don't wash my hands first.
My wife and I have never had safe sex in 37 years ,(and I don't think I want to.)
Cameras ,Ba Humbug,Pretty soon we'll all so safe, life will be boring.
Let's all legislate some more rules we can break,life will be more fun.
We have more laws and rules now they can't possibly enforce, maybe we just go back to the original 10 and leave it at that:smile:.
I'm 57 two of my 3 kids were never in car seats, and lived.# 3 was in a seat and is the same as the older 2,all alive.
Why is it everybody that flys commercial has to wear a seatbelt except for the little babies that can't hang on.
I grew up never wearing a helmet while riding a bicycle.
I drive my car with my hands at other than the 10 and 2 position.
I've operated a boat without a life jacket on.
I've removed the do not remove labels from pillows
I've swallowed a lot of chewing gum.
I sometimes eat food and don't wash my hands first.
My wife and I have never had safe sex in 37 years ,(and I don't think I want to.)
Cameras ,Ba Humbug,Pretty soon we'll all so safe, life will be boring.
Let's all legislate some more rules we can break,life will be more fun.
We have more laws and rules now they can't possibly enforce, maybe we just go back to the original 10 and leave it at that:smile:.
Let's see how fast the little pranksters can talk if they over get pulled over with someone else's plate taped over theirs.
silver-eagle
En-Route
Traffic tickets were never about safety but about revenue generators. The cameras only extend that. They are not perfect either since most intersections with said cameras are adjusted to specifically catch more than the average number of violators.
While they free up an officer to do other police work, I would think that having a traffic enforcement division would be the best way to improve safety and generate enough revenue to pay for them. Odd that some communities are furloughing said division.
I'd rather have a limit than allow anyone to drive as fast as they want. I would rather have a consistent speed limit (like 30) in town than shifting limits by blocks.
Some people just aren't qualified to drive higher speeds, even in a straight line. Just because you got a license, doesn't mean you are qualified. Maybe there should be graduated licenses much like aviation has. Fair weather, rainy, snow, blizzard, day, night. I doubt some people would go beyond fair and day. I also doubt it would keep them from driving.
Pi1otguy
Pattern Altitude
IMO, the max "safe" speed varies with road conditions, traffic and ped activity. Outside of rush hour or rain its often higher then the posted limit. Now distractions like texting are another story.
IDK. Sometimes these type of devices can encourage unsafe behaviors to avoid tickets. After getting my red light cam ticket in one city I now floor it on yellow lights only in that city to avoid tickets. Such revenue streams encourage bad things from drivers like speeding through yellows and cities that short the yellow by .5 seconds.
Whoa, hossie!
When the police wish to charge you with a crime, they have to have something called, "Probable Cause," and they simply cannot validly have it by virtue of an automated machine.
Speed cameras are strictly revenue-production devises, and nothing else - for that matter, radar and laser speed-enforcement equipment are essentially revenue enhancers for their users, and for the auto insurance companies which buy most of them for the public agencies (ugly little secret).
"Speed kills," goes the matra, but we all know that speed does not kill, it's the sudden stop. IF the lumbering drones we all elect to represent us actually gave a rat's backside about safety, they'd focus on active enforcement of right-of-way laws, lane discipline and more effective driver awareness and training.
Hold your breath for that to happen...
K
KennyFlys
Guest
I was never quite fond of speed cameras. The red light cameras seemed like a good idea and many more red light runners badly need to be nabbed.
But, when I saw the totality of evidence in that wonderful finite detail of what was supposedly my car in the 1"x1.5" photo... my fondness for the entire program went out the window.
There's no criminal penalty and the only way to challenge the thing is to go up against the agency that posts it. Sorry, but the city courts are just about always going to side against you. They don't want to lose since it's their city that gets the dough.
Wanna catch folks? Spend the money on real cops. Period.
But, when I saw the totality of evidence in that wonderful finite detail of what was supposedly my car in the 1"x1.5" photo... my fondness for the entire program went out the window.
There's no criminal penalty and the only way to challenge the thing is to go up against the agency that posts it. Sorry, but the city courts are just about always going to side against you. They don't want to lose since it's their city that gets the dough.
Wanna catch folks? Spend the money on real cops. Period.
Teller1900
En-Route
Speed cameras are why we all took up FLYING,right?
