The local/regional speed limits are set using the 85th percentile rule, so they basically pick the speed 85% of the people are going. Then if neighborhoods complain loudly enough, the reduce it further. There is a little bit of ASHTO involved, but that is really only for curvy roads. Because municipalities know speed limits are largely arbitrary and meaningless, they use other methods to control speeds. "Speed humps," "traffic calming devices," and "perceptual countermeasures" are all used to slow drivers down. For real highways, most of them were designed to be traveled at speeds of 80+ and then the 55 mph speed limit came about and it was "patriotic" to take 30% longer to get somewhere. Now the Feds say 70 mph max if you want highway funds to maintain those roads. Safety and speed limits are really not correlated; speed limits have gone from 55 to 65 to 70 in the last 10 years and highway fatalities are at all time lows. And other than 1 person in these forums, most people are going ~10 over the posted speed.
Folks are here to discuss photo radar, and the discussion's likely to include people who disagree with it. Telling them to talk about it somewhere else kinda defeats the purpose of these forums.
MODERATOR
Need help getting around? claires@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Speed limits are initially designed by traffic engineers who use science and educated judgments to recommend the safe speed on a road.
I'm afraid that while that may have been true a decade or so ago, it has all changed with the tax cuts and funding shortfalls that cities now face. I think its more about setting a limit that isn't outrageous, but is slow enough to get enough photo fines nowadays. It's unforunate, but cameras and these related shenanigans only serve to erode citizen's confidence and trust in their government over time.
Speed limits are not arbitrary at all, except in the rarest of situations.
Speed limits are initially designed by traffic engineers who use science and educated judgments to recommend the safe speed on a road.
FALSE.
Now I understand that your blind deference is due to your ignorance. Engineers might have gotten a say about highway speed limits back in the days when route 66 was the main cross-country route, but the 85% rule hasn't been used to set speed limits on limited access highways in decades.
I just returned from a trip to my second home in AZ and I can't believe how bad it's gotten in just a few years. I had the distinct displeasure of driving through Chandler enroute to my brother's house. Roads where people safely drove at 55mph two years ago are now posted at 35mph and littered with cash machines (aka "photo radar"). A trip that used to take me about 90 minutes took me two full (stressful, that is) hours.
It's disgusting that a town that allows itself to be overrun by illegal aliens can't find a better way to balance its budget. Just in case anybody from Chandler City Hall is reading this, please be advised that I won't be spending any of my hard-earned dollars in any of your new stores--you've made it too difficult to get to any of them.
oldfarmer50 says, "And even he admits to speeding when it suits him. "
Yes, for TWO DAYS a year. That's less than 1% of the time. Can anyone else here say that? No. So don't give me grief about my two days a year unless you speed less than that.
The rest of the time, I'm Mr. Obey The Speeding Laws.
And I NEVER, EVER, EVER put myself into the "excessive speed" category which draws the tickets.
So yes, I do have a right to complain about speeders because I earn it with my own actions.
Just as their are varying degrees of murder (involuntary manslaughter, manslaughter, third-degree murder, second-degree murder, first-degree murder, capital murder) there are also varying degrees when breaking speed laws. (I'm NOT comparing the severity of murder with the severity of speeding - I'm merely using it as a comparison point to show how degrees of severity can be similar in murder and speeding. )
That's why MOST traffic enforcement officers give a "buffer zone" of 5-7 miles per hour when enforcing the speed laws. That's why traffic and photo radar cameras are set to only snap at xx miles per hour over the limit.
My disagreement here has NEVER been with "the occasional speeder who sometimes might drive 5-7 miles per hour over the limit."
I has always been with the person snapped on Photo Radar who complains about the ticket. Those are usually the habitual, excessive speeders. I think that sort of driving behavior is wrong.
My contention is that if you are willingly speeding above the allowed "buffer" then you should pay your money and close your flytrap about HOW you got caught.
Don't exceed the allowed buffer (whether or not that is a human-enforced road or a camera-enforced road) and you will not be paying for a ticket.
