DPS to use speed cameras on freeways (Scottsdale: cost, law)

[aj661]

Originally Posted by sierraAZ

Your prayers have been answered! That's exactly what we're getting - Germany's system, circa 1930's.

Funny! Comparing one of the best systems in the world for insuring the safety of motorists to the Nazis I assume. Only the technology didn't exist in the 1930's and we aren't getting the system for catching tailgaters. Still, it was amusing to hear that line comparing law enforcement to fascism again. It's been awhile...

BTW,

1) I've never PRAYED for photo radar or any other form of technology for that matter.
2) If you stay within 11 mph of the posted limit, what are you afraid of? Your rights guaranteed under the constitution do not include driving. It's a privilege. And you most certainly don't have a right to endanger the lives of others by breaking traffic laws. It would be nice if everyone simply policed themselves but that will never happen.
3) You would go to court and "argue" with a camera operator (at least in the case of mobile units), not the camera.
4) You're not getting 1930's Germany. If you were, you almost certainly wouldn't have a car and even if you did, getting a ticket would be among the least of your worries.

[sierraAZ]

Originally Posted by aj661

Funny! Comparing one of the best systems in the world for insuring the safety of motorists to the Nazis I assume. Only the technology didn't exist in the 1930's and we aren't getting the system for catching tailgaters. Still, it was amusing to hear that line comparing law enforcement to fascism again. It's been awhile...

BTW,

1) I've never PRAYED for photo radar or any other form of technology for that matter.
2) If you stay within 11 mph of the posted limit, what are you afraid of? Your rights guaranteed under the constitution do not include driving. It's a privilege. And you most certainly don't have a right to endanger the lives of others by breaking traffic laws. It would be nice if everyone simply policed themselves but that will never happen.
3) You would go to court and "argue" with a camera operator (at least in the case of mobile units), not the camera.
4) You're not getting 1930's Germany. If you were, you almost certainly wouldn't have a car and even if you did, getting a ticket would be among the least of your worries.

Look forward to that:

Big Brother is shouting at you | the Daily Mail

England is ahead in the game.

[AZParents]

I drive the 101 south from Tatum to Shea every day, so I see 2 (or is it 3?) of the cameras every day to and from work.

Before they went "live" I heard all about how they'd cause more accidents, make traffic worse, etc, but I'm not seeing that at all. Yes, some drivers just slow down for the areas where they know the cameras are and then speed back up again, but it doesn't cause any trouble for traffic.

It drives me nuts when some of the same people who biotch about cops when they get a ticket - "Don't they have anything better to do, like catch REAL criminals?" but then get upset about a photo radar solution that frees up the police to do just that.

Like someone else said, don't break the rules and there's nothing to worry about. I got a ticket from one of the cameras so I went to the defensive driving course and had it wiped away. No argument from me- I was speeding and I knew it.

[Bummer]

Originally Posted by AZParents

It drives me nuts when some of the same people who biotch about cops when they get a ticket - "Don't they have anything better to do, like catch REAL criminals?" but then get upset about a photo radar solution that frees up the police to do just that.

Excellent point, AZParents . . . I guess the Cops can't win, can they?

[nitram]

Driving is a privelege, not a constitutional right, and along with that privelege comes the reponsibility to obey the laws. If you don't want to obey the laws then you should forfeit your license and driving priveleges.
Remember the life you save may be your own.
Those who say we are losing our constitutional rights need to be reminded, that the constitution states we have "certain inalienable rights", not total rights to do as we please. Otherwise we would have total anarchy in the US.

[Valley Native]

Photo radar is nothing more than a revenue collector for government agencies like DPS. If they were truly concerned about safety, then they would put more DPS officers on traffic patrol. Also, if safety is a concern, then they wouldn't be setting up cameras for the sole intent of citing speeders. Speed is NOT the cause of accidents ... intoxication and inattentiveness are the main causes. 80 or 85 MPH is not dangerous on an open highway with good conditions & sparse traffic.

