Vehicular traffic in NYC is out of control! (And I'm a driver, yes as well as a pedestrian & subway rider). Cars and trucks run red lights and they speed up when the light turns yellow 100 feet away. Endless Trucks, Uber and Lyft vehicles all day long. I've never seen so much traffic on the streets. Starting now to see traffic jams on my residential block in Brooklyn, mornings usually between 8 and 9:30 and evenings from 5 to 7. And when school is in the traffic jams in the afternoon start at 2:30. For example, on Cortelyou road in Brooklyn going east to Coney Island Avenue there is a backup for three blocks every evening rush hour, horns honking! And they recently fixed that corner for pedestrians. It's a little safer for them, but the traffic hasn't changed. The electric bikes aren't helping out either. The one thing I do like though is the delayed green so pedestrians can cross.
An additional need - start tagging cyclists and ticket the many cyclists who go through red lights.
7
@SLM I gave up riding my bike in NYC last year because I don't feel that confident on my bike anymore. Plus I've noticed that drivers have become more aggressive. Anyway at the age of 75 I'm not that quick anymore. But when I did ride, I wasn't sitting around for a red light if there was no traffic, no pedestrians. But i would have been insane to run a red light if there was traffic around. I'm sure no pedestrian is going to wait for the red light change either, given the same circumstances. I have yet to see that in all the years I've lived in Brooklyn. But drivers have to wait and if I had a nickel for everytime I have seen a driver go through a red light I'd be a rich man. And there's never a cop around when you need one. I drive, I walk and I used to ride.
3
Cameras don't catch drunks, the unlicensed, or the uninsured. They just send a bill, to the owner, way after the fact. There is "arrest". A reckless driver isn't stopped-there's no intervention.
The "School Zone" is such a fig leaf-don't say it's for the children, it's really for the money, unless the school day now runs to 10 pm and I missed the memo.
Waze is a waste of time for mobile police patrols, but very accurate for stationary cams.
NYPD should step up patrols, but instead, we get a cash machine. They've monetized 36 mph, which was the real goal when the limit was lowered to 25 mph..but there was never any real hope of enforcing 25 without cameras....and now the second part of the plan is in force.
Next part will be the headline "rich guy has 87 tickets and just pays them...we need to do SOMETHING".
I hope they budgeted for vandalism....
10
People are complaining about getting caught running red lights???? Legislators in other states are banning them??? If it wasn't so serious it would be laughable.
Personally, I'm glad they're putting the cameras up; if people aren't confronted with their bad behavior, there's no incentive to stop said actions. They can cry "nanny state" all they want, but the solution is a simple one: you don't want a ticket, don't speed and don't run red lights!
19
As a former Manhattan resident and car owner (left a year ago), I have no issue with the cameras. I understand that cameras may give occasional false positives - but a 10 mph buffer reduces that risk. I have had instances where cops flat out lie about traffic infractions, where no amount of statements or eye witness testimony will sway a traffic court judge, and I also once received a photo of my car going through an intersection with me at the wheel. I remembered that trip, and that offence. I tried to squeeze past on a yellow, always a bad idea, and the light flicked over to red right before I went through. I have been very mindful to not do that again. I'll go with cameras over cops any day.
4
Cities should call these what they are: speeding tolls.
Wealthy people can register their cars to corporate entities and write off the fines as the cost of doing business.
5
@CB You may be interested to know that there's a bill to be introduced in the NYC Council to boot or tow repeat offenders, paid fines or not. That will close the loophole you mention. I also think the hypothetical stories I hear about rich people paying the fines and continuing to speed, rich people writing the fines off, and regular folk going blocks out of their way to avoid cameras are rather fanciful. It's just so much easier to slow down and obey the limit, I predict most drivers will do just that, and it's looking like most drivers already are - the recidivist rate is rather low.
1
This is yet another reason I'm glad I don't drive in the city. There are fewer and fewer reasons to have a car here.
1
@Fallopia TubaThis is only one of the many efforts to clear the streets for easy passage by limo or paid driver.