I will be a little bummed when we start seeing cameras hanging from balloons
I like the way they enforce the speed limit now.
Approach: "Aircraft, say speed."
Pilot: "Uhhh...248, sir" as you can hear the engines spooling back.
I actually don't mind most of the speed cameras I've seen out east. Of the ones I've noticed, they all shoot the front of the car. My car is still registered in Kansas, one of the last states to not use front license plates, so all they get a shot of is me smiling behind my middle finger and the empty black license plate frame on the front of the car. That said, I still think they're a stupid idea for all the reasons already mentioned.
SCCutler said:
And turn signals, and merging, and fast lane, and....I thought I had seen bad drivers before, but I hadn't seen ANYTHING before coming to Virginia. Speed isn't even close to the biggest problem here, it's everything Spike mentioned that seems to cause the 6-8 mile backups every couple hours!!!
sba55
En-Route
Couldn't agree more.
I often drive on I-5 at night. There's no traffic, the road is perfectly straight and smooth. I could do 120mph quite safely. If I crashed into a concrete wall head on at that speed, I'd be killed. If I crashed into a concrete wall at 65 mph, I'd be killed, too. Doesn't make a difference.
-Felix
Ted
The pilot formerly known as Twin Engine Ted
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2007
- Messages
- 30,019
- Display Name
Display name:
iFlyNothing
That was exactly my point from that and an earlier post. Jason appeared to disagree with me.
Most people it seems aren't qualified to drive on sunny days with no problems on the road, but that doesn't stop them. My point is speed limits have nothing to do with safe driving. There are speeds that I simply won't drive at due to my limitations (not the vehicle's), and I adjust my speed based on the vehicle, weather conditions, etc. That is how people should drive, and the illusion that speed limits are safety measures is something that people ought to get out of their heads.
Ted
The pilot formerly known as Twin Engine Ted
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2007
- Messages
- 30,019
- Display Name
Display name:
iFlyNothing
And I thought I was laughing when Chris posted that one ATIS "Visibility 2. Winds 32 gusting to 65. Heavy thunderstorms. Holy ****ing **** we are getting our asses kicked. Do not try to land here. Are you crazy? Pieces of mobile homes and dead cows on all runways. Safe yourself. Advise you have Mike."
bqmassey
Line Up and Wait
Those cameras are so damn ridiculous. Red light cameras included.
There used to be a time where you had to be PROVEN guilty to be convicted. A camera doesn't prove that YOU broke a law at all. All it proves is a vehicle with your license plate (real or fake), was at the location of that camera at that time. It doesn't prove you were driving. It doesn't prove it was YOUR vehicle. I'd argue that it doesn't even prove that a law was broken (with no human there to oversee, how can they be sure it's functioning properly, not snapping the picture at the wrong time or reading the speed of another car that's near you but going faster).
They should have to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt that YOU were driving and broke the law. These cameras don't do that.
I find it to be severely unconstitutional.
There used to be a time where you had to be PROVEN guilty to be convicted. A camera doesn't prove that YOU broke a law at all. All it proves is a vehicle with your license plate (real or fake), was at the location of that camera at that time. It doesn't prove you were driving. It doesn't prove it was YOUR vehicle. I'd argue that it doesn't even prove that a law was broken (with no human there to oversee, how can they be sure it's functioning properly, not snapping the picture at the wrong time or reading the speed of another car that's near you but going faster).
They should have to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt that YOU were driving and broke the law. These cameras don't do that.
I find it to be severely unconstitutional.
ReverendSlappy
Ejection Handle Pulled
Agreed. And I think -- somebody'll correct me if I'm wrong -- that the Iowa Supreme Court agreed and shut them down statewide... At least that's what some Iowa residents told me. Anybody know if that's the story?
CJones
Final Approach
They did for a while, but IIRC, they are back working again at red-lights in West Des Moines.
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2006
- Messages
- 5,128
- Location
- Lincoln, Nebraska
- Display Name
Display name:
Jason W (FlyNE)
Now, you'll notice, Spike, that I didn't say that I loved speed cameras. I was only making the point that the only reason to hate them is if you drove around town all day speeding. I don't hate speed cameras because I don't make a habit of speeding. I have been cited for speeding, but it was almost always the case where I was caught not paying attention and I deserved it.
