This is nothing more than a revenue generator for the Town.Municipalities should not be able to set up speed traps on interstate highways. If this goes forward you can expect to see this mushroom all over the country as cash strapped municipalities look for ways to raise money.
That one belongs with: “I’ll respect you in the morning.” “The BMW is paid for.” “Its only a cold sore.” “The check’s in the mail.” This is nothing more than a revenue generation device.
As for the safety concerns, how many accidents / deaths have there been on this streatch of I95?
The first time a senator or congressman winds up with his picture in the paper with his girlfriend beside him, this nonsense will stop. They had this problem somewhere close to Washington DC. His wife got the picture in the mail and after he explained the other woman, the law was changed.
Lets face it, it is about the money. They are doing red light cameras here, and the city only gets half the money. They were going to add the speed camera thing and the people started talking about a recall election for the politicians. That stopped the speed cameras dead in their tracks. The safety turned out to be the safety of re-election for the politicians. Go ahead, make my day…
What speed will they ticket you – 71? 75?
80? They better be consistent but this is big government telling us what
and how to live. Where and when is it going to end?
I would love to see the statistics that indicate the number of accidents in the last 3 years in this city….
The only thing Mayor Greedy Hodges is interested in is raising revenue for his municipality inorder to keep his taxes down….
Lets do a study on the number of people who die from the carbon monoxide coming from all those vehicles that will be bottled necked in Mayor Greedy’s town…
Too much goverment at work again…. oh lets prohibit the farming of tobacco in South Carolina because we all know how many people die from the use of tobacco products…
Sorry for rambling but government is supposed to be FOR the people…..
“Big Government telling us how to live”??? Are you serious? It’s a SPEED LIMIT. We’ve always had them. They work. Obey it and it’s all good. You are over the top. The cameras aren’t taking pictures of the occupants of the vehicles. They are monitoring speed. Driving the speed limit doesn’t cause bottle-necks.
Amazing, people want more control over things unless they’re the ones being controlled. (or at least believing their being controlled)
Is anyone here in P/C Auto? If so, how many inj/fatal accidents include speed as a contributing factor? How many could be avoided entirely? I’ve read many many traffic homicide reports in my day, and the speed factor’s right up there with DUI.
Revenue generator or not, what would you recommend to rectify the situation? More police presence? No, then you’d b$%^ and moan about police not paying attention to “real” crimes. Reduced limits? No, cause if they’re speeding at a 70MPH limit, a lower limit’s only going to make it worse.
Personally I am amazed when people state that their rights are being violated from something that wouldn’t affect them at all if they simply obeyed the law. As the old saying goes…”don’t start nothing, there won’t be nothing”
This particular area has always been a devils triangle for fatal accidents (not to mention a place where bodies are mysteriously dumped from other states)…
Situation likely is that the SC Governor didn’t want that temporary Obama stimulus money for extra police officers. Then again if SC had gotten that extra money for police officers all that the various SC police depts would use it for would be to put more ticket writing officers on more roads (nevermind using officers regularly for anything else like crime fighting).
So I guess this is outsourcing at it’s best, budget-cut creative financing with safety likely taking a 2nd place. Cheaper than payroll, payroll taxes, Workers Comp, & other employee benefits.
I’d rather have a camera there than a wild driving ticket writing officer desperate to justify his job after wasteful Obama stimulus money runs out and he faces a job cut!
Statistically, Camera cause more accidents because drivers try to slow down or stop short at intersections and get rear ended. there is a town near tuscon that removed them because people were avoiding the area or got smart to the cameras and ended up costing the city money.
so basically what you’re saying is that a camera put up to curb speeding may actually cause people to slow down? Hmmmm don’t think I can argue too much with that.
I am interested to see what the stats are of accidents before and after the cameras are installed to see if they are really working. If they are, I say keep them, if not, ditch ’em. But one thing that a lot of people do not mention, with more cameras on the road, the existing cops can pay attention to more important crimes being commited (either that, or this would be a way to justify laying off more cops).
And for those of you that are against the cameras… a police officer can catch a lot more violations then a camera. Right now, cameras only seem to catch speeding, running red lights, and failer to stop before making a turn. I havent seen them catch defective equipment, changing lanes in the middle of the intersection, following too close, failure to signal, etc.
