Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Okay, the only claim I have to Phoenix is that I lived there from 1985-1990, but I saw this thread's title in the General Forums and my statistics radar went off!
Here's where I have a problem:
AZ DPS reported fatality and injury records from two small reporting periods (80 days) from two relatively small pools of population (fatalities/injuries when compared to total drivers). When the sample groups are small, the confidence in the ability to generalize your findings to the general population decreases. A 15% change when the sample group is the size of 50 (7.5 people) is much less meaningful than if there is a 15% change in a sample group of 100,000 (15,000 people). Each life is equally important, but when the numbers get down to 5 and 10 people, long-term trends are needed to determine if this is just normal annual variance created by numerous OTHER variables or if this is meaningful data.
And so I lead in to....
DPS compared 80 days in 2008 against 2007, but they failed to include the same periods from 2006, 2005, 2004...and so on. This is a very significant flaw because they failed to present the long-term highway safety trend for the metroplex. Were the highways generally becoming safer already? How did 2007 compare to prior years in safety records? Well, 2007 was a particularly bad year for injuries in Arizona, with traffic injuries up 27% from 2006. Yes, it's for the whole of Arizona, but this illustrates why comparing 2008 against only one year poses a problem.
Consider it a regression toward the mean. In 2004, 2005 and 2006, traffic injuries in AZ were pretty stable with only about a 1% variance per year, but 2007 comes along and injuries go up 27%. Statistically speaking, there's a pretty good chance that the 2007 data are an anomaly and that subsequent 2008 data would regress to the mean (closer to the average of the 2004-2006 data) naturally with intervention.
Also, you have to consider that auto fatalities are down all across the nation. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration reported last month that national highway traffic fatalities for the first thee quarters were down almost 10%. Yes, it's also comparing only two years but this reduction is factoring in Arizona as well, and if there is a national trend in the same direction then the AZ DPS can't give all the glory to its highway cameras. There's a bigger picture to consider.
And a few other things brought up earlier:
You can't assume causality with correlation. Already defined well by jgunn72 - no need to add.
AZ's budget is in the hole and justification for this large expenditure is needed to keep the taxpayers happy. As the DPS is want to say: "See? This is money well spent after all!" Try to keep in mind the motivations for issuing press releases to the media.
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.
Which occurs how often? A few times during the winter and a few times during the summer monsoon. The rest of year, it hardly rains at all. But I'll agree that a little rain isn't enough to slow people down much ... unless it's a massive downpour. The kind of weather that will accomplish your beloved slower driving is snow, sleet, ice, and fog. We don't have any snow, sleet, or ice, and very little fog. I've said this dozens of times before: our conditions are FAVORABLE for faster driving.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 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.
The 51 freeway between Shea & the I10/202 interchange was widened about five years ago, so it's a lot different than it used to be. It's wider and more efficient ... but the speed limit is STILL 55 south of Glendale Avenue. This makes no sense because drivers can safely do 75 MPH during lighter traffic conditions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RCR
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.
If I remember correctly, the urban freeways in San Diego (same population density as Phoenix) are set at 65 MPH. Same in L.A. with an even greater population density. I could be wrong, because I honestly haven't been on every single freeway mile in L.A. or San Diego, but I recall that 65 is the posted speed in both cities. The funny thing is that Californians in general actually drive faster than Arizonans ... but their urban areas have higher speed limits, and NO photo radar cameras.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RCR
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.
Historically, Arizona usually has a high amount of initiatives for us to vote on. You should be grateful that you're allowed to be part of the process. We were the first state to approve the MLK holiday by public vote. We were one of the first to outlaw cockfighting, and steel jaw traps. Our "paid representatives" certainly didn't listen to the citizens on those issues! I would rather have all public matters be voted on by us, rather than having our state turn into a socialist or totalitarian type of system where the gov't decides everything. Besides, that kind of system is un American. I realize that's pretty much what Napolitano wants ... but that's a different subject.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RCR
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.