Whether or not the cameras are good or bad is a different discussion. Frankly, they don't change the way I drive because I'd rather just leave myself enough time when I'm going places.
wsuffa
Touchdown! Greaser!
Exactly right. Add in the evidence that in some cities the number of rear-end collisions at these intersections went UP (because someone who would have continued through the intersection when entering on green-turning-yellow slammed on their brakes to avoid being caught) AND the number of intersections where yellow was short-timed (see: Montgomery County, Maryland which had a high percentage of yellows set below State standards), and you have a situation where safety isn't the controlling interest.
There's a financial incentive to these cameras. Some of them are run by outside contractors that get a % of the take.
I don't recall seeing any that shoot the front of the car, but I believe they exist.
You'll enjoy this story about such cameras and the middle finger.
Go to Boston. Virginia is like Kansas compared to Boston.
sba55
En-Route
I might be wrong, but I don't believe speeding tickets below a certain speed over the limit are a criminal matter. If so, wouldn't the standards be less than reasonable doubt?
Maybe the solution is to go fast enough by a camera to make it a misdemeanor
-Felix
ReverendSlappy
Ejection Handle Pulled
Maybe so... I had that conversation a while ago. Anyway, hopefully this kind of phenomenon will wake them up. Perhaps if elected leaders and judges and so-on started getting a ticket in the mail, oh, once a week or so...
sba55
En-Route
There is another reason. I don't like them because I don't respect/value our speed limits to begin with. If I did think those limits were appropriate, then I wouldn't have much of a problem with cameras or any other means of enforcement.
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2006
- Messages
- 5,128
- Location
- Lincoln, Nebraska
- Display Name
Display name:
Jason W (FlyNE)
So the people I know must not love or care about their children because they break the speed limit with their kids in the car, including four month old babies, right? I'll think about that next time I'm in the car with one friend of mine who was going 85 in the minivan with pregnant wife, his two other kids, and me.
Sorry, I don't buy it. Speed limits are idiotic laws, because they are based in no way on actual physical limits. Think about this - when you're reading the driver's manual while learning to drive, it specifically says in there that the speed limit may be faster than a safe speed, for example if there is snow, ice, etc. on the road. So, what they're saying there is that it may not be safe to go 65 (example) so you need to go slower, but it is never safe to go faster? And 65 is a physical upper bound for all cars, from my Ford Excursion to my Jaguar XJS to a Porsche 911 Turbo? Furthermore, my mother is unsafe at any speed, whereas, in the right vehicle, I'm safe up to cruising speeds of 120+ mph.
What you stated as the driver who's speeding/swerving/texting should be cited as an impaired driver, because that's what that person is. However the person being impaired has to do with the swerving/texting, and going faster than is safe.
I have no problem agreeing to disagree with you if you can do the same. [/rant]
I would agree that there would be no need for speed limits if the requirements for obtaining a driver's license were as stringent as obtaining a pilot's certificate.
The reason for speed limits isn't to keep you from killing yourself. Frankly, I don't care if some dumb ass wants to take his Ford Pinto up to 110 mph and jump the median. What I do care about is if I'm driving on the same road as that asshat with my family in the car. Your friend's choices are irrelevant to me with his family in his car...until his choices affect me.
You're correct when you say that speed limits don't have any bearing on real life driving. However, they are they price that we have to pay for making cars and licenses so easy to obtain. If every car was being driven by Kent I'd support abolishing speed limit laws. However, when a 16 year old can climb behind the wheel I'll take the speed limits every day and twice on Sundays. It won't keep him from speeding...and it won't keep him from killing my family...but it's better than letting him make whatever choices he wants to make.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2006
- Messages
- 5,128
- Location
- Lincoln, Nebraska
- Display Name
Display name:
Jason W (FlyNE)
Get off my road, I've been driving longer than you have!!
If that's the case you get off of my Grandma's road.
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2006
- Messages
- 5,128
- Location
- Lincoln, Nebraska
- Display Name
Display name:
Jason W (FlyNE)
Those speed limits weren't meant for you.
woodstock
Final Approach
Greebo
N9017H - C172M (1976)
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2005
- Messages
- 10,976
- Location
- Baltimore, MD
- Display Name
Display name:
Retired Evil Overlord
IIRC they weren't to keep anyone from killing anyone, but to save gas in the 70's. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Maximum_Speed_Law
But we're getting into some heated discussion here...and as such, this thread is rapidly becoming SZ fodder.