2
@dannyboy I still maintain it's been a long, long time since anyone could claim they had a "right" to drive in the city. NYC actually has a world-class public transportation system, didja notice?
@Fallopia Tuba asks: "NYC actually has a world-class public transportation system, didja notice?"
Are you over 70 years or disabled? But I guess you have your very own perspective.
Understood. We need to keep our streets safe. But after watching When they See Us and Thirteenth, I am thinking a great deal about mass incarceration. Clearly, we should not speed. Cameras are not biased people, giving tickets, they are cameras, which is fair. But what about the folks who cannot pay the tickets. We all know situations where people living in poverty end up in jail as a result of the tickets that they could not pay. With privilege, it's just a ticket. With poverty, possible jail time.
2
Great idea. Just obey the law and you don't have to worry about the cameras. And if the City makes money from lawbreakers that can be used for schools, health care and other public services, even better!!
5
Okay, let me get this straight. This article informed me that the cameras will operate from 6am until 10pm. Really? The public has been officially told the operating hours of these cameras?! So if hypothetically I wanted to speed, I should just wait until say 10:05pm? Dosen't anyone working in the city government have any, ANY common sense? Better be extra careful on the roads after 10:05pm.
4
@Fred They have disclosed this information since expanding the program years ago when it was just in school zones and 7 - 7. Why shouldn't we know when they're operating? This whole thing is incredibly unconstitutional anyways. Guilty before being proven innocent... is this Russia now?
“2,000 Cameras Will Be Watching How You Drive in New York City”
OK but who’s going to watch the cameras?
1
Why hasn't the City cracked down on drivers who deface or obstruct their license plates so that they cannot be read by the cameras? Agents who patrol to give tickets for parking violations could easily ticket these cars yet they aren't instructed to do so.
10
I'm a driver, and I think it's a positive step. I live across from Sunset Park, and there are way too many cars tearing down our streets. There is a school, and of course the park -- tons of kids and families. Speed bumbs, which we have, help. But not enough.
4
We are told that the City signed a three-year, $176 million contract with a company, Verra Mobility, to install and maintain enforcement cameras that also catch vehicles that run red lights and block bus lanes
A huge amount of money for a small function. How much did the company (Verra Mobility) contribute to DeBlasio and city councilpersons?
8
The meaning of almost every number cited in the article is null due to absence of discussion of statistical uncertainty. Anyway, traffic-citation cameras ultimately represent a failure support for driver education courses.
1
@Charles Packer You touched on the problem. Adding to the problem is that Enforcement has been too ineffective for too long. Now it is just a pay-to-speed solution, not law-enforcement.
2
Right wingers on immigrants: "If migrant children didn't cross the border illegally, they would not be put in detention camps and separated from their parents"
Right wingers on speed traps: "How dare you try to entrap us and try to catch us breaking the law"
10
lol! I'm not a right winger but I'm also not an advocate for the proliferation of speed cameras (nanny state anyone?)... but your comment had me rolling!
To receive a fine you need to be traveling in excess of 35 MPH. That is very fast on local NYC streets.
Don't want a fine, don't speed. Be responsible. Faster speeds meaner reduced reaction time, and NYC is just too busy.
8
what speed is not fast? and on what street? I see 25 even 35 mph on single one way lanes through residential side streets, yet the wide open boulevards have all come down to 25... race to the lowest common denominator is not the answer, nor is 5 mph, or the abolishment of vehicles in our society. everyone has a part to play in their own safety...
3
@Nick have you ever driven on Eastern or Ocean Parkway? 25 MPH on a parkway is a crawl and it's causing bad drivers to drive even worse.
Speaking of local streets, I no longer have the privilege of turning right ON MY OWN BLOCK in Brooklyn. I have to drive down an extra avenue in order to turn RIGHT. It's illogical.
It truly pains me to be on the side of Republicans in this case, but I don't see this as a safety initiative more than it is a cash grab.