And that's just fine with me. Many initiatives that are put on the ballots call for tax increases, or radical changes in laws that we don't need in this state. Regardless of how the majority of citizens feel about the speed cameras, all I know is I've driven all over this city, this state, and beyond for over 25 years ... and I admit to being a fast driver. Never once in those 25 years have I been involved in an accident, and never even had a speeding ticket! We did just fine for many years without photo radar, and we don't need it now. If speed, aggressive driving, and traffic fatalities are such a problem, more DPS officers are needed.
I don't know for a fact, but I assume these statistics are available somewhere. Do you really think they would skew the data?
Uhhh, yes, of course they would skew the data. It's in their best interests to do so, as well as in the best interests of their corporate buddies. Haven't you learned anything about the political machine in the USA?
... Arizona's Governor isn't much better. She went over the citizens in this state and forced photo radar on us without allowing a public vote on the matter ... not to save lives on the roads, mind you, but to draw in revenue to pay down a massive deficit in the state's budget which she & the Legislature couldn't come to terms on. It's nothing more than a tax on drivers without actually labeling it a tax....
I have been forced to pay that taxation without representation.
A few months ago I had to take my 8-yr-old son to the emergency room. According to the health care professionals with whom I had consulted just moments earlier, his severe abdominal pain might be appendicitus. I could either wait for 30 minutes for an ambulance to come get him and take him to the hospital, or I could take him there myself and get him to the hospital in 15 minutes.
Of course I opted to take him myself. With my son crying in pain in the backseat, I tried not to go much faster than the traffic flow, but of course my mind was on getting my child to the hospital before his appendix could rupture, so I was not obsessed with my speedometer at the time.
Several weeks later I received a ticket in mail. Apparently I was caught by a traffic camera going above the speed limit at a traffic light. There was a link to watch the video of myself being ticketed, so I watched it. It was obvious that I was maintaining a speed consistent with the flow of traffic. There was also a police car at the intersection. The officer didn't seem to bat an eye at my speed or the speed of the rest of the vehicles with which I was traveling. I maintain that 1) that cop didn't see my speed as a concern and 2) if he/she had pulled me over, I would have been given a quick warning to watch my speed as I continued to the hospital.
But we are dealing with a machine here, not a human being. It seems that somehow our government officials have determined that machines are completely capable of human thought and reasoning and can make logical judgments about human behavior.
I considered fighting the ticket (which was about $170, if my memory serves me right). I consulted police officers and others familiar with the working of traffic court and determined that it would not do me any good. I may get a reduced fine plus court costs, but I would have to spend an undetermined amount of time sitting in traffic court. I am a single mother and just can't volunteer that much of my day to keeping the bench warm in traffic court.
I ended up paying $130 for a ridiculous driving class, which still ate up 5 hours of my day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bummer
I hate to be "The Poop Head" and disagree here but . . .
Even if the data is skewed, which I strongly doubt, and the cameras have saved ONLY ONE LIFE . . . THEY ARE WORTH EVERY PENNY.
Our Society would be in horrible shape (yes, even worse than it is today) if all citizens obeyed only the laws they preferred or were advantageous to their own personal agenda.
I would like for that one person whose life has been saved by the traffic cameras to reimburse me.
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.
Citizen Zombie. Just what our politicians love to hear: "Tell me what to do because I just can't take care of myself. Protect me from the big bad wolf. Make laws to tell everyone exactly what they can and can't do during every waking moment of their lives."
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?
()
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
Hooray! A citizen with a brain!
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
I couldn't agree with you more.
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.
Speed is not what kills people. Idiot drivers kill people.
Morons who are too busy talking on their cell phones to pay attention to what's going on around them. Dimwits who don't understand that they are on a *freeway* where traveling at a high rate of speed is the whole purpose for the existence of the roadway. Self-righteous control freaks who think they need to drive 10 or 20 MPH under the posted speed so they can force everyone to stack up behind them in the passing lanes, leading to stress and road rage.