How come a survillance camera can take a pix of driving doing 75mph and it’s clear as day and you see his/her nose hairs but the survillance camera at the bank or 7-11 taking a pix of the thug robbing the place looks like it was shot from Mars???!!!
Rear end collisions occur at traffic lights with cameras with greater frequency than at non-camera intersections. (Statistics work both ways.) Drivers slam on their brakes if they think the light might turn red and get them a ticket. I don’t blame them too much. If someone hits you in the tail end, it is their fault. Even though you end up with a no-fault accitent listed with CLUE. Not the best logic in the world, but it is not seriously flawed.
I have watched drivers slow down as if to wait for the light to turn red so they get a “fresh green” to go through. Many people stop in the middle of an intersection when the light turns red, trying to avoid running the light. They never read the driver’s handbook, or at least the part where it says “clear the itersection once you enter it.” Most people do not know that once you cross the “stop bar” you are in the intersection and should proceed through, not back into the guy (gal) behind you trying to be “legal”.
What they really need to do is mount a transponder in every car that sends a signal to the police when you go 1 mph over the speed limit or commit any moving violation. You would be required to appear in court and bring your “papers” and cash. ACLU where are you?
Variations in speed keeps traffic from bunching up. Haven’t you all seen the “parades” that form when a timid driver takes 10 miles to pass a truck? The uniform speed will result in all traffic bunching up at whatever speed limit is set, and every accident will be a chain reaction and bunches of drivers will be killed or maimed at once. Makes for more efficient use of EMS vehicles, too. What aa great idea this is!
I-95 is already a national embarassment with it’s 2-lanes being completely out-dated and inadequate for today’s traffic volume. Now this redneck want people to start slamming on their brakes for what reason? MONEY>
Red light cameras cause rear end collisions, just as ultra-law-abiding citizens do. They simply are afraid of getting a ticket. Increase that fear and you increase the accident potential.
Pseudo intellectuals and nanny-staters will tell you that the law is the law, which is obvious to the casual observer. People who live in fear of some tiny infraction whereby they have additional money extracted from them and “points” against their drivers license, which causes them to pay higher insurance premiums and cause accidents.
For example, those who fear red lights cause rear-end collisions. Those who fear going over the speed limit cause “parades” and multi-car pile ups. I suspect that much in the way of road rage can be traced to fearful drivers.
Those who lock their cruise control at the speed limit in the left lane are an example of the result that the learned reader commenting about the fastest sperm winning implies. There obviously cannot be a “smart” sperm since it is well documented that body parts have no separate intelligence in spite of clever comments to the contrary.
Drivers, laws, and the results are fodder for humorous discussions. Like teenagers, there are many who think they know everything and either try to control or tax (or both) everyone else. They are called nanny-staters. Everyone else just wants to be left alone. Automated taxing in the form of red-light and speed-limit cameras are not part of being left alone.
If the cost of collecting the extra tax is too high, they leave people alone. When it becomes profitable through automation, the public becomes the victim. The usual song and dance is “it is about safety”. The rest of the logic is left for the reader to decide based on their own intelligence.
I agree completely with TN – How are your rights being violated if you’re obeying the law to start with? You just don’t want to get caught, and you know you have a better chance of getting caught by a camera than by a police officer because the officer can’t stop everybody. Revenue generator? Yes, they’re making money – off the lawbreakers! Don’t break the law, and they won’t get your money. Simple as that. And you’d have to pay a fine if it was a cop pulling you over and giving you a ticket, but nobody complains about the cops being “revenue generators,” only the cameras. Interesting. And I’ve heard the argument about rear-end collisions ad nauseum, but I haven’t seen any real evidence of that. That’s a straw man argument. Invasion of privacy? You break the law, they take your picture. You don’t break the law, they don’t take your picture. They aren’t controlling you – you have total control of that accelerator. Don’t press down on it so hard, and you’re the one that’s in control, not them.
Essentially you’re saying that traffic laws and the resulting fines from breaking them are “Extra Taxes”.
More like penalties. If it takes a couple of minutes longer to get where you’re going, then leave earlier. If you don’t like the traffic laws because you feel they’re too controlling? Don’t drive. I hate to use the cliche that driving is not a right but a privledge, but it’s true.
