California drivers may soon face speed cameras (Sacramento, Davis: photo radar, how much)

[Lifeshadower]

California drivers may soon face speed cameras - Inside Bay Area (http://www.insidebayarea.com/california/ci_14152225 - broken link)

California drivers may soon face speed cameras

The Associated Press
Posted: 01/08/2010 06:44:45 PM PST
Updated: 01/08/2010 07:19:44 PM PST


SACRAMENTO, Calif.—California drivers who race through intersections might soon be caught on camera, a move Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger proposed Friday to bolster the state budget with speeding fines. Schwarzenegger wants to retrofit 500 city and county traffic lights already equipped with cameras to capture drivers who run red lights with a system to snap the license plates of speeders, too.
Fines would range from $225 to $325. The state would collect 85 percent of the money, using the projected $338 million to help pay for courts and court security as it scrapes for money to close a $20 billion deficit.
The state estimates each of the 500 cameras would catch 4,800 speeders annually—2.4 million tickets a year statewide. Speeders who blow through red lights would be hit with fines for both violations.
"If the revenues come in below our conservative projections, then so much the better for public safety," said H.D. Palmer, spokesman for the state Department of Finance.
Local governments would operate the cameras and keep 15 percent of the money. League of California Cities lobbyist Jennifer Whiting said that might be enough to entice widespread participation, though the league has taken no position on the proposal.
Cities in several other states already use red light cameras to also catch speeders, according to California budget officials.
Several previous similar bills have failed in the Legislature.
Public acceptance might depend on whether the state can prove a benefit to public safety, said Patricia Mokhtarian, a professor of civil and environmental engineering at the University of California, Davis. "If they tie it to a safety standard, than it might be fine. If it's kind of perceived as a nickle-and-dime way of squeezing more money out of the speeding traveler, then there could be a backlash," she said.

[Huckleberry3911948]

an avalanche of revenue coming to california courtesy robo cop.

[Lifeshadower]

Yeah. On one hand, you shouldn't be speeding to begin with. On the other hand, the state of California needs money.

See how those two work out in this project? Somehow though, I don't know how much of a difference it would make. In Arizona, only 24% of those who got photo radar tickets actually paid their fine (source: Fewer paying speed-camera tickets in Arizona) . I don't know if California can do any better, considering the state's incompetence in almost everything else. I guess we have to wait to see if it will pass, since all other attempts to pass this has failed.

[bhcompy]

There are always privacy concerns with things like speeding cameras, and I assume if they institute it the program will be mired in the courts for a long time

[EscapeCalifornia]

How are they going to define speeding and how are they going to ensure that the right car is ticketed? I'm sure everyone slamming on their brakes at the sight of a yellow light because they can't speed up a little to make it through will be great for gridlock.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by EscapeCalifornia

How are they going to define speeding and how are they going to ensure that the right car is ticketed? I'm sure everyone slamming on their brakes at the sight of a yellow light because they can't speed up a little to make it through will be great for gridlock.

Why wouldn't just be defined as the vehicle moving faster than the speed limit, similar to those little trailers parked on the sides of roads showing "Your Speed" and "Speed Limit"?

I think the technology exists to ensure the right car is ticketed - most of the time. Perhaps it's worth rolling it out and the revenue generated by the majority of offenders will pay for the legal battles for the small percentage of drivers that the system delivers a false positive.

My understanding is photo radar or speed cameras have been in use for years in Europe and it resulted in something like a 70% reduction in speeding.

[EscapeCalifornia]

Originally Posted by Charles

Why wouldn't just be defined as the vehicle moving faster than the speed limit, similar to those little trailers parked on the sides of roads showing "Your Speed" and "Speed Limit"?

I think the technology exists to ensure the right car is ticketed - most of the time. Perhaps it's worth rolling it out and the revenue generated by the majority of offenders will pay for the legal battles for the small percentage of drivers that the system delivers a false positive.

My understanding is photo radar or speed cameras have been in use for years in Europe and it resulted in something like a 70% reduction in speeding.

So you get a ticket when you're in a pack of cars going 0.1mph over? I think they'll find themselves overwhelmed with people fighting these tickets.

[RJay123]

They teach us in traffic school to go as fast as the traffic around you is going.

It's even one of the questions on the written exam when you take your license test.

It's very subjective who is breaking the speeding rule, it's something only a human should determine with his own eyes.

[Des-Lab]

Forget the whole "Safety" issue. The ones who say things like "well if you don't want to get caught, then don't speed" just need to p*** off and take a hike. This subject has absolutely nothing to do with that. If the issue was one of safety, then a profit motive would be absent the equation.

This is a blatant cash grab no more no less. I wish Arnie would've just said it outright, since he stopped one word shy of it anyway:

"To all people of Kal-ee-forn-ya. We need this money. We want that money. We're going to take it. It's just up to you how how wish to pay. Are you going to give it up voluntarily and agree to some much higher taxes and fees with reduced services? Or are you going to give it up involuntarily on the side of the road at gunpoint?"

It's your choice. But make no mistake about it. We ARE going to get your money one way or another."

Let him roll it out. I dare him. Maybe that will finally spark the same kind of outrage that got him INTO office in the first place. Only this time, in an election year, we vote EVERY one of the incumbents out. Every single one.

Yeah, I know it's a pipe dream for sure. That when it comes right down to the ballot box, the "correct and preferred" age/gender/ethnicity attributes still weight far more heavily than any legislative agenda.

[wehotex]

Originally Posted by Lifeshadower

California drivers may soon face speed cameras - Inside Bay Area (http://www.insidebayarea.com/california/ci_14152225 - broken link)

It seems like an outrageous intrusion on drivers to allow this sort of thing. If CA voters had just allowed gays to marry, it would have raised as much $ for the State.