1
A camera is a camera. Pretending that safety is paramount in a country that embraces health related bankruptcies, now that’s rich. Perhaps if corporations and politicians didn’t treat us so poorly, plundering what are meant to be public coffers topped off by actual taxpayers, there’d be less need to shove spy tech in every conceivable nook and cranny. I’d also like to point out how humorous it is that in an age where I’m meant to be on the lookout for so called “deep fakes,” we kid ourselves into believing that recorded traffic footage won’t be doctored to protect the interests of the few. Even were one able to (forensically) disprove such footage, there’s still the matter of paying court processing fees because the DOJ is unashamedly self-serving. We live in a banana republic and pay for the privilege of calling it something else, anything else. And, so far as I can tell, an influx of private cameras won’t improve matters as advertised.
4
This is the future of all democrat led cities and eventually whole states. How else will the mooches and unions promising democrat votes get paid their unsustainable salaries and benefits?
3
A 10 mph leeway is good enough for Manhattan Streets.
4
Ban Speeding Cars from Cities.
Install governors so cars can't speed. If it's a 20 mph zone, then cars shouldn't be allowed to go over 20 mph. All cars, SUVs, and Trucks.
3
In New York City there has been 1 pedestrian killed by a cyclist in all of 2019 and they were the first person killed by a cyclist since 2017. One death every 2 years is one more than should be, but is far from a disturbing frequency. The 3rd cyclist to die in the last 7 days was a young woman who was run over by a cement truck in Brooklyn today. This is an epidemic, there have been NO arrests for any of the 3 people killed by cars.
A car and a hammer are both tools.
If you kill me with either when I am walking or cycling you should be automatically arrested and prosecuted for my death.
7
sorry, but context (or details) of each of the regrettable deaths you cite are required to draw any meaningful position on the topic "dead by vehicle" is not meaningful nor valid.
1
@citykid. Please. The narrative is "bad cars" and bicycles are always blameless. No matter what or how the incident occurred.
Cars should be made to drive slowly thru the city. So should bicycles; both kill pedestrians with disturbing frequency.
1
@RebeccaTouger No, actually only one pedestrian has been killed by a cyclist in 2019 and none in 2018. This is not consistent with "disturbing frequency"
3
@RebeccaTouger
Bicycles do NOT kill pedestrians with disturbing frequency.
2
@RebeccaTouger False. There has been one pedestrian killed by a bicycle since 2017 in NYC.
2
The system is flawed.
In 2015 I was passed on the right by an aggressive driver who activated a speed camera on the Long Island Expressway Service Road. I was traveling the speed limit, partly because I knew the camera was there. The city issued ME the ticket because I was in the left lane, even though the camera explicitly stated that mine was not the lane that activated the camera.
I lost two Department of Finance appeals despite detailing explicitly what happened, along with the evidence that it was the other vehicle that earned the ticket, not mine. This included overlaying the violation's images to show how much further the other vehicle travelled than mine did in one half-second. The administrative judges (first one, then three) ALL ignored my statements, lied about what I said, and returned guilty verdicts.
To get my ticket overturned I had to personally email Polly Trottenberg and threaten to make the issue public along with my evidence. Eventually someone competent at DOT confirmed what I'd been saying all along and rescinded my ticket.
I was fortunate to have the will and acuity to fight back, but I fear the abuse of a system with no checks or boundaries. That is precisely what lawmakers have given the City here. Hello, surveillance; goodbye, due process.
32
@Evan Kalish That New York has some incompetent government employees does not mean that we should stop enforcing the law. You would have had an even harder time fighting a ticket based on human testimony.
3
@Evan Kalish
Unfortunately, the cameras are for making money - not traffic safety - so guilt or innocence does not matter.
3
@Evan Kalish wrote: "I lost two Department of Finance appeals despite detailing explicitly what happened, along with the evidence... The administrative judges (first one, then three) ALL ignored my statements, lied about what I said, and returned guilty verdicts."
This has been my experience.
Department of FINANCE. Won't find justice there.