However standing there and stating that you want the “right” to break the law doesn’t quite click with me. Whether it’s there as a deterrent or a method of generating revenue, the fact remains that it is the law. If you talked to a group of people, every one of them would tell you that there’s a traffic law or two that they don’t agree with. Me personally? I think red light cameras are a bit on the dangerous side, especially since they’re right there where you can see them and react to them. HOWEVER I’d rather have a bunch of fender benders because some people stop unexpectedly because of them,(you shouldn’t be going that fast approaching a stale yellow anyway, that’s just common sense) then burying just one person because someone didn’t feel that stopping for a red light applied to them. As for the I-95 camera. I think it’s a much better idea. Of course people might tap their brakes and or slow down as a result, which suprisingly is the DESIRED result.
People want to be safe, and are all for safety rules and laws that ensure that, unless of course those laws prevent them from having the “right” of putting other people at risk. The same argument applied when seat belt laws started becoming the norm, and of course this will too. If people are too stubborn to use common sense when driving, then deterrents have to be put in place.
Well, TN, it appears that we do agree on a point or two, and disagree on others. Normal life is like that, and I like your style.
I don’t feel that I have a “right” to break the law, only a “need” to spread out traffic (slight extra speed) to avoid multi car pile ups. When is is really bad, I just pull off the road to get out of the parade. I avoided one that way a few years ago about 10 PM on I95 in Florida. I think there were about 25 vehicles involved, many on fire, not sure how many died.
I never run a stale yellow, but if I am across the stop bar, I do clear the intersection. Many do not know that, and it is dangerous (although humerous) to watch someone sit in an intersection and observe people weaving around them. In their own mind, they are obeying the law.
The common alternative is to slam on their brakes and cause a fender bender. In town traffic you cannot leave 50 feet between cars since people behind you get hung at lights and hate you for living. Many drivers approach a mid-life green and slow down to wait for the yellow-red sequence. Others see the stale green and slam on their brakes when the light turns yellow when they are on or near the stop bar.
Now to address seat belt laws. I have never driven a car without wearing a seat belt. Period. When the law was passed, it was a $10 fine and they would not stop you for it, but only add the extra on if they stopped you for something else. Now it is “Click It or Ticket” and the fine is $100 or $125 (not certain, since I have never paid one). They will stop you for that, no other violation required. Tell me with a straight face that that law is for safety alone. I enjoy a good laugh, but at least there are no points. Why not make it $500 and give the driver 12 points so he cannot hurt himself for a year because he loses his license? Ridiculous, yes, indeed, but think of the safety improvement and that scofflaw would be deterred.
You’re right on with the fines getting out of control things like seat belt laws, and I do not agree with the police being able to pull people over JUST because they’re not wearing the seatbelt, however it does kinda circle back to my pay the price for your transgressions argument. I would imagine that the fines keep climbing for:
1. Revenue need
2. Decrease in actual violations due to vigilance by law enforcement (ok that ones a little weak but I can’t leave it out as a possibility)
3. People just not getting the point.
Any of these would be valid arguments, and I’m sure there not the only ones available.
I do remember however reading recently that the click it or ticket campaign was recently brought back into force because it was noted that seat belt use had decreased dramatically. Do I believe this, cant say for sure. Is it possible? In a society where people go out and get a “dummy” or mannequin so they can use the HOV lane, (try googling “HOV lane dummy” while keeping a straight face, I dare you) I have to say that it just might be.
TN, I believe that the point of this whole thread is the revenue need (greed?). Most people long ago outgrew their need for speed, the others drive for NASCAR or Indy. Paying for your transgressions is not a bad idea, if you were really getting to transgress. I would think that they could sell “speeders licenses” for $1000 a year and make a ton of money. Not only that, but there would probably be fewer accidents because the speeder license would have rules attached that said that you cannot do something stupid while you are speeding.
In driving as with other things, common sense should prevail. There is a marked lack of common sense, however.
The mannequin (blow up doll) is a fact. I have seen the busts on TV where the cops get a HOV driver for some infraction and notice that the passenger is not real. Tinted windows help on that one.
Fortunately, I am not in cities that have HOV lanes that often and when I am, I have a car full of people. The mannequin trick is used for people that want out of the parade but cannot speed up or slow down a little to do that. They do pay to transgress for that inflatable passenger, I think it is $250 – $500 a pop (pun intended).
The speeder license isn’t a bad idea, however we’d probably have to isolate them from the other drivers because you know the old saying “it’s not me I worry about when I’m driving, it’s all the other amateurs out there.”