What somehow makes the buffer the correct leeway? Why do cameras and actual LEOs have different buffers? Why is 66 in a 60 OK, but 71 in a 60 a crime? Why do the powers that be never have to prove their policies? Who is in control of those in control?
Yes!!! Bet that you dutifully keep manufacturer tags on your sofa, sofa pillows, etc. Bet that you only spit in designated spitoons whether on sidewalks or in bars.
On a seriious note, imagine that fintail is really a fine upstanding citizen and dutifully complies with 99+ percent of laws touching his life, including strict adherance to red light traffic signals, whether covered by photo or not.
Those who whine about speeders certainly abide by all those laws. Laws are laws, perfect and just, created by perfect logical people, and the US was built on the mindless and complete submission to all laws. Oh wait...
I have no qualms with stopping and then going through a negligently managed red light that is out of sequence on a deserted road and would otherwise cause me to waste several minutes and the gas used idling for that period.
Just keep the hell out of the left lane and stay in your place.
The way things are done? Drive on a highway in a real world location and see how many people exceed the limit.
Who is harmed by photo radar? Depends on if the cancerous mindset spreads. It could be the first stone in a road to hell paved with good intentions. Again, go to the UK and see how cameras have become insane. The power hungry revenuers here wouldn't stop.
If 11 is the definition of excessive, then should LEOs use that cut-off too? Who defines excessive?
In Arizona, it's the Department of Public Safety for the state-run cameras. The Highway Patrol. I'd say that's the right people to be doing it, since they are in charge of human-based enforcement also.
According the the AZ DPS, "In Arizona, anything over 20 miles over the posted speed limit is a criminal traffic violation and the fines for those kinds of tickets are not preset. If a person gets a criminal speeding ticket, it is up to the court to set the fine."
I would support photo radar on interstates in Illinois. Our state got fouled up with last Gov. Maybe new Gov will consider photo radar to keep chronic high speed drivers in check AND also help to shore up State budget shortfall. I would like to see the speeders pay high fines and help pay for various services the State provides. With time, and as speeders come into line, then State can look elsewhere for amount of lost revenue.
"...Yes, for TWO DAYS a year...Can anyone else here say that?...So don't give me grief about my two days a year unless you speed less than that..."
I NEVER speed in routine driving, not even when I'm on vacation. I have exceeded the speed limit occasionally on empty roads when my sporty car needs to have the carbon blown out. That lasts for a few seconds every few months. I will also occasionally accelerate quickly on interstate ramps just for the fun of it (but still under the speed limit).
So, I would guess that I speed only a few SECONDS a year compared to your DAYS. That gives me the privilege to feel superior several thousand times more than you.
Compared to me you are an adrenaline fueled speed junkie.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
"...they are not targeting people like you and me..."
(Here I go again using an extreme example to make a point)
I'm sorry larsb but that is like saying "We're not Jewish so Hitler isn't targeting us". Some things are wrong and need to be opposed even if they don't effect you directly.
Go rent a movie called "Demolition Man". Is is a glimpse of the not too distant future when the government monitors every behavior and cites you for the most minor infraction. I see photo radar as the top of that slippery slope.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
They can put in 50 different kinds of public camera technology and it would not bother me, because they are not targeting law biding shitizens like me.
I did not cry when they started putting cameras in department stores. Did you? I did not cry when they started putting cameras in convenience stores. Did you? I did not cry when OnStar started using GPS to track vehicles. Did you? I did not cry when they started putting cameras in public schools. Did you? I did not cry when they started putting cameras in shopping malls. Did you?
Those cameras have not/will not have cheated ME out of one single liberty in my lifetime.
Those are for catching lawbreakers.
If'n ewe ain't be one, then don't be aworryin' none.
fintail says, "You'd support a complete Orwellian surveillance grid."
As long as the intent is to enforce the law, and the surveillance is public in nature, then yes I would.
You have no right to privacy in the public domain.
But once again - photo radar is not "Orwellian" in any fashion. It takes your picture in a public place (where there is no legal expectation of privacy) in the act of breaking the law.
You have no right to privacy in the public domain.
The right of privacy must be balanced against the state's compelling interests. Not many states have privacy provisions in their constitutions (Arizona does) but most have gone to court to draw lines.