4
This is just another big money maker fro the city. These are not "school safety Cameras" if they are on all day and night and weekends. All you millennials won't give up your Ubers, food delivery, scooters, citiibikes that violates every law on the books and cause accidents but you blame cars because your head is in the phone while you step off the sidewalk before the light changes and say "a car hit me. " Jaywalkers cause accidents too. Take responsibility for your actions and stop blaming others. Jaywalking is a traffic offense also. Ubers block every street,along with trucks ,construction and delivery bikes causing dangerous conditions for everyone.Cars are only a part of the equation. Take your head out of the phone and look both ways before you step off the sidewalk!
12
@Byron "Take responsibility for your actions and stop blaming others."
says the guy who opposes enforcing legally mandated speed limits.
7
The vast majority of collisions that cause serious injury, death, or property damage in NYC are the fault of inattentive or aggressive drivers. Speeding is one of the primary reasons for these collisions.
Jaywalkers causing crashes? What are you going on about?
4
the argument here is not about "enforcing the law" but how it's done. every time a more invasive and "always watching" technology is introduced, the government sells it by "saving the children" (because who can argue against that) before they roll it out to turn us more and more into a surveillance state... I forget the quote, but something along the lines of "someone who trades liberty in the name of safety is not worthy of liberty and will not be safe" (I really wish is recalled the quote correctly)
surveillance state. that's what's scary about the proliferation of these things... not about allowing people to "break the law".. and even that statement is funny. I'll bet that if we as a society starting strictly enforcing all of the laws on the books in such a cold and ruthless fashion, we would all be criminals. anyone who thinks they are living the life of a saint is sadly mistaken...
2
The owner of the car is penalized, not the driver. There are plenty of New Yorkers who think nothing of spending $50 for a pair of socks and don't care how many tickets they pile up. Are auto insurance rates expected to go down once this system is in place?
4
from my observations in the flatiron and penn station area, running red lights is a far more serious problem. in any 1 hour. of time I will see at least 6 cars run red lights often two or three cars going through well after the light has changed.
drivers have been conditioned that traffic regulations are rarely if ever enforced.
7
Anyone that believes that any cameras are there for any other reason than flat-out surveillance is, like me, wishing for the anonymous days of yore. I keep thinking of buying those old black plastic glasses with the mustache attached as a way of thwarting identification.
I also now, as a habit, leave my Bluetooth and Wifi off unless I need them. It’s surprising how infrequently I actually do need them. I don’t really want to “stick it to the man”, but I don’t feel compelled to make it easy on the ‘them’ either...
3
NY's latest policing for profit scheme, like in many other cities is just a new tax.
The Europeans seem to do fine with the Autobahn. Traffic accidents, like death and taxes are inevitable when you have so many vehicles on the road. The injury rate for accidents that occur on the Autobahn is just 0.08 per billion kilometers. Only 4 states in the US have safer roads than Germany.
I purposely avoid intersections with cameras and will often check driving applications for traps before setting out on long trips.
6
@mrmeat "The Europeans seem to do fine with the Autobahn." You do realize that we're talking about a dense urban area, not a controlled access divided highway similar to our interstate highways, right? And that the autobahn is just in Germany, not generally in "Europe"? And that only some rural parts of said autobahn have no speed limits? And that the rest of "Europe" has speed limits? And if we're talking about road safety in general I'm sure you're aware of the very strict laws regarding DWI in most of "Europe". Finally, I'm sure you're aware of the onerous process to even get a driver's licence in Germany that weeds out the incompetent.
10
@mrmeat in German cities the speed limit is 50km per hour (31 mph).
4
@mrmeat Speed cameras are ubiquitous in cities and towns in many parts of Europe. I’ve learned that the hard way. Hertz just bills your credit card, you don’t get a hearing.
3
When the speed limit went from 35mph to 25mph, I got two speeding tickets on the same stretch within a two-week period. Maybe I was doing 38, enough to trigger the camera. I just wasn't used to the new speed limit.
