Traffic Laws & Enforcement Tactics

euphonium · August 2006

"Consumer Man" of Seattle's KOMO tested both the spray and the plastic cover. Thankfully, neither worked in the consumer test. It does take police officers off the street so they can spend more time on violent criminals and that is preferred.

rockylee · August 2006

It does take police officers off the street so they can spend more time on violent criminals and that is preferred.

That's the standard answer, however all I've seen is more money get's floated into the pockets of city officals.

Rocky

xrunner2 · August 2006

August 14 issue of Time magazine had article about black boxes, called event data recorders (EDRS), being installed in cars. 64 percent of this year's vehicles have these devices which can retain up to 20 seconds of data on speed, braking and acceleration before a crash.

Article said that EDR in a Corvette helped convict a 17-year old driver who said he was going 50-55 mph when he crashed into a car and killed its two occupants. The EDR however revealed that he was going 139 MPH. The EDR data was admitted in court and helped convict the guy and put him in prison for 3 years.

Article said that Fed Govt last week was expected to issue rules requiring automakers to standardize the recorders and make the info captured uniformly downloadable.

Article also said that some privacy advocates are concerned that these black boxes along with GPS in cars could lead to real-time surveillance and police issueing tickets for infractions not witnessed by them. These advocates also concerned that the data would be used by insurance companies to raise rates.

Imagine someone getting multiple tickets driving to work via an interstate. Leaving house and driving 15 over on road to interstate, driving 20 over 55 on interstate, driving 10 over on interstate frontage road, driving 10 over on suburban road to office. With efficiency of present day computer systems, these 4 tickets could be processed and put in mail to offender without a human intervention. Just imagine.

Just imagine the revenue possibilities. Drivers could establish accounts with their states using their credit card number so that payment for fines could automatically be debited from their charge card. The notice of violation in mail would show the details and fine amounts for each ticket and the charges to the card. Such efficiency.

rockylee · August 2006

If we let that happen, we might as well let them put a computer chip in our wrist, since privacy will be a thang of the past. We as a society are becoming more and more sick. :mad:

Rocky

210delray · August 2006

Let's not go overboard here. The author of that Time article listened too much to the paranoids.

Does anyone think the driver of the Corvette should have gotten away with his irresponsibility? After all, he killed two people, plain and simple.

snakeweasel · August 2006

Let's not go overboard here. The author of that Time article listened too much to the paranoids.

I agree, I put them in the same group that went around yelling that tollway transponders were going to let them track you and give you tickets if you get to the next toll booth to quickly.

rockylee · August 2006

Does anyone think the driver of the Corvette should have gotten away with his irresponsibility? After all, he killed two people, plain and simple.

I think the driver of the Vette shouldn't of had a computer tattle tale on him. The police could of estimated his speed by looking at the damage at the accident scene.

The "mark of the beast" is getting his way. :sick:

Next, like I said will be chips in the wrist and you will beable to go to the dealership, scan your wrist, and pick out whatever vehicle you want or can afford.

Rocky :surprise:

fintail · August 2006

Yeah, those crime rates are great, aren't they.

Cops go where the money is - traffic infractions. Let's have more transparency on how revenues are generated and where the money really goes. It's everyone's right and responsibility as a citizen to be aware of the misdeeds of their so-called leadership.

grbeck · August 2006

xrunner2: Article said that EDR in a Corvette helped convict a 17-year old driver who said he was going 50-55 mph when he crashed into a car and killed its two occupants. The EDR however revealed that he was going 139 MPH. The EDR data was admitted in court and helped convict the guy and put him in prison for 3 years.

There's a considerable difference between 55 mph and 139 mph. I can't believe that the EDR would be necessary to prove that the Corvette was going much faster than the 55 mph claimed by the defendant at the time of the accident. This should have been proven by accident reconstruction techniques.

euphonium · August 2006

"These advocates also concerned that the data would be used by insurance companies to raise rates."

And why not? More accurate underwriting by the insurance industry is always welcome. Risk assessment can always stand improvement.

xrunner2 · August 2006

I agree, I put them in the same group that went around yelling that tollway transponders were going to let them track you and give you tickets if you get to the next toll booth to quickly.

Hasn't this been done already on the Ohio Turnpike? The card that you get when you get on the Turnpike has a time stamp. The place and time you get off can be easily checked against where you got on. If your average speed over distance was in excess (by some amount) of the speed limits, they give you a ticket. If they are doing this, it behooves anyone getting on the Turnpike to check very carefully that the timestamp is correct.

snakeweasel · August 2006

Hasn't this been done already on the Ohio Turnpike?

