Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Photo Radar
Like most states, Arizona is desperately seeking additional revenue. They have recently begun installing photo-radar units (mobile and fixed) on highways throughout the state and it has had the effect of generating additional revenue.
Those who don't like it have taken matters into their own hands, vandalizing cameras, pushing for special initiatives to ban the cameras and/or putting polarized covers over their plates.
Some restrictions apply to camera enforcement:
-Fines are levied only on the registered owner of the vehicle, no license points are accrued and insurance companies are not notified. $165 for less than 20mph over, 250 for more than 20mph over.
-Cameras are set to record only cars traveling at 11mph over the limit (55 or lower zones) or 10mph over (65mph or higher zones).
What do you think?
Those who don't like it have taken matters into their own hands, vandalizing cameras, pushing for special initiatives to ban the cameras and/or putting polarized covers over their plates.
Some restrictions apply to camera enforcement:
-Fines are levied only on the registered owner of the vehicle, no license points are accrued and insurance companies are not notified. $165 for less than 20mph over, 250 for more than 20mph over.
-Cameras are set to record only cars traveling at 11mph over the limit (55 or lower zones) or 10mph over (65mph or higher zones).
What do you think?
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
Tagged:
0
Comments
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
Speeding is dangerous, illegal, wasteful, and unfortunately, WIDESPREAD.
There have already been articles in the Phoenix newspaper about how people are noticing the slower-moving traffic on the freeways and how people who have always wanted the "flow" to be slower are loving the stress-free drive.
Even if it "IS" only a money grab, which is fine with me because they are not going to grab any of MY money, I'm all for it.
Lower speeds mean more survivable accidents, more time to react to problems, less wasted fuel, and less stressed drivers.
If the speeders want to pay $157 a pop for the right to drive 11 MPH over the limit, then let them.
I'll not be with them.
-IMO Civil Disobedience should stop at the point of vandalism, wrecking speed cameras is never justifiable. OTOH I have no problem w installing a polarized "blocker" cover over the plate.
-Photo Radar is clearly a revenue enhancement measure with limited safety benefits but since there's no points on the license or insurance surcharge it's actually cheaper to get a ticket from the robot than to incur the insurance surcharges from a ticket issued by a police officer. The State is going to get it's piece whether thru photo radar fines or increased taxes--at least you can avoid fines.
-Contrary to Laserb, Arizonians do not drive that fast, especially considering the excellent highway network. Average speeds are no higher here than back home in NH.
-From what I have seen, unlike in many areas, Arizona speed limits are reasonable of the most roads. They are often close to the 85th Percentile Speed which is where most traffic engineers say it should be.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
That seems like a lot of speeding to me.
Maybe not for some areas of the country I'm sure. If they put them in SoCal, they might get 40,000 tickets in an HOUR !!!
"Uh yeah my friend Bob was driving the car that day...I can't remember his last name...he lives three towns over" :shades:
Having said that, I once got a photo ticket for running a red light in Boston. Since I go to court on every summons (sometimes even parking tickets) I appeared in Boston District Court.
The magistrate came in and asked those who had gotten a photo ticket to raise their hand and about 6 of us did so. Then and there she dismissed all of them. Apparently she felt that at least some of the points in the Business Week article where applicable to Massachusetts law.
BTW- in 45 years of driving that's the only time I've ever been cited for running a light or a sign.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
The guy running the mobile camera got fired and the city ended the photo radar contract early.
On the other hand, my elderly mother got a ticket a few months ago for going about 45 in a 30 mph zone - she was just trying to "keep up with traffic." She paid it and then sold her car. :shades:
My buddy tells me that if it is 85mph or over in Az., it is a criminal vehicular offense and therefore license points are levied.
Adopting a simplified linear model of an accident's timeline, the most frequent 'critical pre-crash event' cause is driver inattention. The 'critical pre-crash event' is defined as the action or event that puts the vehicle on an inevitable collision course - the point of no return.
Got that, driver inattention, not speed causes most accidents.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
Slowing down is good for EVERYONE.
Except the states trying to drum up income from the speed cameras.
Maryland Students Use Speed Cameras for Revenge (theNewspaper.com)
Just more to show these cameras are for moneymaking - for desperate municipalities and well-connected crony capitalist camera operators.
I've stated before that I do not go along with destroying enforcement cameras but this strikes me as a creative, amusing and relatively harmless method of civil disobedience.
Tempe Police are investigating, may prosecute.
Tempe is the home of Arizona State University, and residents are no doubt used to student hi-jinks. Investigating and prosecuting this prank will cost the taxpayers much more than simply removing the boxes.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
The big brother argument is bogus. "Catch em if you can and any way you can, but catch em."
Force discipline back into driving any way that is effective.
Speed cameras solve no problems other than giving more money to the big government self-titled conservatives claim to abhor. And I can't forget they aid the illicit fortunes of crooked crony capitalist camera operators, who are untouchable in this dying society and are the biggest threat to any kind of viable future.
What logic is used by automatically dismissing the windfall profits reaped by those who do not deserve their ill-begotten wealth? Talk about "bogus"...
"windfall profit" is defined as the Liberal's jealousy of the Capitalist's earnings.
The logic of
automatically dismissing the profits reaped by camera companies is that they are effective at making transportation safer than otherwise.
If the liberal driver was as concerned about his safe driving as he is about other's profits, photo cameras would not be as necessary as they are today.
Most Libers have never held a job that wasn't paid by a taxpayer. As such explains their acceptance of "profits".