So it's not a stretch for a court to rule that cameras on every corner is an invasion of privacy in an otherwise public place. There have been Supreme Court decisions that say we have a right to be let alone. link
CCTV camera technology is relatively cheap today. With a multi-camera contoller and dvr, one can even monitor front and rear doors, swimming pool, etc and the exterior of their house. Some folks even put cameras inside their house to monitor babysitters. Depending how close a house is to street, can even monitor movements on street in front of house.
Coscto and Sams sell some CCTV gear.
If some guy in an E53 comes up your driveway and you are not home, might want to know that the guy came to your house on your private property.
Analogy to store, school cameras and photo radar is good. If you are not a thief in a store, you don't even worry/think about the cameras monitoring your moves. Same on highways. Obey the laws, nothing to worry about.
Right. Photo radar takes a picture in a public area, the road. And, remember, driving is a priviledge, not a right. You are granted the priviledge in return for passing whatever State DOT driver's test, having a valid driver's license, knowing and abiding to ALL rules of the road, having a legal and safe operating vehicle, driving without having liquor or not exceeding legal alcohol limit, having insurance, proper or corrected eye vision, etc, etc.
Along with license plate covers intended to negate photo radar or stoplight cameras. Any type of plate cover is illegal in Illinois. Enforcing this with meter maid type persons would be good source of revenue for State of Illinois. Maybe $100 fine and then the boot if not paid in time.
Seems like a license plate cover, smoky, blurry or similar, is like a guy walking into a bank wearing a baseball type cap, sunglasses and a fake beard.
AZ is not the "real world?" First I'd heard, thanks for the News Flash !!!
I do what I'm told because I choose to do so. Not because I am forced to do so.
I choose to obey the traffic laws because I want to do my part in keeping the roads relatively safe(ish) and I like to keep my hard-earned money rather than giving it to the state in the form of a speeder's tax.
P.S. I'd just like to reiterate that I REALLY like all you folks here. I am kept upon my toes.
Isn't an E53, or something similar to E__ a body style of mercedes or bmw? Is it like the factory code for the car just as lambda is to recent family of GM bodies?
If photo radar comes to Illinios in big way, would like to see a Pareto analysis of vehicle brands, models after about a year of tickets.
I have them at my camp for game spotting. One flashes to make people think it's garage light,but it takes your vechles picture and I can hook it to TV for a slide show. I also bought a a LED camera that doesn't flash and nobody can spot it,so I have360 degree coverage.I bought a nightscope for the dang coyotes. Also, I have a Google set up .I forget what it cost a month. I can see why the government is tryn' to shut it down. However, I got a ticket 15 years ago in Austria for going through a red light. The technology is old. I had my wife Renata speak in German to the Constable,even flashed my CID badge. I still got the ticket,we are so loved around the world,but I deserved the ticket,forget the professional courtesy.
So blanket surveillance of residential areas with automatic number plate recognition to see who is going where and when at all times, under the guise of average speed determination for protecting the children is okay?
Comments
Because municipalities know speed limits are largely arbitrary and meaningless, they use other methods to control speeds. "Speed humps," "traffic calming devices," and "perceptual countermeasures" are all used to slow drivers down.
For real highways, most of them were designed to be traveled at speeds of 80+ and then the 55 mph speed limit came about and it was "patriotic" to take 30% longer to get somewhere. Now the Feds say 70 mph max if you want highway funds to maintain those roads.
Safety and speed limits are really not correlated; speed limits have gone from 55 to 65 to 70 in the last 10 years and highway fatalities are at all time lows. And other than 1 person in these forums, most people are going ~10 over the posted speed.
MODERATOR
Need help getting around? claires@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Tell everyone about your buying experience: Write a Dealer Review
I'm afraid that while that may have been true a decade or so ago, it has all changed with the tax cuts and funding shortfalls that cities now face. I think its more about setting a limit that isn't outrageous, but is slow enough to get enough photo fines nowadays. It's unforunate, but cameras and these related shenanigans only serve to erode citizen's confidence and trust in their government over time.