As far as I know no they don't. I was stationed in Ohio in 1979-1980 and would travel the Turnpike at break neck speeds and never got a ticket. I have traveled it many times since (latest was 2 years ago) traveling at speeds fast enough to do that and they haven't given me one yet.

xrunner2 · August 2006

I agree, I put them in the same group that went around yelling that tollway transponders were going to let them track you and give you tickets if you get to the next toll booth to quickly.

The Tollway system in Illinois could generate a lot of extra revenue for the state by charging fines for speeding. This could be earmarked for funding some type of critical need such as school systems to lighten tax burden on home owners.

Does not take much to imagine that software could be easily made (if not already on the shelf) to identify drivers who have gone some amount over the limit (say 15 mph) and issue fines against their transponder account. This could be well publicized in advance so that there is fair warning. It could be trialed on certain stretches to work out any problems, then implemented over all toll roads.

After awhile, the amount over the limit could be tightened to say 10 mph. The fines would not count as points on drivers license until some amount of infractions were recorded. Drivers afraid of this system would be free to turn in their responders for a refund and to use other types of roads.

I don't think that many drivers would turn in their responders and pay toll manually to avoid speeding detection. Manual tolls cost twice as much as transponder tolls. But, drivers that have a need to speed on certain days could leave their transponders at home and pay higher tolls manually. They would have to be mindful of times when there might be long lines at the toll booths.

snakeweasel · August 2006

The Tollway system in Illinois could generate a lot of extra revenue for the state by charging fines for speeding.

The Illinois Highway robbers association, oops sorry the tollway authority has already said they will not do this. Plus there is a sizable number of drivers who only go through one toll booth on their commute so you could not determine their speed this way.

grbeck · August 2006

That sounds like a good way to get people to agitate for higher speed limits.

Just three weeks ago my father drove my wife and I from Harrisburg to the Philadelphia Airport, which meant taking the Pennsylvania Turnpike from the East Shore exit to Downingtown (suburban Philadelphia). He never drives faster than 65 mph (the speed limit on the Turnpike).

During that trip we passed ONE - count it, one - vehicle, and were passed by everything from minivans to Toyota Camrys, all traveling at 75-80 mph.

And there was zero enforcement. But even if the police cars were out, they still aren't going to stop you for anything up to 75 mph, unless you are tailgating, constantly changing lanes, etc.

Most drivers like to cruise along at 75 mph, regardless of what two numbers on a sign happen to be, and people need to accept that. I doubt that it's any different in Illinois. And if people want more money for schools, etc., I'd also suggest that they tax themselves directly to pay for it, or find ways to cut school costs. It's not the responsibility of drivers to fund distant school districts.

210delray · August 2006

PA is seriously AWOL on traffic enforcement (and road maintenance, school upkeep, etc.). My native state, sad to say it, needs work. Fortunately, it looks like their one goofball senator is going to be unemployed soon.

The New Jersey Turnpike was way different this past weekend -- lots of police everywhere. It didn't stop people from going 75 mph though. But I was going 65 carrying a mattress in my pickup and passed a lot more than one vehicle.

Maybe I was imagining it, but a few people seemed to have slowed down from the breakneck pace of only a few months ago -- higher gas prices possibly?

snakeweasel · August 2006

PA is seriously AWOL on traffic enforcement

Really? Seems like every time I am in PA and within 50-75 miles of Ohio there is someone pulled over every 10-15 miles.

grbeck · August 2006

The de facto speed limit on most interstates up here is 75 mph.

My friend is a Pennsylvania State Police trooper, and she told me that, conditions permitting, the police aren't going to stop you for anything up to 75 mph, as long as you aren't engaging in reckless behavior. Given that I've cruised along at 75 mph - and been passed by a marked units cruising along at 80 mph - I believe her. I've also cruised by "hidden" police cars at 75 mph, with no problem.

Which suits most of the drivers up here just fine.

And I haven't noticed people slowing down. It did seem, however, as though traffic volume was down on the weekends. I know that we've tried to cut back our driving when possible.

grbeck · August 2006

The western portion of the Pennsylvania Turnpike is patroled more heavily than the eastern portion.

Once you pass the Fort Littleton exit, police presence increases, especially around Breezewood, and again at Somerset.

snakeweasel · August 2006

My friend is a Pennsylvania State Police trooper, and she told me that, conditions permitting, the police aren't going to stop you for anything up to 75 mph, as long as you aren't engaging in reckless behavior.

Pretty much the same thing here in IL, the state police will allow 10 over with no problem as long as you're not reckless.

