Fatal crashes down 29% in Phoenix, all accidents down 10%...speed cameras being credited... (Glendale: tax, live)

[jgunn72]

Whoops! Even AAA is calling shenanigans on DPS's supposedly unbiased scientific data!

AAA: Are speed cameras really saving lives? | State News | eastvalleytribune.com (http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/133348 - broken link)

From TFA:

"
That said, Gorman said she believed it was unclear how DPS reached its conclusions, especially when compared to the thoroughness and transparency of past studies.
Gorman noted the state’s photo-enforcement pilot program, operating on Loop 101 in Scottsdale for much of 2006, was followed by months of research from an Arizona State University expert. The result was inches-thick bound study.
That study concluded that the average speed slowed by 9 mph, yet drivers could travel through the stretch more quickly because of a reduction in collisions. While the overall number and severity of collisions declined, rear-end crashes increased, the study found."


Note read-end crashes increased. Hmm next to frontal collisions and tbones which don't occur much on a highway, rear-end crashes would be next in line for the most severe crash.

[LesterBurnham]

Well...let's hear the argument against this.

I don't know...I mean, what else changed about the freeways that can correlate with the lower accident rate and lower speeds? The cameras were designed to do exactly that, they went up, and the figures went down.

Yes, there's no other possible cause for reduced fatalities and if you need further proof look at this chart:

Fataility numbers for 2007 vs 2008 (http://www.pe.com//imagesdaily/2008/12-26/20081226_gfx_fatals_600.jpg - broken link)

I mean look at the tremendous dropoff. It's working beautifully everywhere. Wow, in California fatalities were down 47% in Oct 2008 [starting right at the same time as our speed camera program started] and this is a bigger sample than 80 days in AZ. I haven't seen Nov or Dec numbers, but the CHP released a report saying Thanksgiving fatalities were down as well. It is perfectly clear to anyone with half a brain that this program is working exactly as it is supposed to and we should all feel safer on the roads.

....um, but wait a minute, I just remembered something. They didn't install speed cameras nationwide and they didn't install speed cameras in CA. I don't understand how they have fewer fatalities without the miracle-working cameras, it just doesn't make sense.

hmmmm, Oh! I've got it. California is next to Arizona so no doubt the visiting Californians learned their lesson from our speed cameras and took their new safe driving habits back home with them. Boy, we sure taught those crazy Californian drivers a thing or two, didn't we. Yes, this is the only thing that makes sense. Hey, maybe if we were to install another 1000 speed cameras, we could spread safe driving to the entire country!!!!!

[Greatday]

Originally Posted by joninaz

How many of these permanent speed cameras are in place on the highways? I just drove all over and didn't see any, but am not sure of the scheduled installation.

I don't know the actual number currently in place. My understanding though is that there will be 125/150 permanent installations statewide with most concentrated in the dense metro area.

I do know that on the 60, east and west, between Power and the I-10 there are quite a few - as there are on the I-10 out to west of Buckeye.

Then, you have to add to the "mix" the rolling cameras - those in the Van's parked on the shoulders - these set up at random locations.

[movin'on]

I do believe the cameras are saving lives. And I say hooray for the cameras. I can drive on the freeways now and not fear for my life (as much).

All people have to do is not speed, and the speed cameras won't bother you a whit. Very simple.

[Valley Native]

Originally Posted by movin'on

I do believe the cameras are saving lives. And I say hooray for the cameras. I can drive on the freeways now and not fear for my life (as much).

All people have to do is not speed, and the speed cameras won't bother you a whit. Very simple.

OK, I'd be willing to be more accepting of the photo radar cameras under three conditions:

* First, put it to a public vote. If the majority of the voters approve it, so be it. At least we will have a chance to voice our opinions via the ballot ... and this entire matter could have been resolved with less controversy if the citizens of this state were allowed to vote on it in the first place!

* Second, raise the speed limits on ALL freeways to 75 MPH. This would include those sections of the 17, 10, and 51 freeways in Phoenix where the limits are set at a ridiculously low 55 MPH. This is no longer the era of the Edsel or the oil embargo. Modern vehicles can travel safely at faster speeds as long as the weather & road conditions are favorable.

* Third, keep the 10 MPH buffer for driving over the speed limit ... but also add a slow buffer to cite those who drive more than 10 MPH under the posted limit. During peak commute times, this would really be a revenue generator for the state. Just think, the cameras would be flashing every second at cars that drive 25 MPH on clogged freeways. Even during the times when freeways aren't congested, the idiots who slam on their brakes when they spot the cameras could also receive citations for driving too much under the speed limit!