Me? I commute using good old fashioned buses and trains, although they take a little longer sometimes, they do cost less in the long run, and I’m definitely “out of the parade” (by the way I like that one, and fully intend on using it when the chance arises” I encourage my children that mass transit and good old fashioned footwork are good alternatives to being stuck in traffic and frustrated and surrounded by people who are just as frustrated if not more than you are. It’s not easy, South Florida’s transit system is not as seamless as some of the other major metropolitan areas out there such as New York or Chicago, but with planning and a little patience, it can be done.
Well, I guess that we could isolate the speeders in an HV lane, which could be made by simply painting over the O in the HOV lane. The advantage would be that the $1000 license fee would be more profitable for the states.
Feel free to use the parade line. I figured that one out years ago when I saw a bunch of cars in a row as I watched from an overpass.
Mass transit is only good on the east and west coasts, tossing in Chicago, perhaps. I don’t much care for mass transit because I was mugged in New York on the subway, but I was with my Italian girlfriend. She had an Italian friend by the name of P. Beretta so everything turned out ok.
I like Florida, and they have busses if your life fits the schedule. I do like the Underground in London, and Eurostar in Europe although things are getting pretty rough over there, too. Russia’s subway is beautiful in places and pretty safe, but there are soldiers carrying AK-47s to keep troubles to a minimum. So I think Florida and its transit will suffice.
I see that Belle thinks we shouldn’t be getting along. We have a term for people like that. We call them “dingers” which you might find in some dictionary.
I’m guessing Belle doesn’t realize that a civil discussion is a lot more productive than an knuckle dragging, chest thumping “me right, you wrong” discussion. Oh well….
Maglev is a proven technology. I was on the Maglev train in Japan (Tokyo) and it is a weird sensation. Very smooth and fast. Eurostar is fast but it is also a train with multiple cars and bunches of passengers. The Skytran is individual transportation which offers security, privacy, and it is self parking. What a deal that is!
The power driver system is also proven technology. I was designing with Insulated Gate Bipolar Transistors in the 80s, and they have improved a lot since then. They make electric motors sing (literally) and are unbelievably efficient. Couple this transportation system with nuclear power generation and there should not be any CO2 left in the atmosphere (plants will start dying off and we will have to have a new tax to pipe CO2 to the forests).
Note that this is something that Ames Research and the IEEE is working on, so it could be ready for prime time quickly. I think they had something similar to this for one of the Olympics or some other big deal a few years ago. It is still running and it pays its own way, no taxpayer subsidy (as is required by all other mass public transportation schemes).
I did notice the enumeration and reference to all of the “green” power generation technologies, which is required if you want developmental subsidies from the government.
Americans are just about the laziest, most careless, and ignorant drivers on the face of the Earth.
I have driven many miles on the German Autobahns including the sections that have no speed limits. German drivers tend to be courteous, keep right except to pass, and don’t distract themselves with cell phones or cold drinks while they are driving. American drivers careen from place to place showing little concern for those around them. They drive horrid minivans stuffed with bratty larvae or they have cottage sized SUV’s with only the driver on board. They block the left lane on interstates and show no driving skills whatever.
The speed cameras in the USA are used to nab drivers who exceed an arbitrary posted speed limit. The traffic cams in Germany nab drivers who are cutting in and out of traffic or showing discourtesy like flipping off a fellow driver. Americans need to take driving more seriously but they probably never will.
BTW- the accident and death rates on the Autobahns are superior to those on US interstates.
Oh well. I have effective countermeasures in my vehicles that protect me from the nanny cams, and yes they do work. I don’t drink and drive and I match the speed of traffic around me. I don’t whip from lane to lane and I NEVER exhibit road rage.
When I’m on an interstate highway outside of city limits and there is no traffic I drive quickly and safely with no risk of injuring myself or those around me.
Good idea. The law is the law. Surely AAA is not advocating speeding. The cameras are just for enforcing an existing law. Illegal is illegal.
Unfortunately the only time you see the ACLU or liberals complain is when a terrorist rights (ha!) are being violated.
How about a little less oppressive government and freedom of privacy. STOP IT WITH THE CAMERA’S!
This is nothing more than a revenue generator for the Town.Municipalities should not be able to set up speed traps on interstate highways. If this goes forward you can expect to see this mushroom all over the country as cash strapped municipalities look for ways to raise money.