As for the reckless idiots who drive at 100 MPH or more, photo cameras won't stop them. People who drive that fast are driving at CRIMINAL speeds, and should be pulled over & arrested. Instead, all they get is their beautiful picture taken with a citation in the mail, and they'll just continue to drive as fast as they want. Again, if it's the excessively fast speeders they're concerned about, why don't they put officers on patrol to nab them? Better yet, why don't they put on more cops to nab the drunks, the inattentive, and the slowpokes in the left lanes who hold up the flow of traffic?! Those are the real menaces in traffic ... not those who drive 66 in a 55!

[aj661]

Originally Posted by sierraAZ

Look forward to that:

Big Brother is shouting at you | the Daily Mail

England is ahead in the game.

Wouldn't work in the U.S. They'd get stolen. Or spray painted.

Originally Posted by Valley Native

Photo radar is nothing more than a revenue collector for government agencies like DPS. If they were truly concerned about safety, then they would put more DPS officers on traffic patrol. Also, if safety is a concern, then they wouldn't be setting up cameras for the sole intent of citing speeders. Speed is NOT the cause of accidents ... intoxication and inattentiveness are the main causes. 80 or 85 MPH is not dangerous on an open highway with good conditions & sparse traffic.

As for the reckless idiots who drive at 100 MPH or more, photo cameras won't stop them. People who drive that fast are driving at CRIMINAL speeds, and should be pulled over & arrested. Instead, all they get is their beautiful picture taken with a citation in the mail, and they'll just continue to drive as fast as they want. Again, if it's the excessively fast speeders they're concerned about, why don't they put officers on patrol to nab them? Better yet, why don't they put on more cops to nab the drunks, the inattentive, and the slowpokes in the left lanes who hold up the flow of traffic?! Those are the real menaces in traffic ... not those who drive 66 in a 55!

I addressed all of this last April. Good night.
http://www.city-data.com/forum/541191-post75.html
http://www.city-data.com/forum/544077-post80.html

[SOON2BNSURPRISE]

My answer to that is retractable licence plates. That is the answer to the cameras. Not sure how to make that work with mobil cameras as I can only see a viable way to make it work with the cameras that they put at many of the intersections in California near where I live. Apperently those same cammeras are in the Phoenix area now. We were asked at the hospital where I work from a company that monitors that for the city. They wanted to put a system on our roof to monitor the cameras. He told them no, but then he drives a Ferrari and didn't want to help out the cause. LOL

Other things that you could try are velcro plate holders. Snap them on when you park and take them off when you drive. Another thing that may be more appealing is an official plate that covers your current plate. When you want to speed cover your actuall plate with the fake plate and there you go, no tickets. I do think that it is easier to explain a missing plate then the snapp on plate though. By the way does AZ require a front plate as well as a back plate?

[ranman469]

My answer to that is retractable licence plates [bad idea]

everyone has seen them on the internet. i bet the fine is more that the ticket.

az. no plate on the front needed

[Bummer]

Originally Posted by Valley Native

Photo radar is nothing more than a revenue collector for government agencies like DPS. If they were truly concerned about safety, then they would put more DPS officers on traffic patrol. Also, if safety is a concern, then they wouldn't be setting up cameras for the sole intent of citing speeders. Speed is NOT the cause of accidents ... intoxication and inattentiveness are the main causes. 80 or 85 MPH is not dangerous on an open highway with good conditions & sparse traffic.

As for the reckless idiots who drive at 100 MPH or more, photo cameras won't stop them. People who drive that fast are driving at CRIMINAL speeds, and should be pulled over & arrested. Instead, all they get is their beautiful picture taken with a citation in the mail, and they'll just continue to drive as fast as they want. Again, if it's the excessively fast speeders they're concerned about, why don't they put officers on patrol to nab them? Better yet, why don't they put on more cops to nab the drunks, the inattentive, and the slowpokes in the left lanes who hold up the flow of traffic?! Those are the real menaces in traffic ... not those who drive 66 in a 55!

NOTHING is perfect, Valley!

I have never seen anything suggesting the Speed Cameras will REPLACE the traditional, tried and proven enforcement procedures!

In addition to the Speed Cameras here in Tucson, Law Enforcement has been adding Red Light Abuse Cameras at the intersections notorious for accidents caused by inattentive and/or arrogant disrespectful drivers. So far, the results have been impressive.

Every little bit counts!