Photo Radar

1679111238

Comments

  • grbeckgrbeck Member Posts: 2,358
    larsb: OK. You go talk to cops and see if they think speeding is OK.

    Actually, I have, and, off the record, they agree that driving above the speed limit on a limited access highway is no big deal.

    And I've followed off-duty state and local police officers while they are driving on local limited access highways. They have not activated their emergency lights, so they are obviously not responding to an emergency call. Most of them drive at least 75 mph. My favorite was the marked police car from a town in Virginia traveling at 85 mph along I-81 in Pennsylvania (posted speed limit - 65 mph). I did enjoy the high-speed police escort.

    As they say, actions speak louder than words... ;)
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    see 408
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    Police officers, in marked cars or when off duty, speed, so that makes it OK? I really hope that's not your position.

    Last I heard, a cop who murders someone gets arrested. A cop who beats his wife gets arrested.

    Being a cop is no excuse for breaking the law.
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Member Posts: 3,062
    ANyone know how red light camera intersection technology distinguish those cars just making a "right-turn-on-red" vs runnning a red light?
  • euphoniumeuphonium Member Posts: 3,425
    The position of the vehicle in the photo would indicate direction.
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Member Posts: 3,062
    Depending on size of intersection, a vehicle might still be going forward AND through the stop line marker before starting to turn the vehicle wheels for a right turn.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,543
    And around here, many cars seem to go straight in turn only lanes too, as the driving ability is dumbed down.
  • grbeckgrbeck Member Posts: 2,358
    larsb: Police officers, in marked cars or when off duty, speed, so that makes it OK? I really hope that's not your position.

    You specifically asked me what a police officer would say in regards to my post that exceeding the speed limit on a limited access highway is hardly dangerous. I responded by showing what they DO, which completely rebuts the point you were trying to make. It also provides graphic proof of their views on the dangers of exceeding the speed limit on a limited access highway. As I said, actions speak louder than words...

    And, yes, it's perfectly okay to exceed the limit on a limited access highway (conditions permitting), and if the people charged with enforcing said limit do it while off duty, too, then it's even more okay. Informed drivers understand this.

    larsb: Last I heard, a cop who murders someone gets arrested. A cop who beats his wife gets arrested.

    Apples to apples, please. Murdering someone and spousal abuse are bad because someone is either killed (murder) or seriously injured (spousal abuse). Driving 85 mph in the 65 mph does neither...which is why police officers, and lots of other people, do it every day.

    Incidentally, many posts back, I noted that the response, "it's the law," is an insufficient reason as to why the speed limit must be rigidly obeyed. After all, I showed that various laws have different penalties for violations, which proves that they are not all accorded the same weight. You scoffed and said that you know the difference between murder and exceeding the speed limit. Yet, here you are trying to make that very connection - attempting to equate murder (not to mention spousal abuse) to exceeding two numbers on a sign.
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    I've said two times already that we are just going to have to "agree to disagree" on the issue and quit clogging up the forum.

    You got the last word, which you obviously cannot live without. Now for the sake of the other forum users, just drop it.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Well, you're welcome to drop it, but you can't really control what others post. Anymore that you can stop someone from speeding, unless you're a cop. Even the radar cameras will just slow them down for a day. Maybe.
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    I didn't mean to "tell" him to do anything.

    I just meant that neither of us will change our views, so his picking and choosing which of my arguments to attack is just wasting everyone's space.

    But Steve, as Host, if you don't care that two people go back and forth forever with no chance of anyone changing anyone else's mind, them I'm willing to do that, as time permits.

    I thought the goal of long-winded over-and-over discussions were to get enough facts out there to finally convince the "wrong" person that they are indeed "wrong."

    With the two of us, we are never going to see eye-to-eye on this issue.

    In a "topic-related" flashback:

    There was another Letter to the Editor in today's Arizona Republic which contests your assertion that "Even the radar cameras will just slow them down for a day."

    Reader writes that she got a ticket and got the message. She now drives slower to avoid tickets. "It's a deterrent to speeding and anybody who disagrees with this is just not being honest."