Now the strange thing is I sometimes see county police hiding alongside the interstates. I always wonder what they are doing there.

grbeck · August 2006

I think that is why there is no great clamor for an increase in speed limits...and why those concerned about speeding should not advocate enforcing current limits to the letter.

Sometimes it's best to let sleeping dogs lie...

izaclown1 · August 2006

I was listening to a local call in show talking about "black boxes" and GPS cell phones for teens. This particular person took his new foreign sports car in for normal oil change and check up. The tech guy pulled up his record and told the owner that he should not be driving his car so fast during the "break in" period. The owner said, "WHAT???". 130 miles an hour on a certain road at 1:00 am on a certain date. The owner thought a second and guess who "borrowed" the car that night, yep teenage son. Guess that was an interesting conversation at supper that night.

There is good and bad in the technology. Then, you start getting tickets from some GPS system....

snakeweasel · August 2006

That is why when I bought the Caddy the first thing I said to my son was "No, so don't even bother asking".

jek1862 · August 2006

I am trying to find the entire New York State Vehicle and Traffic Laws on the Internet. It says you can find them at the Assembly and Senate sites. I looked, but cannot find it. I would assume they are on the Internet somewhere, but despite my best efforts I cannot find them.
If anyone knows where they are I would be most grateful for a link. Thank you very much.

smittynyc · August 2006

http://www.nysgtsc.state.ny.us/vt-ndx.htm

Note: these are only excerpts.

redmaxx · September 2006

When they actually do want the info:
http://www.wired.com/news/autotech/0,2554,58616,00.html

fintail · September 2006

I'd trust them to use it for only ethical and legitimate reasons too. They are good people.

imidazol97 · September 2006

>why not raise vehicle registration rates?

But that means someone registering a vehicle that drives 8000 mi/year will pay the same for road maintenance as a vehicle that drives 150000 miles a year.

I also laughed at the signs ont he back of semis saying "This vehicle pays $6000 in road taxes." My answer was yeah, and it does $40,000 in damage to the roads and it caused two accidents with $100,000 in damages and $500000.in injuries

snakeweasel · September 2006

Actually I think gas taxes is the best way to go. The more you drive the more gas you use the more in road use taxes you pay. The more affluent people who can afford to drive a car that uses more gas will pay more, those who wish to economize by driving a car that gets better gas mileage will pay less. Those who drive in from another state will pay the use taxes too when they buy gas in the state.

I paid LESS when I moved here to register 3 vehicles for 2 years and get them emissions tested than I paid for 2 vehicles in AZ to get them registered and tested for 1 year.

You pay for emissions testing? May I ask how much, here in IL its free.

imidazol97 · September 2006

In OHIO we had E-Check tailpipe testing for about 12 years at a fee of $20 once each two years after the car was three years old. The locals found that bad and bitterly complained, but it made the EPA happy. The real problem was the legislature passed the law allowing this private company to do the testing (whose brother-in-law) and only passed it for Cleveland area, Cinci, and Dayton area. Somehow they excluded Columbus and Toledo--they have no pollution.

It was a small fee if only the whole state had had to have the checks it would have caught a lot more bad cars. Now they're rid of it and instead they get forumlated gasoline at a much higher cost than having $10 per year. But the local yokals complaining finally got rid of E-Check.

snakeweasel · September 2006

Her In Illinois is it only done in areas with a high population density. So while the Chicago area would be affected, places in the middle of nowhere would not be.

The testing places are owned and run by the state and do not charge for the test. On newer cars they just plug into the computer and read the on board diognostics.

imidazol97 · September 2006

Many here complained that they didn't like it being run by a business rather than the state, who made a profit on their bid to setup and run them for 10 years. What many of those complainers really didn't like was not being able to drive their polluting cars around. The ones that didn't pass E-Check, for the most part, needed to be fixed. But you should have heard the haters complaining about their brakes being damaged by the physical test and on and on.

So instead of fixing the 5% of cars that needed repairing, we all get to drive on gasoline that gets less mileage and costs more!!!

snakeweasel · September 2006

So instead of fixing the 5% of cars that needed repairing, we all get to drive on gasoline that gets less mileage and costs more!!!

I think everyone is getting that. Here we get that re formulated gas and still have emission tests.

smittynyc · September 2006

$37 bucks for the annual safety/emissions inspection in the New York City area; $21 elsewhere.

The problem here is that the inspections are conducted by private businesses -- it could be your local independent mechanic, most car dealers (which will usually only inspect cars purchased there), franchises like Midas, etc. The system is ripe for abuse, and there are plenty of horror stories.

smittynyc · September 2006

I don't like stickers either, and in NY you've got the regisration sticker up there as well. Fortunately, the guy who does my inspections is pretty careful and lines up the inspection sticker right against the registration. I've got them as low and as close to the outer edge of the windshield as they can be and still be legible.