Speed cameras have not been proven effective in the insane Orwellian surveillance grid police state of England, which has the most of any nation in the world and has pioneered the ideal of camera driven revenue creation based on arbitrary speed limits set by cowardly politicos who deserve to meet a noose in the middle of the night. But maybe the cameras will be different on this continent - right. Useless laws and shameless cash grabs by weak minded public sector dolts are the same no matter which nation is at hand.
Most silent generation "capitalists" have exaggerated fortunes built on either inheritance, cronyism, a complete vacuum of ethics, or a decidedly yellow combination of either. Most are unwilling to face these facts about those who are truly creating the problems in society, and who have dodged accountability for decades.
The inbred hicks one sees speeding around in their clapped out jacked up SUVs and pickups aren't "libers"...
Merry Christmas!
Statements like that, which are obviously wrong to anyone paying attention, cast doubt upon everything you say... rightly or otherwise.
I have to think that both you and fin are too extreme in your views. Certainly there is some safety benefit from speed and red light cameras.
And revenue generation is unquestionably a major factor in their implementation. But I don't believe that is sufficient cause to advocate vigilante lynching in the dead of night.
Personally, I am greatly annoyed by the "me first" types who steal time from the cross traffic by continuing to stream across the intersection after the light has changed. But I believe that the robotic enforcement of traffic law is in violation of constitutional protections, to be able to confront our accusers. So put my name in the "against" column.
Happy Holidays,
James (oregonboy)
You are correct in Criminal cases, but violating a photo radar device is not a criminal, but civil class of infraction, not requiring your criminal application.
A showcase example of Libers being supported by the taxpayer, give a close look at the incoming President, his staff and his advisors. Sprinkled with a few Academia nuts as well. All of them never met a tax they didn't like.
There's another statement that diminishes your credibility. Aside from the fact that it is an untrue stereotype and that many of us think Obama and his "Libers" will do better than the outgoing "Cons" it has no bearing whatever on the matter at hand.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
"A showcase example of Libers being supported by the taxpayers"
Really hard to get credibility there coming from someone who worships at the throne of military-industrial profiteers and the inheritance elite (aka the past 8 years of hell we've endured).
How can that be if it's all a Liber plot? :confuse:
I predict they'll increase the number of cameras, this isn't about Left or Right it's all about the "Cha-Ching"! :shades:
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
The libs are against cameras because they will take away their cushy government money and the cons want them so they can fund a war in some arab country?
I think you guys are making the wrong arguments here. It's not the libs or the cons that want to suck your wallet dry...IT'S BOTH OF THEM. The only difference is where they waste it once they get it. I don't think either side spends the money they take from me in my interest as it is. I sure don't want to give ANY of them any more.
I'm kind of torn on this issue. I get angry every morning when I come up to a particular stop light on the way to work and people are still zooming through after I have had the green light for several seconds. I also don't like the possibility that in the future I will be cited by some robot every time I drift 1 mph over the speed limit.
I guess I see the need for traffic enforcement but I think that cameras should be use ONLY at documented problem sites, ONLY on a temporary basis, and ONLY after signs are put up warning people that they are liable to be cited.
As to the political argument, write a check to your favorite bunch of crooks.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
I hear you on wanting to catch the real offenders but I don't think that's going to happen with photo enforcement.
I remember the same opinion was offered to oppose the parking meter, radar, and the breathalyzer, but they have come to be accepted as will, hopefully, photo enforcement.
True. But don't all those methods have a human involved as a witness? One of the things that makes me uncomfortable about these robot devices is that you can't confront your accuser.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
Remote parking meters
These things are out there already, but more as a deterrent I guess:
What is a Car Breathalyzer?
But you could see where the interlock could phone home and dispatch a cop.
What's the big deal of "confronting your accuser?"
Either you were speeding or not.
The same "challenge" you would make to a human officer can be made in court if you dispute the ticket.
The judge makes his/her decision either way.
It's a constitutional right and arguably one of the most important.
The same "challenge" you would make to a human officer can be made in court if you dispute the ticket
A camera cannot testify as to when the accuracy of it's radar was last calibrated, nor car it testify to the state of weather. traffic etc at the time of the alleged offense.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
The state of the weather, traffic, etc does not matter. A Speeder is a Speeder is a Speeder.
There are no "legal exceptions" to the speeding law.
If there were extenuating circumstances like "I was taking my sick to the " then you can bring that up when you challenge the ticket.
You'll get your say, and will only have to argue with the judge, not both the judge and the officer.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
If everyone were to do what I do and contest every summons, the sytstem would quickly collapse from over load.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
But I do know about debating and arguing - THOSE I am good at.
And I have friends who have gotten photo radar tickets. They ARE ALLOWED to contest the ticket in court before a judge and have their say.
That is no different in process than contesting a ticket issued by a human, except that you have one less person to argue with.
Injury accidents - down 17%
Fatalities - down 29%
In the first 80 days of the program, about 7 fewer people died than usual.
Photo radar CAN save lives and DOES reduce speeds.
At last, something we agree on.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
Common Sense-ation.
Such cameras have widely been defined as ineffective in England - the state that invented the Orwellian surveillance grid and has more of these cameras than anywhere else. But maybe results are different in the land of logic and reason known as Arizona.
If the goal is to slow down traffic, I think that is working here. That part is the only part that needs to be effective - because all the other "good" things come from that basic step.
Just by slowing people down, traffic collisions and injuries and deaths are reduced automagically.
Still no positive relationship between cameras that truly exist to make money for desperate municipalities and well connected crony capitalist camera operators and any wide ranging improvement in road safety.