People who hate the speed cameras... (Tempe: transplants, live in, law)

[Rick Lee]

My radar detector will pick up the mobile units. The stationary ones don't use radar, so you have to know where they are. Though the next radar detector I get has a GPS feature where you can program in the stationary sites and it will alert you when you get near one.

[azkylady2]

Originally Posted by Rick Lee

Let me guess - you'd also consent to a police search of your car because you have nothing to hide. Right? Sheeple like you are what the gov't. wants. Just keep your mouth shut and let them protect you from yourself.

probably, as you say nothing to hide.

[Huckleberry3911948]

robo cops as much as i loath them are good. you have no idea how many red lights are run here how many people speed. its dangerous. what bothers me is not that they do it, its the utter lack of remorse for injury and death.

[Rick Lee]

Red light cameras are totally different. Driving 75-80 in a 65 zone if that's what the flow of traffic is doing is not dangerous at all. Running a red light is always dangerous. I've only ever done it on my bike if I knew the car behind be was not gonna stop and would kill me, which has happened, though not in an intersection where there were cameras.

[zenkonami]

Originally Posted by Rick Lee

Red light cameras are totally different. Driving 75-80 in a 65 zone if that's what the flow of traffic is doing is not dangerous at all. Running a red light is always dangerous. I've only ever done it on my bike if I knew the car behind be was not gonna stop and would kill me, which has happened, though not in an intersection where there were cameras.

What if it were a 65, or a 55 zone because of a hard curve, or an unexpected (to someone) change in the number of lanes, or any of a number of other circumstances. People who drive them every day may know how handle them, but if someone doesn't...someone who is expecting the speed limit to mean something, then they will just go along until the unexpected happens, and hopefully react appropriately with everyone else.

What if, as seems so often to happen in Phoenix, during a monsoonal downpour, traffic has decided it's still safe to go 75-80 in a 65, regardless of traffic density, visibility, surface conditions, etc... Is it still "perfectly safe"?

I know the cameras don't discriminate in these circumstances, but it is a valid reason to have speed limits and for drivers to understand the RULES of the road. It'd be great to have cops instead of cameras, but who in Arizona is willing to pay more taxes to fund those cops?

I am far more concerned with other drivers are doing on the road than the effect the cameras are having. I've seen too many stupid drivers in Phoenix who created accidents or hazardous situations because they weren't obeying basic traffic rules. I've yet to witness speed traps and cameras being responsible for similar situations.

[Bummer]

Originally Posted by HX_Guy

I'm not trying to justify the cameras, I think they are a pain in the ass...but I do think it's 100% the driver's fault. I mean it's simple, if you don't go over 10 MPH above the speed limit, then you won't get caught. Pretty cut and dry. It's not like they don't give you any leeway, they give about a 20% above the limit leeway. (And I don't believe when people say they got caught going 7 MPH...I'd have to see the citation to believe that. Going by your own judgment of course you're going to be bias)

I was in the Phoenix Area most of yesterday, HX_Guy, and I agree 100%.

There's definitely an advantage to Real Live Cops but considering the costs involved . . . NOT REALISTIC. If anyone feels the cameras are costly, just consider the costs involved with doubling and/or tripling the traffic enforcement force.

Bottom line . . . The Arrogant, Disrespectful, First Person Singular Drivers (small percentage, I'm sure) are the reason for the cameras, NOT the politicians.

[Ponderosa]

Originally Posted by Rick Lee

My radar detector will pick up the mobile units. The stationary ones don't use radar, so you have to know where they are. Though the next radar detector I get has a GPS feature where you can program in the stationary sites and it will alert you when you get near one.

Do you know how they work? I see the squiggly lines in the road where they put sensors. Do they sense the changes in density moving over them and infer speed? Can't be entrance/exit as that depends on wheelbase.

[Rick Lee]

Originally Posted by Ponderosa

Do you know how they work? I see the squiggly lines in the road where they put sensors. Do they sense the changes in density moving over them and infer speed? Can't be entrance/exit as that depends on wheelbase.

I don't know exactly, but I suspect it's some kind of Vascar system. I really wonder if it would work on a single motorcycle with no cars around though. If I'm in the middle of nowhere and come to a red light that works on a ground sensor and is not timed, I cannot get the light to turn green. (That's why they sell red light devices for motorcycles, similar to what emergency vehicles use.) I think my bike and I weigh around 750 lbs. together, which is not enough to trip any red light sensor I've been too, so I wonder if it would trip one of the speed cameras.

[Ponderosa]

Originally Posted by Rick Lee

Red light cameras are totally different. Driving 75-80 in a 65 zone if that's what the flow of traffic is doing is not dangerous at all. Running a red light is always dangerous. I've only ever done it on my bike if I knew the car behind be was not gonna stop and would kill me, which has happened, though not in an intersection where there were cameras.

It has been my observation that most traffic moves 5-10 mph over the limit on the freeways. They don't flash you for that. When someone - including me - is going faster than that they are usually weaving across lanes, tailgating, not using signals and otherwise being aggressive Type A (for ahole) jerks - all pretty unsafe acts.

[Rick Lee]

Originally Posted by Ponderosa

When someone - including me - is going faster than that they are usually weaving across lanes, tailgating, not using signals and otherwise being aggressive Type A (for ahole) jerks - all pretty unsafe acts.

I've never done any of those things and usually go at least 80. I've never not signaled a lane change in my life. I don't know why you equate speed with doing other dangerous things. Sure, some people do them. But they are not related to each other in most people's driving, certainly not mine. There is absolutely nothing dangerous about going 80 on a hwy. in dry, clear conditions with little to no traffic. Speed limits got lowered in the 1970's because of the Arab oil embargo. They are higher now, but kept lower than the normal flow of traffic on purpose, so they always have a revenue stream whenever they want to turn on the tap. It's got nothing to do with safety. If they cared about safety, they'd make any kind of driving while distracted the same as a DUI and speed camera offenses would carry insurance points. The fact that speed camera tickets aren't reported to insurance means they want to give you enough incentive to pay up and not punish you too much. Pure revenue and nothing else.