I see a lot of cars with huge gaps between the stickers, or an inspection sticker that might as well be smack dab in the middle of the driver's line of sight, and it drives me crazy.

stickguy · September 2006

I just wonder how much it will cost to have all these fancy GPS, etc. gizmos added to every car on the road. Plus, what about everyone from out of state that won't pay any tax?

The gas tax is still the most efficient way to collect the variable component. You drive more, you pay more. And even though it isn't exact, most heavier cars (that beat up the road more) also get lower mileage, so in effect they pay a higher road tax. hey, a Smart car isn't going to do much damege, right?

What they should do is have tiered registration fees based on weight. That way, the H2 driver pays more to account for the extra pounding his rig does to the roads. Then they pay more for the gas tax too, over a more efficient vehicle.

redmaxx · September 2006

But that will probably never happen, since the rich people will complain that it's another tax on the rich, how it's so unfair and how it's going to hurt jobs, yada, yada.

drivingforce · November 2006

Background: Around 2 million Miles ticket accident free Professional Commercial Driver now retired, as well as over a half dozen years as State Trooper. Been writing to various state and fed agencies for years with many issues, with one that stands out as one of the worst - Red Light Running, but not in the sense you might think. Edmunds has a news article about this subject and misses the mark completely! My research with the Hedtke Institute has found that the true cause of so many crashes, yes even deaths can be attributed to NO uniformity in the past for the length of time a yellow light is on prior to turning red. Think about that for a minute. I have found that although a research review on this specific issue is scheduled by the Fed DOT starting in 2007, has it's traffic engineering recommendations posted currently, they are only recommendations and are not based upon using the worst case scenario as the base minimum requirement for length of time a yellow light should be on. Their engineers use a formula weighting certain factors to arrive at a average to use as the time a yellow light should be on based upon speed and certain road layouts, not road conditions or using the vehicle that takes the longest to stop as the minimum amount of time to use. Big Trucks unloaded take longer to stop, literally by double at high speeds, yet their averages essentially do not make it possible for even one truck to physically come to a stop safely using their formula. Let us speculate for a moment on just how many crashes have occurred because traffic engineers haven't built in enough time for these big rigs to stop safely, or dare to consider how many deaths have come about for the same reason. Everyone of us have seen the fast changing lights, or more appropriately called revenue intersections used by various towns and cities to boost their traffic ticket revenue. How many of you have thought of bringing class action wrongful death law suits or even attempted to sue these governmental agencies to correct these dangerous situations they have helped to cause by their greed and disregard for human life? It's not cheap to under take such a suit, so they continue with impunity, not even worried about what they do, they just continue to blame the drivers for running the lights. In almost any city, you will find a stretch of roadway where there are multiple intersections basically with the same layout, with lights timed differently. So you see even within the same city there is no uniformity, much the less county wide or state wide. And what about those hapless drivers who dare to drive across numerous states? Not only are lights not uniform, frequently signage, laws and enforcement is different. You as a driver are their easy mark, their patsy to make money off of and endanger your life. Don't believe me, I've been on both sides of the fence and only see small changes to make our driving safety really important. An recent example is a central Florida planning commission set up to coordinate traffic lights between three counties and yes finally addressing yellow light timing to be based upon road speed limits, including a 4 way all red condition added to the yellow light warning time to further prevent the serious crashes so often attributed to red light running vehicles. Will you stand by and continue to allow these bureaucrats to not be held accountable? Act on these issues before anyone else dies needlessly! Also, Do something safe for your community, for your children, for your future, like taking school bus loading and unloading off of major roadways into subdivisions and side roads, so our children have safety, while we continue to move our traffic without incurring the road rage wrath or the sleepiness of a driver. Prevention should be your action. Using your head is the key. Thank you for your concern, Mark Hedtke

fintail · November 2006

I wonder if that can be related to lights than turn green the instant the opposing direction turns red. I've noticed an awful lot of lights in my area operate like this. The yellow-red pause seems to be OK, but red gets an instant green for cross traffic. Seems like an invitation for trouble.