Sounds pretty fair, doesn't it?
()

[Greatday]

I cannot agree with RAISING the speed limits in highly congested areas, the volume of traffic alone would preclude raising the limits. Also, the traveling distances between vehicles would, IMO, tend to be closer then they are now - and braking distances would be extended.

The speed limit on another stretch of Interstate 10 in Phoenix is going up.

The Arizona Department of Transportation said Wednesday it will raise the limit to 65 mph from 55 mph between 24th Street near Sky Harbor International Airport and the "Stack" Interstate 17 interchange.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articl...peedlimit.html

[Valley Native]

Originally Posted by Greatday

I cannot agree with RAISING the speed limits in highly congested areas, the volume of traffic alone would preclude raising the limits. Also, the traveling distances between vehicles would, IMO, tend to be closer then they are now - and braking distances would be extended.

Explain, please, why speed limits on certain sections of the 51, 202, 17, and 10 freeways suddenly drop from 65 to 55 MPH when those sections are not any more congested than the 65 MPH zones. There are some highly congested places along the east 202 freeway from Phoenix into Tempe where the speed limit increases to 65 MPH. Heading west along the same 202 freeway from Tempe into Phoenix, the speed limit drops to 55 MPH with less congestion ... depending on the time of day of course.

[movin'on]

Originally Posted by Valley Native

OK, I'd be willing to be more accepting of the photo radar cameras under three conditions:

* First, put it to a public vote. If the majority of the voters approve it, so be it. At least we will have a chance to voice our opinions via the ballot ... and this entire matter could have been resolved with less controversy if the citizens of this state were allowed to vote on it in the first place!

* Second, raise the speed limits on ALL freeways to 75 MPH. This would include those sections of the 17, 10, and 51 freeways in Phoenix where the limits are set at a ridiculously low 55 MPH. This is no longer the era of the Edsel or the oil embargo. Modern vehicles can travel safely at faster speeds as long as the weather & road conditions are favorable.

* Third, keep the 10 MPH buffer for driving over the speed limit ... but also add a slow buffer to cite those who drive more than 10 MPH under the posted limit. During peak commute times, this would really be a revenue generator for the state. Just think, the cameras would be flashing every second at cars that drive 25 MPH on clogged freeways. Even during the times when freeways aren't congested, the idiots who slam on their brakes when they spot the cameras could also receive citations for driving too much under the speed limit!

Sounds pretty fair, doesn't it?
()

I agree with you on the public ballot and the rest disagree. 75 is too high. This means someone could be driving 84 without a ticket. This is too fast and this is what kills people. Sorry folks, LEAVE YOUR HOUSE 10 minutes earlier and heed the speed laws!

Plus, both you and I know there are enough idiots who live here who think it's fine to drive like business as usual even when it's raining.

[RCR]

Valley, I think you are streching it to ask for 75 on all freeways. 65 should be good within the city and 75 outside. It has been a while since I have been on the 51 but I remember some areas, especially around the Camelback area where it just felt like the lanes were tighter and going that fast was uncomfortable. Maybe it is different now. Also, I could be wrong on this, but I thought that the feds actually used to mandate speed limits based on population centers. I thought they used to hold a state's highway dollars hostage if the speed limits were set too high.

As far as the public vote, I think it will eventually come to that. I am fine with that but it does bring up a subject which may belong on another thread. I feel that there are far too many items showing up on our ballot for public vote. This is why we have "paid" representatives to handle these items. There have been studies done in the past showing that the more initiatives there are on the ballot the more likely they are to fail. It seems that when you get above a certain number of initiatives people just become too lazy to research each item and thus vote no on all.

[ArizonaBear]

Originally Posted by movin'on

I agree with you on the public ballot and the rest disagree. 75 is too high. This means someone could be driving 84 without a ticket. This is too fast and this is what kills people. Sorry folks, LEAVE YOUR HOUSE 10 minutes earlier and heed the speed laws!

Plus, both you and I know there are enough idiots who live here who think it's fine to drive like business as usual even when it's raining.

Actually: it would not hurt my feelings to see 80 MPH on straight rural sections of, say I-10 west of Buckeye heading out to this side of Quartzsite

Speaking for myself: my 1990 Suburban is not really happy cruising much above 70 MPH so I tend to hover around that speed even on the '75 MPH' stretches of freeway----------in the right lane of course.