    Here is the link to her letter.

    That's a realistic, grown-up response. Shows maturity.

    People who say "WAAH WAAH they used a camera to catch me speeding NO FAIR!" are the ones who are childish and immature and reacting like people who think breaking the law is OK.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Drives slower? Big deal - my mom got a photo radar ticket, sold her car and quit driving. :P

    There's a silver lining in everything. :)

    And the letter writer appears to be a woman. And she's married to the regional distributor for Redflex.

    (Ok, no she's not - just kidding).
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    steve said, "Drives slower? Big deal - my mom got a photo radar ticket, sold her car and quit driving. "

    We need a few more of those !!!

    Imagine how much safer and friendly our roads would be if more people did whatchoMomma did !!!!
  • berriberri Member Posts: 10,165
    I saw that Chicago has a potentuial financial problem because of all the transit busses getting caught by red light cameras (kind of ironic!). The funny part was that while the violations keep increasing, the number of accidents is actually falling each year. Maybe the correlation between cameras and safety is more liberals spouting what they think, rather than actual fact based? Nah, people wouldn't fake or misuse statistics, right!
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    I am thinking Larsb might be European. It seems like they have a different view of laws, government and regulation than most folks in the USA.

    I don't think its too hard to come up with a list of laws that don't make sense, are stupid, or otherwise irrelevant. Some are even immoral. I think that is why people in the US don't blindly follow legislation if they don't agree with it.

    Dumb Laws by State

    Speed limits, in most cases, fall under the same heading. Reasonable and prudent is still the maximum speed law on the books in most places with federal highway funds requiring additional, silly laws.

    One law that is on the books is slower traffic must stay to the right unless passing. I think America would be a much better place if people would follow this law. Its one of my personal favorites.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    I think reasonable & prudent is on the books so the cops can ticket you if you are driving too fast for conditions but still below the speed limit. The California Highway Patrol stopped a guy I know three times while he was doing the limit during a rain storm - I suppose because when it rarely rains, people forget that the oils on the road make for slick driving. I guess the cops would rather pull you over and tell you to slow down instead of pulling your carcass out with the Jaws of Death tool.

    I think most of those dumb law sites are either apocryphal or they make sense in context. It's not dumb to forbid sweeping litter into the street or keeping bikes off the sidewalks in the city core.
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Member Posts: 3,062
    DIdn't realize that red light cameras were a liberal thing.
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    I don't think too many reasonable people would consider speed limits as a "dumb law."
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Member Posts: 3,062
    I will admit to being dumb for 5 minutes this morning for clicking on the "Dumb Laws by State". Some I looked at for my state made sense. Such as: Crystal Lake Illinios law making illegal to use Crystal Lake city water to water freshly installed sod in hot summer month. Law makes perfect sense in that community wells are under extreme stress in hot, dry summer months.

    Obviously, some laws are outdated and put on books for conditions that no longer exist. Maybe "Stupid" part of Obama/Congress Stimulus program could allot billions to give to communities across the US to employ contractors, not government employees to find obscure and out-of-date laws and give to legislatures to take action to rescind.

    Saw another law for someplace in Illinois in that it was illegal to drink beer from a pail on the curb. I think that this made sense years ago. I recall some years ago an instance when a super old senior relative was reminiscing to me. She said that when she was a pre-teen child, her drunkard father would have her take a small bucket to a tavern down the block for a cold bucket of beer and bring it "BACK" to house so he could get drunk at home. She said this was common back then and drunkard fathers had set up accounts/tabs at neighboorhood taverns to have their young kids fetch cold beer.
  • oldfarmer50oldfarmer50 Member Posts: 24,298
    "...so he could get drunk at home..."