Good for me. I sure keep to 25 now.
I'd like to see the red-light runners and 50mph men snagged good. And some of them blast their radios so loud they wouldn't hear a kid scream if they hit one.
The nice thing is that cameras do not make judgments. Just the facts, ma'am. It's your license plate, not your face, that counts.
It's time.
11
In the part of the Bay Area where I live, lights with red light cameras turn yellow for a long enough time before turning red to allow drivers traveling at normal speed to pass through without risk of tripping the camera. However, in other communities, the lights turn from green to yellow to red so fast that it is easy to get caught. That's unfair. But why should anyone have an issue with a red light camera that provides sufficient warning?
This article is the first I've heard of speed cameras. I was leery, but then I read the article. No one is ticketed until they've driven 10 or more miles above the speed limit. Then, they only get a $50 fine. Who can complain about that?
6
@Karen asks: "Who can complain about that?"
Answer: Citizens who have observed the lawless actions of the contractors who are managing NYC affairs in our name.
1
I drive in New York.
This is a good thing
I’ll think twice before I pop a red light.
11
Finally. A tax on bad drivers is an ideal tax. Now how about 2,000 red-light-running cameras? Some of the comments by drivers here reveal just how unaware many are of the danger they create in a city packed with pedestrians, bikers, children, the elderly, and people with mobility problems.
20
It is hard to say that it is unfair to ticket speeders.
Regardless, look for bottlenecks and increased road rage. Our fundamental problem is not just speed; it is too many drivers on too many roads, with too many traffic lights and too long commutes.
We won't solve that with speed traps. But we will make it a better financial deal for the city.
2
Too bad.
1
I think this is a great idea. I hope they can get the kids on doing wheelies in groups of motorbikes too. And especially, the idiots loudly revving their motorcycle engines like cavemen.
4
“New York City is going to become just one big speed trap,” said Shelia Dunn, a spokeswoman for the National Motorists Association, a grass-roots advocacy group that opposes speed cameras.
Really? A grass roots group that opposes safety? (see stats in article Ms. Dunn) And of course the Republicans were opposed, kid's safety is socialist after all. Who's buttering NMA's bread?
9
@Dave The NMA has been around for over 20 years. They were instrumental in getting the national 55 mph limit repealed, and fight unfair traffic laws and practices. Automated enforcement over time tends to follow the money, eg red light intervals, 10 pm school zones, etc. The NMA is the nation's premier driver's rights organization, what AAA would be if it wasn't a wholly owned subsidiary of the insurance industry
3
Register cyclists and monitor them too and I'm all for this in cities.
4
@Lisa. I dont know how things are in Boston, but here in NYC many reckless and speeding drivers are arrested and prosecuted and found guilty of killing pedestrians. Of the last three deaths attributed to cyclists (and only 3 deaths in 3 years) , two were definately called accidental bynthe NYPD and the last is unclear who was at fault. Cyclists strikie and injure pedestrians at a rate of hundreds a year compared to thousands by drivers. In 2016 the ratio was 350 to 10,000. Despite popular perception and tabloid labels like "deadly menace" fact is cyclists cause a fraction of the injuries, deaths, and general mayhem drivers do. And it's not like drivers being registered, licensed, inspected, and monitored makes them safe drivers. In my borough alone somebody drives a vehicle into a building or a yard at least once a month. The problem out there is drivers, not people who so often and loudly claim "I almost got hit by a bicycle"
7
Nothing but a money grab. Funny, The Times fails to mention that most of these "cameras" are run by private companies that split the fine. Interesting, wonder why?
12
I drive every day in the city because of work. It's almost impossible to speed because of the traffic. And you're never going to reduce traffic fatalities, until someone cracks down on pedestrian stupidity. Can't tell you how many times I had to slam on my brakes because some idiot is jaywalking/crossing against the light/too stupid to look up from their phone to realize they're in the middle of an avenue, etc. Every single day.
13
@marymarynyc Actually speeding and red-light cameras have an excellent track record at reducing traffic fatalities.
