azpride wrote:Apparently the solution to the states economic crisis is going to be the millions and millions of dollars generated by those #@$%%##$@!# speed cameras.
When I first started driving, my daddy sat me down and revealed to me a fool-proof method of making sure I never got nailed by traffic cops or traffic cameras or anything else.
"Hayley", he said to me, "If you follow this secret, you'll never have to worry about those things."
And here is the secret ...
Don't speed.
And what do you know? His secret method has worked! I've never gotten a speeding ticket in my life.
Wow... I'm blown away by your insight, Desert Spirit! That certainly IS a foolproof method, and had a loved one in my life sat me down and shown me the light as your dad did for you, it may have prevented me from receiving all zero of my speeding tickets!
Wait...
I don't speed and I have never gotten a speeding ticket, yet I'm still uncomfortable and upset with the idea of constantly being watched when I'm driving on freeways? I must be crazy or something...
Last edited by JoelHazelton on Jan 27 2009 5:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Arizona is the land of contrast... You can go from Minnesota to California in a matter of minutes, then have Mexican food that night." -Jack Dykinga
I don't see that as valid justification. As far as I know, the majority of the people who drive the roadways and have to deal with these behavioral problems on a daily basis didn't get any say on whether or not these cameras were erected. It seems to me there was another motivating factor behind them...
"Arizona is the land of contrast... You can go from Minnesota to California in a matter of minutes, then have Mexican food that night." -Jack Dykinga
The argument that if you don't speed you don't have to worry about the cameras taking your picture is also false. It has been recently revealed that all of the cameras also contain video cameras, which a live high-resolution feed is constantly being streamed to the photo company HQ. The cameras on the mobile units currently also videotape and scan the license plates of 1000 vehicles an hour. While the stationary cameras are not currently utilized for this purpose, they are ready to do so if that feature is "turned on". Currently, those scanned license plates are cross-checked with a database of stolen vehicles or other vehicles linked to crimes such as child abductions. It all sounds innocuous until you realize that those records are now public records and must be surrendered to anybody who wants them, including employers, spouses, insurance companies, etc.
"Where have you tracked this license plate in past 30 days?" I'm not a conspiracy-theory, big-brother-is-watching kind of guy, but I think that's a little bit overreaching.
---
I also believe that you should have the right to face your accuser. If I get a photo ticket, my "accuser" is a private citizen employed by a private company who sits at a desk and looks at photos taken from somewhere he was not present at the time. How can a guy in a desk tell if my speed was not "reasonable and prudent" from a photograph? And the state prosecutes based on the "evidence" that the private company provides ... while the private company has a financial incentive to secure a conviction. That's flat out un-American in my opinion and I've never understood how it has stood up to legal challenges. (Oh wait, yes I have. Money.)
I'm not sure what my spirit animal is, but I'm confident it has rabies.
These are good arguments. Personally, I'd rather just pay an extra cent of sales tax, or whatever it takes, and have the streets and highways flooded with traffic cops. Especially near the university down here. It would create jobs, too... ;)
It's horrible by the U. That being said, there's a camera on 22nd and Wilmot that I see strobe no less than 5 times every morning.. between speeders and red light runners. The camera there seems to be effecting peoples actions, ohhh I say not at all.
FWIW the only camera ticket I've ever gotten was on the autobahn
I don't think they are. How is this different from security cameras in banks or 7-11's? How is it different from grocery stores who track your purchases under the guise of giving you "discounts"? For that matter, how is it different from traffic cops themselves? All these things are "surveillance". If you're worried about being "watched" and your movements and tendencies tracked, then I'm afraid it's way too late for that.
The camera there seems to be effecting peoples actions, ohhh I say not at all.
The fact that people continue to break the law does not mean we should therefore give up and stop trying to enforce it.
As far as I know, the majority of the people who drive the roadways and have to deal with these behavioral problems on a daily basis didn't get any say on whether or not these cameras were erected.
Since when do you get a "say" in whether or not laws are enforced? Do you ever give a thought to the thousands of people who are killed and crippled every year by people speeding or driving recklessly? Do you think they had a "say"? What gives you the right to endanger yourself, me, and everyone around you?