    He probably didn't want the photo radar to snap a picture of him driving home from the bar with a pail on his head. ;)

    2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible

  • grbeckgrbeck Member Posts: 2,358
    Next time you drive on a limited access highway, count how many people - and maybe even some police officers - vote with their right foot. That should give you a hint. ;)
  • eliaselias Member Posts: 2,209
    larsb, i'm not breaking the law when i drive 79.999 mph in a 65. it's merely a civil violation. so it doesn't make sense to bring up actual crimes by comparison. instead, maybe lets compare with other civil violations.?

    about photo radar specifically:
    is there any photo radar in the northeast? on an engineering basis i'm interested in the device's envelope of operation.
    can it get a usable photo of the plate on a ZR1 idling by at 160MPH?
    if the driver were to do a 180 and flip the bird at exactly the right moment as he passed the photo-radar, the camera would photograph the side of his car, and the bird, and no license plate. also the additional doppler-shift on the incident radar due to vehicular rotation could increase the speed-radar's reading considerably, yet another bonus.
    so anyway.... is mythbusters hiring?
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    On my little short commute, I travel a 3 to 4 mile stretch of one little short highway.

    At one end of it, they sometimes park a Photo Radar van. It was there this morning.

    Ahead of me about 3/4 a mile, I saw a flash and knew the van was there.

    After I passed it (going 55 MPH, the posted limit) I saw another flash in a group of cars about 3/4 a mile behind me.

    Two drivers in about 30 seconds, each going at least 11 MPH over the limit.

    Their day did not start out so good. They should have left home 5 minutes earlier and drove the limit !!!!!!
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    Speed laws may be "civil" laws, but they are LAWS nonetheless. Breaking them IS breaking the law.

    And speeding up to certain speeds does transform it into a criminal law case. People have been arrested for speeding.
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Member Posts: 3,062
    Great!!! That will teach them a lesson to slow down. Lack of personal responsibility and discipline to manage time/life and immature attitude toward laws.
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    Could happen.

    Getting tired of paying speeding tickets and tired of shelling out $125 and four hours for a defensive driving class, combined with maturity, is what got me to stop speeding.

    I did a lot of speeding in my younger years. I was one of the Evil-Doers.

    The last ticket I got was in 2000, for speeding on an on-ramp when merging, and after that I decided "enough of giving my hard-earned money to the state" and I reformed my ways.

    Getting tickets CAN reform people's attitudes. I'm living proof of that.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,543
    Coerced submission to regulations imposed by people who lack the knowledge and insight to do pretty much anything correctly isn't really an improved attitude.
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    Yes, coerced into not speeding.

    It's called obeying the law.

    People who refuse to be "coerced" can just keep paying the fines.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,543
    Or they can speed attentitvely and keep on movin on.

    I exceeded the limit on my drive to work this morning. I will do the same on my way home. I did the same yesterday and I will do the same tomorrow. I have very little worry of getting a ticket or creating any kind of dangerous situation, as it simply is not a true evil.

    Blind submission to laws does not create progress. Nothing but blind submission to laws created by overpaid underworked irresponsible cronies, the US wouldn't exist.
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    First, you've yet to successfully explain how obeying speed laws is "blind obedience" in any form, and secondly, why "blind obedience" to a law so helpful to us all is BAD in any way.

    Drive 11+ MPH over the limit in photo radar areas all you want. Just pay the fine willingly and speed on, pardner.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,543
    Whether or not I am successful in your opinion is of no matter to me. When people preach that being "proper" and having the right "attitude" is blindly obeying anything made into a law by the least competent government organizations in American history is enough for me.

    You'll do what you're told, and you'll like it. You love the idea, admit it.

    Helpful to us all? Maybe self-righteous hybrid driving bicyclists shouldn't be making such judgments. Helpful to those who lack the facilities to handle driving at speeds deemed appropriate by the rest of the first world, and helpful to greedy mulicipalities and cowardly camera company operators, maybe.

    Still no reasoning of why 11+ is some magical number...other than the powers that be have determined it to be the boundary, and what they say goes. A proper attitude...

    It all comes back to "you can't even run your own life..."
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    Here's what I love: Speeders who get caught by Photo Radar when they know the cameras are there.