Consider yourselves warned...
sba55
En-Route
Oh, I didn't know. If I get pulled over, I'll just tell them you told me to ignore them
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2006
- Messages
- 5,128
- Location
- Lincoln, Nebraska
- Display Name
Display name:
Jason W (FlyNE)
Point is, while speed limits are supposed to be set using all relevant factors (road condition, alignment, traffic, etc.), they rarely are, and in many instances where speed cameras are used, the limits are set unrealistically low, with the specific intent of generating revenue. Note well: Most speed and red-light cameras are not operated by the jurisdiction, they rae operated by private contractors which collect a cut.
wanttaja
En-Route
What were the statistics for the change in T-Bone collisions, which is what running a red light sets up?
Ron Wanttaja
Speed
Pre-takeoff checklist
This is from TXDOT.
The state study sought to document the impact the camera systems have on crash frequency at reported intersections, according to the report it published. It also focused on the type of crashes that occurred in those intersections when drivers disregarded red light signals.
The type of collisions documented at the intersections used in the study include both rear-end and right-angle collisions.
Rear-end collisions increased by 5 percent, from 106 to 111, while right-angle collisions were down by 43 percent, from 265 to 151.
http://www.lufkindailynews.com/hp/content/news/stories/2008/12/07/red_light_cameras.html
Ted
The pilot formerly known as Twin Engine Ted
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2007
- Messages
- 30,019
- Display Name
Display name:
iFlyNothing
So if you admit that it doesn't make a difference, why does it even matter? How is it keeping said person from making decisions that are in line with what you believe is correct, when you admit it doesn't? I fail to see your point, other than it makes you feel better to have a speed limit in place, which you yourself appear to admit isn't followed.
Bad driving and speed limits are not related. Speed limits are advertised to be safety measures, but they aren't. If they actually made a difference, then the people you complain about would drive differently, but obviously they do not.
I already said I can agree to disagree with you, I'll reiterate that.
wbarnhill
Final Approach
I've only been pulled over by a cop, never had a speed camera or other camera tag me for any reason, but...
My big problem with any camera system is this (same goes for my University's decision to utilize cameras instead of a foot patrol):
Cameras do not prevent crimes from happening. Cameras document crimes, but do nothing to take the perpetrator off the street. Be it speeding or rape, cameras are only recording eyes until someone actually looks at the images and pursues the matter.
You cannot claim that cameras promote safety when they do nothing to remove the perceived threat (in this case, speeders).
My big problem with any camera system is this (same goes for my University's decision to utilize cameras instead of a foot patrol):
Cameras do not prevent crimes from happening. Cameras document crimes, but do nothing to take the perpetrator off the street. Be it speeding or rape, cameras are only recording eyes until someone actually looks at the images and pursues the matter.
You cannot claim that cameras promote safety when they do nothing to remove the perceived threat (in this case, speeders).
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2006
- Messages
- 5,128
- Location
- Lincoln, Nebraska
- Display Name
Display name:
Jason W (FlyNE)
If it works on 50% of the 16 year olds from the get-go and another 25% after they've had their first speeding ticket (and daddy's insurance went up 20%) then it would have a measurable impact on safety. Would you not agree that if every 16 year old were not given any direction (no speed limit laws) there would be a much higher rate of speeding among said teens?
Ok, Ted, how about this? Why have drunk driving laws? Who says that I'm not fit to drive at .08? They don't know my body. They don't know my tolerance levels. They can't stop me from getting behind the wheel after 15 shots and driving home. I can make that choice. Just because somebody can make a choice to break a law doesn't mean that the law doesn't have a purpose. Additionally, just because you don't like a law doesn't mean that it doesn't have a greater purpose in society.
Of course, I wouldn't assume that this would end up working out any other way. I'm not really into taking these types of conversations personally. It's just a fun discussion with my friends.
flyingcheesehead
Taxi to Parking
That's for sure. Chicago has some "random crime cameras" in high-crime areas, a couple of which are visible from the interstate on the south side. They put big bright blue flashers on them so everyone knows they're there - And someone got murdered right in front of one.