Speed limits are initially designed by traffic engineers who use science and educated judgments to recommend the safe speed on a road.
FALSE.
Now I understand that your blind deference is due to your ignorance. Engineers might have gotten a say about highway speed limits back in the days when route 66 was the main cross-country route, but the 85% rule hasn't been used to set speed limits on limited access highways in decades.
It's disgusting that a town that allows itself to be overrun by illegal aliens can't find a better way to balance its budget. Just in case anybody from Chandler City Hall is reading this, please be advised that I won't be spending any of my hard-earned dollars in any of your new stores--you've made it too difficult to get to any of them.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
And even he admits to speeding when it suits him.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
I was recommending the best place to discuss it if they wanted it to CHANGE.
Point being that "talking" about it on these forums won't change a single thing.
Yes, for TWO DAYS a year. That's less than 1% of the time. Can anyone else here say that? No. So don't give me grief about my two days a year unless you speed less than that.
The rest of the time, I'm Mr. Obey The Speeding Laws.
And I NEVER, EVER, EVER put myself into the "excessive speed" category which draws the tickets.
So yes, I do have a right to complain about speeders because I earn it with my own actions.
The proper American way is blind and unflinching submission to any and every law at every junction of life, yes?
Just as their are varying degrees of murder (involuntary manslaughter, manslaughter, third-degree murder, second-degree murder, first-degree murder, capital murder) there are also varying degrees when breaking speed laws. (I'm NOT comparing the severity of murder with the severity of speeding - I'm merely using it as a comparison point to show how degrees of severity can be similar in murder and speeding. )
That's why MOST traffic enforcement officers give a "buffer zone" of 5-7 miles per hour when enforcing the speed laws. That's why traffic and photo radar cameras are set to only snap at xx miles per hour over the limit.
My disagreement here has NEVER been with "the occasional speeder who sometimes might drive 5-7 miles per hour over the limit."
I has always been with the person snapped on Photo Radar who complains about the ticket. Those are usually the habitual, excessive speeders. I think that sort of driving behavior is wrong.
My contention is that if you are willingly speeding above the allowed "buffer" then you should pay your money and close your flytrap about HOW you got caught.
Don't exceed the allowed buffer (whether or not that is a human-enforced road or a camera-enforced road) and you will not be paying for a ticket.
You need to move to England, you'd love it there.
On a seriious note, imagine that fintail is really a fine upstanding citizen and dutifully complies with 99+ percent of laws touching his life, including strict adherance to red light traffic signals, whether covered by photo or not.
I have no qualms with stopping and then going through a negligently managed red light that is out of sequence on a deserted road and would otherwise cause me to waste several minutes and the gas used idling for that period.
Just keep the hell out of the left lane and stay in your place.
But when it's the law and the way things are done, why complain when you can easily just obey and not be harmed?
Who is harmed by photo radar? Only excessive speeders. Not the general public at large.
And you know what? Excessive speeding as a personal habit CAN BE CHANGED. I know, because I did it.
I would estimate that It's reasonable to most people that 11+ MPH over the limit is verging on excessive.
Who is harmed by photo radar? Depends on if the cancerous mindset spreads. It could be the first stone in a road to hell paved with good intentions. Again, go to the UK and see how cameras have become insane. The power hungry revenuers here wouldn't stop.
If 11 is the definition of excessive, then should LEOs use that cut-off too? Who defines excessive?
In Arizona, it's the Department of Public Safety for the state-run cameras. The Highway Patrol. I'd say that's the right people to be doing it, since they are in charge of human-based enforcement also.
According the the AZ DPS, "In Arizona, anything over 20 miles over the posted speed limit is a criminal traffic violation and the fines for those kinds of tickets are not preset. If a person gets a criminal speeding ticket, it is up to the court to set the fine."
I NEVER speed in routine driving, not even when I'm on vacation. I have exceeded the speed limit occasionally on empty roads when my sporty car needs to have the carbon blown out. That lasts for a few seconds every few months. I will also occasionally accelerate quickly on interstate ramps just for the fun of it (but still under the speed limit).
So, I would guess that I speed only a few SECONDS a year compared to your DAYS. That gives me the privilege to feel superior several thousand times more than you.