If the traffic cams get you to slow down, then they're worth it. And if they don't, then at least you'll get stuck with the ticket. Maybe if you get enough of them, it will get through to you.
Wow... I'm blown away by your insight, Desert Spirit!
I don't see why you feel the need to get snotty. It's possible to state an opinion in an adult manner.
desert spirit wrote:Since when do you get a "say" in whether or not laws are enforced? Do you ever give a thought to the thousands of people who are killed and crippled every year by people speeding or driving recklessly? Do you think they had a "say"? What gives you the right to endanger yourself, me, and everyone around you?
If the traffic cams get you to slow down, then they're worth it. And if they don't, then at least you'll get stuck with the ticket. Maybe if you get enough of them, it will get through to you.
The laws are enforced without traffic cams. People are going to drive recklessly and speed without them. Ever noticed how much the flow of traffic fluctuates on freeways with the cameras? I think a steady flow is safer.
The traffic cams don't slow me down and I won't get stuck with a ticket. Please understand that being against the traffic cams does not mean that I am a law-breaker and that the city has finally found a way to "get through to me." My traffic record is as clean as your's.
desert spirit wrote:Wow... I'm blown away by your insight, Desert Spirit!
I don't see why you feel the need to get snotty. It's possible to state an opinion in an adult manner.
Read your original reply; I was matching your sarcasm. Any person with half a brain knows that going the speed limit will prevent traffic tickets.
Last edited by JoelHazelton on Jan 27 2009 4:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Arizona is the land of contrast... You can go from Minnesota to California in a matter of minutes, then have Mexican food that night." -Jack Dykinga
This reminds me of the whole NSA surveillance thing...everyone is freaked that the feds are bugging their phone. Personally, I couldn't care less. I'm not planning a bombing or bank heist, not growing reefer in my basement, not trying to overthrow the system, etc. What are they going to learn from my calls? That I tell a lot of lame jokes? People are far too paranoid.
It's the principle of it, not the fact that I'm afraid I'm going to get busted.
I don't feel any safer on the road now that there are speed cameras. In my opinion, if speed cameras actually make you feel safer than maybe you shouldn't be behind the wheel. It's a false sense of security. Since when were accidents caused solely by somebody going 76 mph in a 65 zone? It doesn't happen. Accidents are caused for reasons that cannot be controlled by a camera that clocks your speed and sends you tickets. The camera won't catch people driving drunk, text messaging, dialing and talking on phones, eating, switching cd's, etc, and I know these cause more accidents than somebody who is fully attentive and going 11 over the speed limit.
Desert Spirit- Upon reading again, my reply was awful snotty. My apologies, bad time at work today.
"Arizona is the land of contrast... You can go from Minnesota to California in a matter of minutes, then have Mexican food that night." -Jack Dykinga
I view speed cameras the same way I view an automated telephone tree when I need some customer service. Its technology taking over for something that is much more pleasant to deal with a real human being.
I understand that its a "more efficient" way to catch speeders, and subsequently *might* actually reduce speeds, accidents, and/or injuries ("might" because I've yet to find a single piece of evidence for this that is not promoted or published by somebody who gets money from the cameras being there).
But unlike the bank and Circle K, the person on the other side of the camera is not using the captured images to MAKE MONEY off of me! In the case of speed cameras, not only is the state making money off of me, but so is some corporation from Australia. The same company holds the burden of proof as to whether or not I was speeding.
The difference between a camera and a cop is a lot of donuts. Seriously, a cop can determine if the driver is impaired or has a warrant for his arrest. A cop can also determine if there was light traffic on a dry road and you were driving a safe, new-model car 15 mph over the speed limit because your daughter just called from a situation she wasn't comfortable being in.
Whatever the case may be, people are subjective, and computers are not. And the reason we have a legal system in this country that includes a jury of your peers is that sometimes mistakes happen.