13
@marymarynyc
Drivers hit 35-45 MPH between lights all the time.
You shouldn't have to "slam your brakes" for the mysterious pedestrians that magically appear in front of you.
3
If you’re following the law and the rules, what are you afraid of?
10
Tell me the cameras are going to pick up cyclists driving the wrong way and fine them. And the ones running red lights as well.
11
@LW
And all those dangerous unlicensed speeding e bikes and mini bikes that never stop for lights..
8
Maybe we should just make all cars have a maximum speed of 20 mph. NO more speeders. Problem solved.
7
"The cameras also provide a false sense of reassurance because they do not eliminate dangers from other obstacles, such as jaywalkers or cyclists running red lights."
Danger from jaywalkers?? Reckless drivers scare me as I make my way around New York. But jaywalkers inspire no feat.
4
Hopefully both. The city should be hostile towards drivers. Drivers are certainly hostile in the city.
3
I don't drive much in the city anymore, but I guess this will get me to reduce any driving there to an absolute minimum.
For any normal driver, this is absolutely terrifying.
The speed limit is a ridiculous 25 mph now.
So, what's the difference between 25 and 26, or between 25 and 30 in a modern car? The slightest momentary pulsation on the gas pedal. The smallest moment of following the car in front of you instead of staring at your speedometer. And staring at your speedometer, to the exclusion of other things, is the only way to be sure you won't accidentally drift up a mph or two.
They say that they won't ticket you until you're going 35, but what if they change their minds? What if they just say, "Whoops. We lied"? What if my speedometer is slightly off?
I could be driving down the road thinking I'm doing 25, but actually going faster, triggering camera after camera, and only find out after a month, when the tickets start to roll in, that I've incurred dozens, perhaps hundreds, of $50 fines.
You'd be crazy to drive in the city now. And I pity the cab drivers.
1
@Eric
i don't know where in the 'hudson valley' you are, but if you're incapable of keeping your car to a certain speed, perhaps you need to stop driving altogether.
most roads in my part of the hudson valley are at 25-30-35 mph limits.
5
@Eric
The difference between 25, 30 and 35 mph absolutely means a lot in terms of struck pedestrian fatality rates.
Even speed cameras in school zones do not go off unless you’re 5+ the speed limit and those cameras are stricter than the normal ones. And staying within 5mph of the limit at those low speeds while paying attention to the road really isn’t hard at all.
4
@Eric
NYC already has speed cameras and no, it is not difficult to maintain speed, you drive? And there is a 10 MPH buffer that is more than generous.
2
Can we now get license plates on bikes (especially the electric ones) so they can be caught riding on the sidewalks, blowing through red lights, going the wrong way on one-way streets? Just this morning, while crossing the street with my dog in the crosswalk, with the light, a woman on a Citibike blew through the light, yelling at me to look out. I said “you have a red light!” She said “I know, but I don’t want you to get hurt,” and blithely peddled on. Many of us are too old to play dodge em, and the police just ignore them.
12
Red Light cameras in the city are a much better idea than speed cameras. There's flagrant and dangerous red light running at every single one of the intersections I walk through every day. Drivers know that there's no down side.
7
@Sussler
NYC already has red light cameras, though we need many more. Both are necessary.
1
This old former city police officer is all for these cameras. All the worries about Big Brother are nonsense. Americans are notorious about ignoring speed limits, texting while driving, driving aggressively, and driving while intoxicated. People who claim to be all about supporting law and order and law enforcement somehow see it differently when they get behind the wheel. Bravo, NYC!
13
Driving in New York will mean/you are on the silver screen/Traffic cops will stop and laugh/asking for your autograph/Should you choose to wear a mask/in the Bastille you will bask.
Hopefully this will slow down the big trucks barreling through out streets.
7
Since I posted this comment another cyclist has been killed. 29 year old woman hit by a 70 year old cement truck driver. Died at the scene. No tickets issued. The 15th cyclist killed so far this year. Vision Zero?!?!