Compared to me you are an adrenaline fueled speed junkie.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
So get on my side and help me bring people to their senses around here !!
(Here I go again using an extreme example to make a point)
I'm sorry larsb but that is like saying "We're not Jewish so Hitler isn't targeting us". Some things are wrong and need to be opposed even if they don't effect you directly.
Go rent a movie called "Demolition Man". Is is a glimpse of the not too distant future when the government monitors every behavior and cites you for the most minor infraction. I see photo radar as the top of that slippery slope.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
They can put in 50 different kinds of public camera technology and it would not bother me, because they are not targeting law biding shitizens like me.
I did not cry when they started putting cameras in department stores. Did you?
I did not cry when they started putting cameras in convenience stores. Did you?
I did not cry when OnStar started using GPS to track vehicles. Did you?
I did not cry when they started putting cameras in public schools. Did you?
I did not cry when they started putting cameras in shopping malls. Did you?
Those cameras have not/will not have cheated ME out of one single liberty in my lifetime.
Those are for catching lawbreakers.
If'n ewe ain't be one, then don't be aworryin' none.
Why is 6 OK from a cop, but 10 OK from a camera?
But I wouldn't expect the public sector to ever have so much honesty.
That's a question for the AZ DPS, I suppose.
I just know that if you are caught speeding by photo radar, you should pay your ticket and hushitup.
Really, don't tell people what they "should" do.
No, that's not true at all. I could come up with a lot of good reasons.
But I'm not in the law enforcement profession, so I'm not going to put "words" into their mouth by attempting to know the real reasons when I do not.
What's important to ME is that people pay their tickets and don't complain about how they got caught.
Certainly nothing horrible has ever come from that mindset...
As long as the intent is to enforce the law, and the surveillance is public in nature, then yes I would.
You have no right to privacy in the public domain.
But once again - photo radar is not "Orwellian" in any fashion. It takes your picture in a public place (where there is no legal expectation of privacy) in the act of breaking the law.
The right of privacy must be balanced against the state's compelling interests. Not many states have privacy provisions in their constitutions (Arizona does) but most have gone to court to draw lines.
So it's not a stretch for a court to rule that cameras on every corner is an invasion of privacy in an otherwise public place. There have been Supreme Court decisions that say we have a right to be let alone. link
Coscto and Sams sell some CCTV gear.
If some guy in an E53 comes up your driveway and you are not home, might want to know that the guy came to your house on your private property.
Analogy to store, school cameras and photo radar is good. If you are not a thief in a store, you don't even worry/think about the cameras monitoring your moves. Same on highways. Obey the laws, nothing to worry about.
It's not "imposing" on my privacy on ioter because I will not get snapped.
It's possible to avoid any "supposed" privacy violation ( 100% of the time ) by simply following the posted speed laws.
Agree and that is why those very dark tinted side windows should be outlawed.
Seems like a license plate cover, smoky, blurry or similar, is like a guy walking into a bank wearing a baseball type cap, sunglasses and a fake beard.
I do what I'm told because I choose to do so. Not because I am forced to do so.
I choose to obey the traffic laws because I want to do my part in keeping the roads relatively safe(ish) and I like to keep my hard-earned money rather than giving it to the state in the form of a speeder's tax.
P.S. I'd just like to reiterate that I REALLY like all you folks here. I am kept upon my toes.
If photo radar comes to Illinios in big way, would like to see a Pareto analysis of vehicle brands, models after about a year of tickets.
Also, I have a Google set up .I forget what it cost a month. I can see why the government is tryn' to shut it down.
However, I got a ticket 15 years ago in Austria for going through a red light. The technology is old. I had my wife Renata speak in
German to the Constable,even flashed my CID badge. I still got the ticket,we are so loved around the world,but I deserved the ticket,forget the professional courtesy.
It is a slippery slope indeed. Where does one stop?
So blanket surveillance of residential areas with automatic number plate recognition to see who is going where and when at all times, under the guise of average speed determination for protecting the children is okay?
I don't care if Barack Hussein Obama knows I drive through xx neighborhood every day.
Do you?