• Raiderkev@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Imo it’s just a bullshit revenue generator, and an invasion of privacy/expansion of the surveillance state. Cops should only be focused reckless drivers, drunk drivers, and people on their phones that are actually putting people in danger. Someone accidentally doing 35 in a 25 isn’t a danger. I haven’t gotten a speeding ticket in over a decade, and I’m a very safe driver. I can almost guarantee once these go into effect, they will put them in places where the flow of traffic is generally not going the speed limit on most days, and just rake in money. I’ll probably start getting tickets, and it will impact my insurance premiums.

    • BassTurd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      How often do you “accidentally” go 10 mph over the speed limit, especially in locations that you frequently travel? I live in a state that has speed and red light cameras. In my city I can specifically point to at least 7, 2 on my commute to work. I’ve never got a ticket from any of them. Legally, there has to be signs around that say there is photo enforcement. If you’re paying attention to the road, like you should be when driving, there is almost no excuse for getting a speed camera ticket. Sure it’s a revenue generator, and I very much subscribe to, “all cops are bad” but that doesn’t change the fact that it’s enforcing laws with absolutely no bias. I’ve never seen a traffic camera shoot an unarmed civilian at a routine traffic stop and they are effective at slowing traffic in those areas, anecdotally speaking.

      • Emma_Gold_Man@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not arguing with your main point, but “absolutely no bias” is a stretch. The camera itself may not be biased, but other factors like camera placement, street design, and fines that aren’t scaled to income mean they still disproportionately impact black, brown, and poor people.

      • Raiderkev@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Highway 280 in the bay area was designed for high speed driving according to my uncle who was a caltrans engineer. He says it was designed for 80 mph speed limit in some parts. I’m trying to find a source on that, but found mostly reddit posts saying the same. If you go 65, you will be tailgated. Some people here call it “Do 80” and the traffic flows at 75 -80 mph. The people who are actually putting people in danger on that road will be going 90+. Highway 5 as well as highway 99 traffic routinely flows at a higher rate of speed than the posted speed limit as well. 10 mph is negligible for highway driving imo. I rarely even look at my speedometer when driving, just go with the flow, move to the right if someone is coming up driving faster, pass on the left when applicable. That’s how it should be, not having people try to focus on going some arbitrary number. People should be focusing on the road, not the speedometer. The biggest danger to drivers and pedestrians is people under the influence, people on their phones, and reckless drivers who change lanes frequently and tailgate people. We should be focusing our efforts there if we want safer roads, but the state doesn’t want that, they want revenue. Instead of going after true nuisance drivers, their solution is to put cameras that catch anyone going above an arbitrary number and give them a ticket. It’s bullshit.

    • georgette@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I can almost guarantee once these go into effect, they will put them in places where the flow of traffic is generally not going the speed limit on most days

      So you are saying they will put these cameras in places where a lot of people are breaking the speed limit?

      • Raiderkev@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, I’m saying we have low speed limits relative to what’s actually a safe driving speed, and putting a camera there to punish everyone for driving as they normally do is a shitty move.

      • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s not how speed limits work. They are legally required to be raised if traffic is going faster:

        “Once the road is built, engineers will evaluate the existing speeds by measuring the operating speed. They often do this by measuring the speed that 85 percent of drivers are travelling at or below, called 85th percentile speed.”

        Per federal FHWS/MUTCD regulations.

        • Raiderkev@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Tell me 1 instance of a freeway that raised speed in recent years. Practically every freeway in CA that’s not the 5 has a 65 mph limit. Traffic absolutely doesn’t flow at that speed on a bunch of them.