I think the speed limit there is 70 mph. How much faster do you need to go?
That one belongs with: “I’ll respect you in the morning.” “The BMW is paid for.” “Its only a cold sore.” “The check’s in the mail.” This is nothing more than a revenue generation device.
As for the safety concerns, how many accidents / deaths have there been on this streatch of I95?
The first time a senator or congressman winds up with his picture in the paper with his girlfriend beside him, this nonsense will stop. They had this problem somewhere close to Washington DC. His wife got the picture in the mail and after he explained the other woman, the law was changed.
Lets face it, it is about the money. They are doing red light cameras here, and the city only gets half the money. They were going to add the speed camera thing and the people started talking about a recall election for the politicians. That stopped the speed cameras dead in their tracks. The safety turned out to be the safety of re-election for the politicians. Go ahead, make my day…
What speed will they ticket you – 71? 75?
80? They better be consistent but this is big government telling us what
and how to live. Where and when is it going to end?
I am not quite understanding how the girlfriend would get in the picture? Can the cameras shoot pictures right through the dash board?
Yes, they use modified cat scan equipment, which explains the high cost in the fee sharing arrangement.
I would love to see the statistics that indicate the number of accidents in the last 3 years in this city….
The only thing Mayor Greedy Hodges is interested in is raising revenue for his municipality inorder to keep his taxes down….
Lets do a study on the number of people who die from the carbon monoxide coming from all those vehicles that will be bottled necked in Mayor Greedy’s town…
Too much goverment at work again…. oh lets prohibit the farming of tobacco in South Carolina because we all know how many people die from the use of tobacco products…
Sorry for rambling but government is supposed to be FOR the people…..
“Big Government telling us how to live”??? Are you serious? It’s a SPEED LIMIT. We’ve always had them. They work. Obey it and it’s all good. You are over the top. The cameras aren’t taking pictures of the occupants of the vehicles. They are monitoring speed. Driving the speed limit doesn’t cause bottle-necks.
Amazing, people want more control over things unless they’re the ones being controlled. (or at least believing their being controlled)
Is anyone here in P/C Auto? If so, how many inj/fatal accidents include speed as a contributing factor? How many could be avoided entirely? I’ve read many many traffic homicide reports in my day, and the speed factor’s right up there with DUI.
Revenue generator or not, what would you recommend to rectify the situation? More police presence? No, then you’d b$%^ and moan about police not paying attention to “real” crimes. Reduced limits? No, cause if they’re speeding at a 70MPH limit, a lower limit’s only going to make it worse.
Personally I am amazed when people state that their rights are being violated from something that wouldn’t affect them at all if they simply obeyed the law. As the old saying goes…”don’t start nothing, there won’t be nothing”
This particular area has always been a devils triangle for fatal accidents (not to mention a place where bodies are mysteriously dumped from other states)…
Situation likely is that the SC Governor didn’t want that temporary Obama stimulus money for extra police officers. Then again if SC had gotten that extra money for police officers all that the various SC police depts would use it for would be to put more ticket writing officers on more roads (nevermind using officers regularly for anything else like crime fighting).
So I guess this is outsourcing at it’s best, budget-cut creative financing with safety likely taking a 2nd place. Cheaper than payroll, payroll taxes, Workers Comp, & other employee benefits.
I’d rather have a camera there than a wild driving ticket writing officer desperate to justify his job after wasteful Obama stimulus money runs out and he faces a job cut!
Statistically, Camera cause more accidents because drivers try to slow down or stop short at intersections and get rear ended. there is a town near tuscon that removed them because people were avoiding the area or got smart to the cameras and ended up costing the city money.
so basically what you’re saying is that a camera put up to curb speeding may actually cause people to slow down? Hmmmm don’t think I can argue too much with that.
I am interested to see what the stats are of accidents before and after the cameras are installed to see if they are really working. If they are, I say keep them, if not, ditch ’em. But one thing that a lot of people do not mention, with more cameras on the road, the existing cops can pay attention to more important crimes being commited (either that, or this would be a way to justify laying off more cops).
And for those of you that are against the cameras… a police officer can catch a lot more violations then a camera. Right now, cameras only seem to catch speeding, running red lights, and failer to stop before making a turn. I havent seen them catch defective equipment, changing lanes in the middle of the intersection, following too close, failure to signal, etc.