6
@Eric Ambel, uh, the bicyclist was WRONG. Dead, yes, a tragedy, but WRONG....
1
Nothing but a speed trap that create a "caste system" . Track down police personal cars and judges, and our politicians, and they'l speed, but the ticket will just not be issued due to the fact that the cameras have a database of "do not send tickets". (just like the HOV lane on the Gowanus expressway, certain people are driving illegally without punity). With the cameras, You can never "face your accuser, and even if you have to speed to deliver someone to the hospital, the cameras cant tell the difference and judges dont believe anything so when speeding in necessary the city issues tickets, all about the money. Just like the new insurance commercial out, you are punished without regard to any situations, ("Dont mess with my discount") . You can even get a ticket for getting out of the way of an emergency vehicle. But hey, if that's the way its going to be, lets put cameras in the politicians and police offices, and then we can root out all bad behaviors!!!
4
@Ed P is there any evidence for the conspiracy that yo are suggesting? Or is the lack of evidence is all you need for a conspiracy?
7
@Ed P - "...if you have to speed to deliver someone to the hospital..."
When I need to get someone to the hospital, I call 911 and they send these loud vehicles with sirens that I can hear blocks away. They show up with medical professionals who stabilize the sick person and then they rush to the hospital with those loud sirens and the legal right to drive however they want to. They are in direct communication with the hospital on-route.
8
@Ed P
Just because you are having a medical emergency doesn't allow you to break traffic laws. Are you trying to create additional emergencies?
2
New York City is one of the world's great walking cities. Anything that improves the safety of walkers and bikers is a good thing. Cars have ruled for far too long and measures like speed cameras, more bus lanes and congesting pricing will be greatly positive for the vast majority of New Yorkers.
10
@Andrew J. Cook One of the main things to improve the safety of walkers would be enforcement of the traffic rules for bikers. Especially those going the wrong way on a one-way street.
4
@Andrew J. Cook
walking is not biking.
If you removed all pedestrian fatalities by bicycle this year, the number of fatalities would not change.
The speed limit is now 25 mph in NYC, unless marked otherwise. When I lived in Bath Beach/Bensonhurst, drivers routinely did 50 mph on Bay Parkway, leading to several deaths. I’m back in my old neighborhood at least once a month, and the situation hasn’t changed.
Remember Angel Martinez? He was the four-year-old boy killed by a coffin-truck driver who admitted he’d deliberately run a red light on Third Avenue in Brooklyn, which caused the youngster’s death. No charges were filed against him, because he cried at the scene. Police attitudes need to change, not just the speed limit
9
"Linda Corman, 67, a freelance writer, said that while she was wary of any surveillance camera that could lead to a Big-Brother state, in this instance, “This is a good use of it.”"
And what would not be a good use? Where will we draw the line of weighing public safety and security against privacy, intrusion, and micro-analysis of the everyday activities of citizens?
Our laws and public policies were not written for the digital age. Almost anything we may do in public or even some private places is now open not only to review but may be permanently recorded and suddenly appear years later only to inflict harm upon unwitting if not totally innocent people. Voiceless/soundless videos through the lens of a single angle that omits context, tone and others nearby is not proof of guilt, innocence or simply happenstance. What happens just before and just after a recorded event is equally as important as the brief seconds of a chance occurence.
The digital age has created a great conundrum. We may have found new ways to protect ourselves from criminals while ending the freedoms that Democracy promises.
We need to think carefully about the price we pay for security.
4
@Jay - Meanwhile, your smartphone relays information back to the corporations about 14 times per minute telling them everything you do or where you go. Every store you walk into has cameras. But you are worried about a camera at an intersection? This kinds of "speed traps" have been around most of my life in one form or another. Without them, drivers will drag race down the street.
5
New York City gives total freedom to cars at the expense of its human inhabitants: the freedom to drive recklessly without consequences, to continuously harass and threaten pedestrians, to produce dangerous pollution and constant noise, and to lower the standards of living for everyone who doesn't have a car, like myself. I'm glad that something (anything) is being done to make the city a little more livable and finally start to value people over automobiles.