    That just proves that they are not taking car of their own financial houses and are not caring about the safety of themselves, their passengers, and other people.

    Selfish. Drivers who get snapped are nothing if not Selfish.

    "I want to drive as as fast I want to drive, and every other consideration be darned" is what they are saying.

    Convince me it's not a selfish attitude. My mind is open to your discussion points.......
  • vchengvcheng Member Posts: 1,284
    From:

    http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/second-arizona-jurisdiction-rejects-speed-camer- a-tickets/

    "In December, Arrowhead Justice Court Judge John C. Keegan issued an order declaring the state’s freeway photo radar program unconstitutional."
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    Yes, I saw that earlier.

    All he wants is the fines to be the same in the Photo Radar as if it were a "live human-issued" ticket.

    I see nothing wrong with that concept either.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,543
    Aha, now we have a new caveat about knowing the cameras are there. How the story changes. I too find some consolation in seeing the inattentive nabbed, but do it in the name of revenue, not bogus claims of safety.

    If it was all about safety, nobody would be going over 40 or so. Your dream world!

    I'm not here to convince you, I don't often try to persuade brick walls :P
  • vchengvcheng Member Posts: 1,284
    What you are neglecting as many times before is the element of choice and free will involved.

    We have a right to be secure in our persons against unreasonable searches and seizures. These rights cannot be violated but upon probable cause.

    Quite a simple but powerful concept really, but ignored by many for their own ulterior motives to the detriment of our great nation. Witness the gut wrenching issues related to the use of torture in the name of keeping us safe, and you may see the analogy.

    Slippery slopes indeed!
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    What in God's name are you even talking about?

    I merely agreed that the judge can say "the fine should be the same" regardless of photo radar or human-operated radar.

    What other ridiculous statement are you accusing me of now?
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    It's not a "new caveat" at all.

    Camera zones in Arizona are all marked. Everyone should know they are there if you are paying attention to road signs.


    I've already said in previous posts that I'm OK with Photo Radar being a "money grab" too.

    If it slows people down, which is DOES, then that's good too. But making money for the state on people who refuse to abide by laws is fine with me.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,543
    How slow should they go? What is the arbitrary and asinine threshold for today? Should it change whenever an overpaid underworked pubic sector revenue waster makes a decree?

    Just admit it is a cash grab masquerading as safety...and keep right.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,543
    Did I type too fast for ya? ;)
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    People should drive the speed limit, and not complain when the cameras snap them cheating the law.

    That boils down my entire argument.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,543
    Bolts down, indeed.

    Cheating the law...it's almost like a joke. Laws are not just in and of themselves. Laws are only worth as much as those who create and allow them.

    Just keep to the right.
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    Breaking laws/rules with the intent of not getting caught = cheating
    To violate rules deliberately = cheating
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,543
    Obsessing and harping on defiance of asinine, arbitrary and mindless "laws" as "cheating" = inability to admit one's own blind deference.

    Maybe better a cheater than a sheep.
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    Sheep > Cheater

    Yes, I'm a sheep. BAAA BAAA. Shear me and make me drive the speed limit !!!
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,543
    All I have to do is make a law and get "society" to go along...and you'll follow. Maybe you should move to the UK - a camera on every corner, and an insane Orwellian nanny state leading a once powerful system to its death. I think you'd be right at home.

    Just keep right.
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    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.

    If there are speed limits in your town you disagree with, go to City Council meetings and complain.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,543
    Yes, the limits which change at random positions on roads everywhere are completely based on logic. 60 vs 65 vs 70 has been proven with relevant distinction on the roads where the respective speeds are set, just as 30-50 speeds are defendable on other roads. That's why the traffic network is such a fine example of good planning.

    I will complain where I please, but really, thanks for the advice.
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    And yes, you can "complain where you please," but doing it here does you no good.

    Do it somewhere it might help, if you care that much about it.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,543
    It's going to take a lot more than complaints or babbling to some city council shmucks to right this sinking ship....this is just chatter.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Your Privacy

By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our Visitor Agreement.