So – it’s safer to allow speeding than to implement tools to enforce the law? Riiiight……
How come a survillance camera can take a pix of driving doing 75mph and it’s clear as day and you see his/her nose hairs but the survillance camera at the bank or 7-11 taking a pix of the thug robbing the place looks like it was shot from Mars???!!!
Rear end collisions occur at traffic lights with cameras with greater frequency than at non-camera intersections. (Statistics work both ways.) Drivers slam on their brakes if they think the light might turn red and get them a ticket. I don’t blame them too much. If someone hits you in the tail end, it is their fault. Even though you end up with a no-fault accitent listed with CLUE. Not the best logic in the world, but it is not seriously flawed.
I have watched drivers slow down as if to wait for the light to turn red so they get a “fresh green” to go through. Many people stop in the middle of an intersection when the light turns red, trying to avoid running the light. They never read the driver’s handbook, or at least the part where it says “clear the itersection once you enter it.” Most people do not know that once you cross the “stop bar” you are in the intersection and should proceed through, not back into the guy (gal) behind you trying to be “legal”.
What they really need to do is mount a transponder in every car that sends a signal to the police when you go 1 mph over the speed limit or commit any moving violation. You would be required to appear in court and bring your “papers” and cash. ACLU where are you?
Variations in speed keeps traffic from bunching up. Haven’t you all seen the “parades” that form when a timid driver takes 10 miles to pass a truck? The uniform speed will result in all traffic bunching up at whatever speed limit is set, and every accident will be a chain reaction and bunches of drivers will be killed or maimed at once. Makes for more efficient use of EMS vehicles, too. What aa great idea this is!
I love to read the comments. Reminds me it’s not the smartest, but the faster sperm that wins.
I-95 is already a national embarassment with it’s 2-lanes being completely out-dated and inadequate for today’s traffic volume. Now this redneck want people to start slamming on their brakes for what reason? MONEY>
Red light cameras cause rear end collisions, just as ultra-law-abiding citizens do. They simply are afraid of getting a ticket. Increase that fear and you increase the accident potential.
Pseudo intellectuals and nanny-staters will tell you that the law is the law, which is obvious to the casual observer. People who live in fear of some tiny infraction whereby they have additional money extracted from them and “points” against their drivers license, which causes them to pay higher insurance premiums and cause accidents.
For example, those who fear red lights cause rear-end collisions. Those who fear going over the speed limit cause “parades” and multi-car pile ups. I suspect that much in the way of road rage can be traced to fearful drivers.
Those who lock their cruise control at the speed limit in the left lane are an example of the result that the learned reader commenting about the fastest sperm winning implies. There obviously cannot be a “smart” sperm since it is well documented that body parts have no separate intelligence in spite of clever comments to the contrary.
Drivers, laws, and the results are fodder for humorous discussions. Like teenagers, there are many who think they know everything and either try to control or tax (or both) everyone else. They are called nanny-staters. Everyone else just wants to be left alone. Automated taxing in the form of red-light and speed-limit cameras are not part of being left alone.
If the cost of collecting the extra tax is too high, they leave people alone. When it becomes profitable through automation, the public becomes the victim. The usual song and dance is “it is about safety”. The rest of the logic is left for the reader to decide based on their own intelligence.
I agree completely with TN – How are your rights being violated if you’re obeying the law to start with? You just don’t want to get caught, and you know you have a better chance of getting caught by a camera than by a police officer because the officer can’t stop everybody. Revenue generator? Yes, they’re making money – off the lawbreakers! Don’t break the law, and they won’t get your money. Simple as that. And you’d have to pay a fine if it was a cop pulling you over and giving you a ticket, but nobody complains about the cops being “revenue generators,” only the cameras. Interesting. And I’ve heard the argument about rear-end collisions ad nauseum, but I haven’t seen any real evidence of that. That’s a straw man argument. Invasion of privacy? You break the law, they take your picture. You don’t break the law, they don’t take your picture. They aren’t controlling you – you have total control of that accelerator. Don’t press down on it so hard, and you’re the one that’s in control, not them.
Nicely put, I disagree, but nicely put.
Essentially you’re saying that traffic laws and the resulting fines from breaking them are “Extra Taxes”.