Hello? Speed kills people? No. Idiots, dimwits, morons and control freaks kill people.
I would also like to point out that you have no way of knowing WHY someone is traveling faster than the posted speed. Just consider for a moment all of the possible situations that arise in life where someone would NEED to be driving fast. The simplistic advice to "leave your house 10 minutes earlier" does not apply to a whole plethora of possibilities.
In the end, it's best for people who can't handle driving on high-speed roadways to either take a driving course to learn how to use those roads correctly, or only drive on surface streets.
I have been forced to pay that taxation without representation.
A few months ago I had to take my 8-yr-old son to the emergency room. According to the health care professionals with whom I had consulted just moments earlier, his severe abdominal pain might be appendicitus. I could either wait for 30 minutes for an ambulance to come get him and take him to the hospital, or I could take him there myself and get him to the hospital in 15 minutes.
Of course I opted to take him myself. With my son crying in pain in the backseat, I tried not to go much faster than the traffic flow, but of course my mind was on getting my child to the hospital before his appendix could rupture, so I was not obsessed with my speedometer at the time.
Several weeks later I received a ticket in mail. Apparently I was caught by a traffic camera going above the speed limit at a traffic light. There was a link to watch the video of myself being ticketed, so I watched it. It was obvious that I was maintaining a speed consistent with the flow of traffic. There was also a police car at the intersection. The officer didn't seem to bat an eye at my speed or the speed of the rest of the vehicles with which I was traveling. I maintain that 1) that cop didn't see my speed as a concern and 2) if he/she had pulled me over, I would have been given a quick warning to watch my speed as I continued to the hospital.
But we are dealing with a machine here, not a human being. It seems that somehow our government officials have determined that machines are completely capable of human thought and reasoning and can make logical judgments about human behavior.
I considered fighting the ticket (which was about $170, if my memory serves me right). I consulted police officers and others familiar with the working of traffic court and determined that it would not do me any good. I may get a reduced fine plus court costs, but I would have to spend an undetermined amount of time sitting in traffic court. I am a single mother and just can't volunteer that much of my day to keeping the bench warm in traffic court.
I ended up paying $130 for a ridiculous driving class, which still ate up 5 hours of my day.
I would like for that one person whose life has been saved by the traffic cameras to reimburse me.
You're whole argument went right out the window with that one comment.
You're whole argument went right out the window with that one comment.
You mean the comment where I jokingly ask for the one person whose life was supposedly saved by robotic cops to reimburse me for the time and expense unconstitutionally imposed on me for trying to save my child's life?
You failed to refer to my comment in its correct context, which was a reply to the following:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bummer
...Even if the data is skewed, which I strongly doubt, and the cameras have saved ONLY ONE LIFE . . . THEY ARE WORTH EVERY PENNY....
I'll take this opportunity to point out that speeding is NOT the number 1 reason for traffic fatalities in Arizona. The #1 cause of traffic fatalities in Arizona is, in fact, running red lights. (This is perhaps the only valuable tidbit that I learned in that driving class.)
I'll take this opportunity to point out that speeding is NOT the number 1 reason for traffic fatalities in Arizona. The #1 cause of traffic fatalities in Arizona is, in fact, running red lights. (This is perhaps the only valuable tidbit that I learned in that driving class.)
Interesting, NextHalf . . . where was it posted that Speeding is the #1 cause of traffic fatalities? As far as I'm concerned, the #99 cause needs to be addressed if it will save that one life.
However, I believe you are correct about Red Light Violations so, according to your logic, the Red Light Cameras are OK but the Speeding Cameras are not? Statistics be damn, I can assure you from personal experience since I live a couple of blocks from a Red Light Camera Intersection . . . accidents have been reduced tremendously. Prior to the cameras, accidents, some extremely major, were almost a daily event, after the camera installation an accident is almost a rarity.
Bottom line . . . for those insisting the cameras are nothing but a Big Brother Money Source; so be it and tough toenails as long as they save lives and reduce personal injuries and property damage while they are making money.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
)