There's a great article from the New Times a while back about a woman who got a camera ticket when she was out of the country. Obviously it was a mistake. But she didn't appear in court to fight it ... because she was out of the country!!! ... and she not legally served a ticket for which she never signed or acknowledged receipt. A default judgement was placed against her, and some time later when she found out that her license had been suspended, there was no recourse for her because she had not appeared in court because she had never known she was summoned to appear! She was told that despite all the evidence she showed to prove that she wasn't driving her car, and was out of the country, the picture wasn't of her or her car, etc., the judge could only say that she did not appear in court and therefore was guilty (despite his agreeing that she was not guilty of the traffic infraction).
THATS why I don't think that cameras are a good idea. Because the legal system does not give an innocent person the proper legal recourse to be "innocent until proven guilty". Sometimes real people with real brains are actually needed.
I'm not sure what my spirit animal is, but I'm confident it has rabies.
"Those that would give up essential liberties for a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty NOR safety" Benjamin Franklin
"The censorship method ... is that of handing the job over to some frail and erring mortal man, and making him omnipotent on the assumption that his official status will make him infallible and omniscient."
George Bernard Shaw
hikeaz wrote:"Those that would give up essential liberties for a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty NOR safety" Benjamin Franklin
Which reminds me of Ed Abbey's take on driving on the highway;
"Hayduke, rejoicing, scarfing up more beer, concluding his Flagstaff six-pack, wheels down to the river on the narrow road at a safe and sane 70 per, bellowing some incoherent song into the face of the wind. He was indeed a menace to other drivers but justified himself in this way: If you don't drink, don't drive. If you drink, drive like hell. Why? Because freedom, not safety, is the highest good. Because the public roads should be wide open to all - children on tricycles, little old ladies in Eisenhower Plymouths, homicidal lesbians forty-ton Mack tractor-trailers. Let us have no favorites, no licenses, no god-damn rules for the road. Let every freeway be a free-for-all."
"The only thing we did was wrong was staying in the wilderness to long...the only thing we did was right was the day we started to fight..."
-Old Spiritual
My book, The Marauders on Lulu and Amazon
For the record, I think that people alone aren't the right answer either. Thats why cops use radar and laser to confirm their visual estimate of a driver's speed. But one without the other isn't nearly as effective.
The reverse example of photo radar is Arizona's DUI law. I think we all agree that drinking and driving is a terrible thing and can have unbelievable consequences. However, the current law allows a cop to cite you without the aid of a computer (no blood, urine, breath test required) simply by claiming that you were "impaired to the slightest degree" based on his subjective viewpoint (which usually involves a field sobriety test, which any nervous person can fail). If you try to fight this charge in court, you will likely lose because who will the court believe, a professional law officer, or a private citizen motorist?
The frequent argument is "I don't speed" or "I don't drink" ... why should it matter to me? And the answer is because there are numerous documented cases of innocent people being accused of something they didn't do. Those people often choose to admit guilt because its not worth the hassle of trying to prove innocence, or spending a small fortune to stand up for what's right. And that shouldn't be the case.
Technology is good as an aide to, not as a replacement for, actual people.
I'm not sure what my spirit animal is, but I'm confident it has rabies.
Don't like it? Move to an actual city like Chicago where they cite you for "obstructing the flow of traffic" when you only go the speed limit. (Of course, that assumes traffic isn't horrible such that it is actually possible to drive at all.)
This whole speed camera thing is the result of too many snowbirds here who can't drive, think 15 under is a safe speed for the highway, and don't understand the concept of slower traffic stay right.
Hike Arizona it is full of sharp, pointy, ankle-twisting, HAZmaster crushing ROCKS!!
Hike Arizona it is full of sharp, pointy, shin-stabbing, skin-shredding plants!
Hike Arizona it is full of striking, biting, stabbing, venomous wildlife!
I know what you mean about Chitown. Chicago driving is an experience...you don't worry about the speed limit, you just go fast enough to not get run over by the bumper to bumper traffic moving at 80 mph - same as Detroit used to be (when people still lived and worked there).
I have accumulated a whopping 0 speeding tickets as well. But I'm still anti speed camera - for most offenders they don't get any negative reinforcement until the ticket arrives in the mail. Not the same as getting pulled over and feeling the immediate sting and embarrassment.
"Look deep into nature, and the you will understand everything better" Albert Einstein
Route Editor
Route Scout
I must be crazy or something...