More like penalties. If it takes a couple of minutes longer to get where you’re going, then leave earlier. If you don’t like the traffic laws because you feel they’re too controlling? Don’t drive. I hate to use the cliche that driving is not a right but a privledge, but it’s true.
However standing there and stating that you want the “right” to break the law doesn’t quite click with me. Whether it’s there as a deterrent or a method of generating revenue, the fact remains that it is the law. If you talked to a group of people, every one of them would tell you that there’s a traffic law or two that they don’t agree with. Me personally? I think red light cameras are a bit on the dangerous side, especially since they’re right there where you can see them and react to them. HOWEVER I’d rather have a bunch of fender benders because some people stop unexpectedly because of them,(you shouldn’t be going that fast approaching a stale yellow anyway, that’s just common sense) then burying just one person because someone didn’t feel that stopping for a red light applied to them. As for the I-95 camera. I think it’s a much better idea. Of course people might tap their brakes and or slow down as a result, which suprisingly is the DESIRED result.
People want to be safe, and are all for safety rules and laws that ensure that, unless of course those laws prevent them from having the “right” of putting other people at risk. The same argument applied when seat belt laws started becoming the norm, and of course this will too. If people are too stubborn to use common sense when driving, then deterrents have to be put in place.
Well, TN, it appears that we do agree on a point or two, and disagree on others. Normal life is like that, and I like your style.
I don’t feel that I have a “right” to break the law, only a “need” to spread out traffic (slight extra speed) to avoid multi car pile ups. When is is really bad, I just pull off the road to get out of the parade. I avoided one that way a few years ago about 10 PM on I95 in Florida. I think there were about 25 vehicles involved, many on fire, not sure how many died.
I never run a stale yellow, but if I am across the stop bar, I do clear the intersection. Many do not know that, and it is dangerous (although humerous) to watch someone sit in an intersection and observe people weaving around them. In their own mind, they are obeying the law.
The common alternative is to slam on their brakes and cause a fender bender. In town traffic you cannot leave 50 feet between cars since people behind you get hung at lights and hate you for living. Many drivers approach a mid-life green and slow down to wait for the yellow-red sequence. Others see the stale green and slam on their brakes when the light turns yellow when they are on or near the stop bar.
Now to address seat belt laws. I have never driven a car without wearing a seat belt. Period. When the law was passed, it was a $10 fine and they would not stop you for it, but only add the extra on if they stopped you for something else. Now it is “Click It or Ticket” and the fine is $100 or $125 (not certain, since I have never paid one). They will stop you for that, no other violation required. Tell me with a straight face that that law is for safety alone. I enjoy a good laugh, but at least there are no points. Why not make it $500 and give the driver 12 points so he cannot hurt himself for a year because he loses his license? Ridiculous, yes, indeed, but think of the safety improvement and that scofflaw would be deterred.
You’re right on with the fines getting out of control things like seat belt laws, and I do not agree with the police being able to pull people over JUST because they’re not wearing the seatbelt, however it does kinda circle back to my pay the price for your transgressions argument. I would imagine that the fines keep climbing for:
1. Revenue need
2. Decrease in actual violations due to vigilance by law enforcement (ok that ones a little weak but I can’t leave it out as a possibility)
3. People just not getting the point.
Any of these would be valid arguments, and I’m sure there not the only ones available.
I do remember however reading recently that the click it or ticket campaign was recently brought back into force because it was noted that seat belt use had decreased dramatically. Do I believe this, cant say for sure. Is it possible? In a society where people go out and get a “dummy” or mannequin so they can use the HOV lane, (try googling “HOV lane dummy” while keeping a straight face, I dare you) I have to say that it just might be.
TN, I believe that the point of this whole thread is the revenue need (greed?). Most people long ago outgrew their need for speed, the others drive for NASCAR or Indy. Paying for your transgressions is not a bad idea, if you were really getting to transgress. I would think that they could sell “speeders licenses” for $1000 a year and make a ton of money. Not only that, but there would probably be fewer accidents because the speeder license would have rules attached that said that you cannot do something stupid while you are speeding.
In driving as with other things, common sense should prevail. There is a marked lack of common sense, however.
The mannequin (blow up doll) is a fact. I have seen the busts on TV where the cops get a HOV driver for some infraction and notice that the passenger is not real. Tinted windows help on that one.
