12 speed cameras planned, mostly for northwest side (Tucson, Oro Valley: how much, house)

[cheesecurd]

12 speed cameras planned, mostly for northwest side

[cheesecurd]

Just an extra tax on drivers. Step 1 - lower the speed limit. Step 2 - issue tickets Step 3 get lots of money!

[Bummer]

Originally Posted by cheesecurd

Just an extra tax on drivers. Step 1 - lower the speed limit. Step 2 - issue tickets Step 3 get lots of money!

WRONG . . . WRONG . . . WRONG, Cheesecurd.

Hang up the cell phone, stop eating or drinking and pay attention to your driving, including the speed limits, and this would be a NON ISSUE.

[Mike_]

Whether or not speeding is right or wrong I do believe the cameras are purely for financial gain. Again I generally don't speed but do believe it is unfair.

[Jalhop]

Originally Posted by Bummer

WRONG . . . WRONG . . . WRONG, Cheesecurd.

Hang up the cell phone, stop eating or drinking and pay attention to your driving, including the speed limits, and this would be a NON ISSUE.

It's not very humanly possible to maintain a speed limit. If the camera gives a ticket for 1+ mph over, people will drive 5+ mph under the limit to compensate. In my city's school zones (where we have the cameras, and I agree with them there) I try to maintain 15 mph and yet still have difficulty staying under 20 mph throughout the zone.

Another issue with the cameras is when the private camera company gets 80% or whatever of the amount, so that the basic ticket is $475. The cameras can drive down house values when people move out or won't move in. I think the #1 reason some cities are big on the cameras is because they're getting a large upfront payment for a multi-year contract from the private vendor, who stands to make megabucks in profit. Then the politicians can get re-elected using their freewheeling spending (or at least preventing some unpopular cutbacks). In these cases the cameras are a net loss to the public, in the long run I think. There's more to this issue than just "the law is the law". The voters should be very wary of them.

[Marcy1210]

It might help if they'd post more speed limit signs. Even though Oracle's not on the list, the speed limit changes from 45 to 50 back to 45 again in a couple of places, and if you're not paying attention to reading all the roadsigns, you'll miss the speed limit sign (singular) on the stretch between River up to Oro Valley. I had a cop behind me for a while before I noticed him and I was going 49 in a 45 zone, and he didn't stop me. He actually passed me...so maybe the speed cams will give you a 5mph cushion.

[Jalhop]

The cameras allow the law to be dehumanized and corporatized, and they generate revenue, so it's doubtful there will be a cushion beyond 1 mph. The good cop won't give the ticket at 49 mph because he/she doesn't want to be a jerk.

As someone seriously interested in buying into Tucson, of all the negatives I've read about, a proliferation of speed cameras is suddenly near the top of the list. I've read about this stuff getting really bad in other cities. I've lived in a police state before (Idaho). A for-profit corporate-run police state is even worse.

As the article notes, if it was really for safety they'd be focused on the school zones first. It's obviously not for safety.

[iflyjetzzz]

Originally Posted by Bummer

WRONG . . . WRONG . . . WRONG, Cheesecurd.

Hang up the cell phone, stop eating or drinking and pay attention to your driving, including the speed limits, and this would be a NON ISSUE.

The problem is that most speed limits are too low.
Example: River Road has a speed limit of 45. It should be 55 on most of the road.
I drive 54 and get passed all of the time; I don't feel that those people passing me are unsafe.

As mentioned before, put the speed cameras in school zones. It would make the 'safety, not revenue' facade more believable.

[az461]

Originally Posted by Mike_

Whether or not speeding is right or wrong I do believe the cameras are purely for financial gain. Again I generally don't speed but do believe it is unfair.

They are usually from Private-Party vendors. IF the money was to off-set the cost of manufacturing and labor and rest to help the specific city.meaning IMPROVING transportation issues. That's ONE THING. - I would then see the point.

But since it is a privatized company, I wonder how much carry-over equity goes to the community. Probably very little incentive. Some Senior Executives of the Company get large cuts and probably give that to the higher-end government officials as a bonus for going through the proposals.

[cheesecurd]

Moderator cut: snip

do you think these type of cameras could cause a INCREACE in collisions at intersections instead of lessening them do to folks stopping at these "Tucson" intersections before the light goes from yellow to red because they are afraid they will get one of these high dollar tickets?