It's funny though...my mom lives in a podunk town, the kind of place where stoplights go on blinking mode from 11pm-7am...and there the lights have a second or two where both directions are red.

redmaxx · November 2006

I wonder what idiot thought this was a good idea:

http://www.azcentral.com/community/pinal/articles/1120gr-qcdrivers20-ON.html

fintail · November 2006

what a gross waste of taxpayer funded resources. any lawyer who can fog a mirror will be able to get that junk tossed out. Stupid authoritarians. Hopefully someone ticketed for it will sue that little backwater and bankrupt it.

imidazol97 · November 2006

Makes almost as much sense as red light cameras. I just talked to a safety director of a nearby city about their red light running problem. I suggested that the one they have doesn't work at the other 8 traffic lights around a high density shopping area. People run them even more flagrantly. He loves the red light cameras: because at the location where it is, red light running has gone down in the year since they installed it... Well, duh.

He wants to install more as soon as they're sure Ohio won't "ban" the cameras unless they have a police officer at each one to hand out tickets.

The mentality of the safety director kills me. It's typical of their city and how it's handled problems (not) through a couple of decades.

fintail · November 2006

It's all about the money, revenue masquerading as safety.

I wonder how many of those tickets get tossed out.

imidazol97 · November 2006

A lot of the tickets are probably never paid. People just ignore them. Can't get blood out of a turnip?

In City of Dayton there was a news story about how many millions of $ were owed for the unpaid sheets of paper (not legal tickets). The red light camera company was pushing Dayton to pursue the deadbeats (many of them probably were their own residents) so the company would get it's 75% or so. Dayton city didn't seem to want to anger some of those folk by going after the ones with a handfull of repeat violations.

Did you see the story in Arizona about the police vehicles and others being exempt from having to pay the bills for those speed/red light camera violations? I wonder if police offices and FOPA members get off without paying those bills for red light violations.

I just can't get over how simple-minded the safety director was about how well the speed and redlight camera combined worked at the one intersection; sure violations went down compared to when it was first installed!!! What brainpower. I rarely see a police car from that city unless they in the line at McDonalds which is right next to Lowes that I frequent.

fintail · November 2006

The way those camera companies reserve those shares of what is really law enforcement revenue is absolutely criminal. Use the money for a fund for people injured in traffic accidents or something...but don't give it to shady crony businessmen who push to have laws enforced simply to fatten their wallets. These people need to be introduced to Mr. Guillotine.

I didn't see the police/FOP exemption, but I am not surprised. One can't expect consistent and justifiable law enforcement. What's gonna happen, will the bigshots get fired? These people are lifers., untouchable .

I can believe a safety director would be simple minded. You should have asked about his credentials and work experience.

redmaxx · November 2006

Did you see the story in Arizona about the police vehicles and others being exempt from having to pay the bills for those speed/red light camera violations? I wonder if police offices and FOPA members get off without paying those bills for red light violations.

Yes, the City of Scottsdale worked out an agreement with DPS so that they wouldn't be issued tickets. IIRC, they were let out of hundreds of tickets in the short time the 101 cameras were operating, with the highest being ~118 MPH.

rayainsw · December 2006

Over the long Holiday weekend, I drove ( as I typically do ) from north of Atlanta to visit my friends on the Florida Gulf coast.

I now drive a red Corvette. If there is anything any speed law enforcement officer would prefer to stop than a red sports car, I dont know what it might be.

I drove through at least 8, maybe 10 areas where LEOs were utilizing Detection Devices. In every case, I was always traveling above the speed limit, but only 5  7 MPH over.

I do find it interesting that the speed limit is really not the speed limit.
Meaning: In the eyes of the ( typical ) actual enforcement officer, the speed limit is actually 8 or 9 or 10 MPH higher than the posted limit.

Much as I have observed over my past 40+ years of driving.

Even with a car capable ( according to GM and most independent sources ) of about 100 MPH more than any currently posted speed limit in this country, 75 to 80 MPH is actually fast enough  for me, with typical traffic, on most US roads.

Just my 0.02 gallons worth. . .
- Ray
Happy to achieve over 28 MPG in such driving.

imidazol97 · December 2006

It's always interesting how the officers and related people drive in their own cars. The speed limit ISN'T the speed limit for them! Especially true for those that like to display the FOP or FOPA tags on their license plate, often covering up part of the plate.

A friend of ours does not have those markings on any of his cars.

clarencehollow · December 2006

I never hear the Rich compain like a poster wished they did. Fact of the matter is the rich pay most of the taxes, and the bottom 50% of income earners in the USA, pay about 7% into the till. Yet they take more than 1/2 of the take in benefits, entitlements etc. I hope the poor get richer and the rich get richer. Any ways, I just got my car inspected in NY and I paid $10.00.

fintail · December 2006

Well, you're getting half of what you hope for. .500 is a nice average in some fields.

There's more to a "take" than governmental benefits and entitlements. Those who pay the most benefit the most from society. The bottom 40% hold .2% of the wealth, you realize.

Traffic Laws & Enforcement Tactics

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles