Imagine if drivers maliciously complied and drove the minimum.
Speed cameras always end up devolving into a petty political football that creates more opposition and resentment than harm prevention. If you need to consider speed cameras at all, it means you definitely have an infrastructure design issue. That’s where both the attention and the money should be going.
You’re right about civil infrastructure, it’s a shitshow of road layout in some parts of Oakland.
However, they’ll print money with these cameras the way people drive.
What’s really interesting is that between Oakland and Berkeley, there are so many cyclists risking their lives every day
The money from these camera tickets must go to improving road safety. And the city must not decrease the amount of money they put towards road safety either.
Speed camera ticket fees should go solely to servicing the municipal bonds issued to pay for road diets, and if you’re bringing in more ticket fees than you have bonds to pay then you need to issue more bonds to pay for more road diets.
11 mph? In the land down under 3 kph (~1.86 mph) is enough to be fined and get demerit points.
I’m ok with this, 11 is enough that is not just a oops. But speed limit signage better be prominent.
11mph is egregious (46 in a 35) number that I hope most people will find reasonable. Introducing cameras in a reasonable way like this should help with driver acceptance. Hopefully they didn’t put it at the bottom of a hill where the speed drops from 60 to 35 (ie revenue focus).
Until you keep getting popped going exactly 11 over …No way I’m that precise
Oakland
Oof. So that’s where the city budget went this time
Or not…maybe they say you were going 11 miles an hour faster…but I successfully argued there was no way I was going exactly 11 over the speed limit, which the camera claimed. I was irritated because that was like the 4th ticket I was going EXACTLY 11 mph over. 2nd at that specific camera.
“There’s no way I was going exactly 11 over, I was either speeding well over or going the limit, but no chance I was going 11 over.”
What kind of an argument is this?
I didn’t expect it to work by any means, I was just irritated because most of the time I was driving perfectly okay, but would get nabbed where the speed dropped 20mph for a short distance, if your mind was preoccupied it was an easy oops, damnit.
Look Doug Ford, it works, PUT OUR CAMERS BACK ASSHOLE
Prove it was me driving then.
Tell me you didn’t read the article without telling me you didn’t read the article (“the cameras take pictures of a vehicle’s rear license plates”)
Can you ticket a car for driving infractions? How does license plate identity the driver, not just whoever registered the vehicle?
In Australia, you can nominate someone else who was driving the vehicle after you receive ticket. But the ticket always goes to the person whose name is under the car registration.
Likewise in the UK. I’m less sure about the efficacy and ethics of speeding fines than many people in this community – not to say they shouldn’t exist, just that I’ve seen plenty unreasonably low restrictions in places where there’s no heightened risk to the public, and that I’m not convinced that motorway/interstate restrictions are useful to the degree they’re enforced – but having the registered owner take the risk if the driver doesn’t own up seems entirely reasonable.
Agree with you. All speeding cameras where I live are on rural highways (110km/h zones), and usually at the bottom of a big hill.