Fortunately, I am not in cities that have HOV lanes that often and when I am, I have a car full of people. The mannequin trick is used for people that want out of the parade but cannot speed up or slow down a little to do that. They do pay to transgress for that inflatable passenger, I think it is $250 – $500 a pop (pun intended).
The speeder license isn’t a bad idea, however we’d probably have to isolate them from the other drivers because you know the old saying “it’s not me I worry about when I’m driving, it’s all the other amateurs out there.”
Me? I commute using good old fashioned buses and trains, although they take a little longer sometimes, they do cost less in the long run, and I’m definitely “out of the parade” (by the way I like that one, and fully intend on using it when the chance arises” I encourage my children that mass transit and good old fashioned footwork are good alternatives to being stuck in traffic and frustrated and surrounded by people who are just as frustrated if not more than you are. It’s not easy, South Florida’s transit system is not as seamless as some of the other major metropolitan areas out there such as New York or Chicago, but with planning and a little patience, it can be done.
Get a room.
Well, I guess that we could isolate the speeders in an HV lane, which could be made by simply painting over the O in the HOV lane. The advantage would be that the $1000 license fee would be more profitable for the states.
Feel free to use the parade line. I figured that one out years ago when I saw a bunch of cars in a row as I watched from an overpass.
Mass transit is only good on the east and west coasts, tossing in Chicago, perhaps. I don’t much care for mass transit because I was mugged in New York on the subway, but I was with my Italian girlfriend. She had an Italian friend by the name of P. Beretta so everything turned out ok.
I like Florida, and they have busses if your life fits the schedule. I do like the Underground in London, and Eurostar in Europe although things are getting pretty rough over there, too. Russia’s subway is beautiful in places and pretty safe, but there are soldiers carrying AK-47s to keep troubles to a minimum. So I think Florida and its transit will suffice.
I see that Belle thinks we shouldn’t be getting along. We have a term for people like that. We call them “dingers” which you might find in some dictionary.
Personally, I’m hoping I’m around when this comes out:
http://www.skytran.net/phpsite/home/Home%20Intro.php
I’m guessing Belle doesn’t realize that a civil discussion is a lot more productive than an knuckle dragging, chest thumping “me right, you wrong” discussion. Oh well….
Maglev is a proven technology. I was on the Maglev train in Japan (Tokyo) and it is a weird sensation. Very smooth and fast. Eurostar is fast but it is also a train with multiple cars and bunches of passengers. The Skytran is individual transportation which offers security, privacy, and it is self parking. What a deal that is!
The power driver system is also proven technology. I was designing with Insulated Gate Bipolar Transistors in the 80s, and they have improved a lot since then. They make electric motors sing (literally) and are unbelievably efficient. Couple this transportation system with nuclear power generation and there should not be any CO2 left in the atmosphere (plants will start dying off and we will have to have a new tax to pipe CO2 to the forests).
Note that this is something that Ames Research and the IEEE is working on, so it could be ready for prime time quickly. I think they had something similar to this for one of the Olympics or some other big deal a few years ago. It is still running and it pays its own way, no taxpayer subsidy (as is required by all other mass public transportation schemes).
I did notice the enumeration and reference to all of the “green” power generation technologies, which is required if you want developmental subsidies from the government.
Americans are just about the laziest, most careless, and ignorant drivers on the face of the Earth.
I have driven many miles on the German Autobahns including the sections that have no speed limits. German drivers tend to be courteous, keep right except to pass, and don’t distract themselves with cell phones or cold drinks while they are driving. American drivers careen from place to place showing little concern for those around them. They drive horrid minivans stuffed with bratty larvae or they have cottage sized SUV’s with only the driver on board. They block the left lane on interstates and show no driving skills whatever.
The speed cameras in the USA are used to nab drivers who exceed an arbitrary posted speed limit. The traffic cams in Germany nab drivers who are cutting in and out of traffic or showing discourtesy like flipping off a fellow driver. Americans need to take driving more seriously but they probably never will.
BTW- the accident and death rates on the Autobahns are superior to those on US interstates.
Oh well. I have effective countermeasures in my vehicles that protect me from the nanny cams, and yes they do work. I don’t drink and drive and I match the speed of traffic around me. I don’t whip from lane to lane and I NEVER exhibit road rage.
When I’m on an interstate highway outside of city limits and there is no traffic I drive quickly and safely with no risk of injuring myself or those around me.