8
In order for these cameras to really be effective, they should all have signs that warn of their presence. The camera itself won't necessarily get people to slow down. Yes, they'll "learn their $50 lesson" but only one camera at a time.
If there are signs warning of their direct presence, then drivers will heed the warning and slow down.
4
@Chris Absolutely! If the goal of the cameras is to keep drivers in compliance there should be a giant sign at each one saying "SPEED CAMERA HERE! SLOW DOWN!"
1
The technology to transmit a vehicle's speed to a roadside detection device already exists, and could be implemented at a small fraction of the cost of the cameras. In fact, with "modern technology", the speeder could receive a text saying his bank account had been debited for the cost of fine, by the time he reached the next red light! Of course, he shouldn't read the text while operating the vehicle ...
3
"The cameras also provide a false sense of reassurance because they do not eliminate dangers from other obstacles, such as jaywalkers or cyclists running red lights."
Talk about a red herring. Their purpose is to protect us from speeding and red light-running DRIVERS. "Jaywalkers" are hardly a source of danger, and I can count on one hand the number of injuries caused by cyclists since the cameras were introduced.
7
Better traffic control in NYC must be multi-faceted.
We need quantifiable improvements in public transit. This includes more SBS (MTA bus) service, more bus-only lanes, and traffic control. The DoT tickets parked cars, but does absolutely nothing about.... double-parked cars?...cars idling in bike lanes and in MTA bus stops?? and yes, even cars parked across the sidewalk on some residential side streets? Where is the actual control of the traffic flow?
In addition to cars often speeding through a yellow/red light, they also literally cut corners when making turns. Instead of going out into the intersection and Then making their turn, many cars will hug the corner while turning, in order to beat the light. In such instances the driver does not have good view of the overall intersection and crosswalk, and this is when they are more likely to 'clip' pedestrians who were in the crosswalk.
Intersection corners need to have those poles added at the corners, which prevent drivers from hugging corners when making turns.
So long as the MTA continues to flail, NYC cannot continue to rubber-stamp new luxury housing developments and their parking garages, as just where do you think all the cars are going to go on our streets? The focus must be on public transportation. Not on 2-ton vehicles. Not on unfettered R.E. development.
In Queens, some side streets with attached private homes have parking in the back, complete with dangerous hidden drives. This too must be addressed.
2
Obviously this works. And it is about time that NYC takes advantage of the high tech equipment that can make life more safe for residents and tourists alike. I see no problem with 24 hours per day surveillance. Why stop this at 10pm?
11
As an American who spent fives years in Sydney Australia I will say they work. After 3 tickets in the mail and $500 in fines I drive the speed limit and no more. It’s followed me back to America too. In Sydney they even have mobile cameras, and average speed traps on highways between fixed points. It’s worked for them and substantially reduced fatalities on the road. It’s simple physics.
12
While the article mentions a contract between NYC and Verra Mobility to operate the cameras, it doesn't disclose the terms. Many of these types of contracts give the vendor a percentage of violation fees, which gives the vendor an incentive to increase the number of alleged speeders the camera capture. The company might lower the speed which triggers the violation notice, capture cars in the field of the camera's vision that are not in the street zone mandated by the city, and other tactics. For-profit policing often leads to abuses of power.
I think speed cameras are reasonable, as long as there is no tie between the vendor's profits and the amount of violations issued.
6
In a place called Perfect, the money from fines would be used to upgrade public transportation so people will leave their cars at home. But that would make too much sense.
4
As I drive around suburban DC, the traffic suddenly slows. I have entered a camera zone. When I first moved here I got a couple of "tickets." Just cost, no consequences on licence points. The worse is at the bottom of a long hill in Gaithersburg, MD. Ugh.So we all watch our speed,which is a good thing.
1
I appreciate caution around fears over a "wealth-transfer scheme" but this ain't it.
Hard to believe many commenters here are beneficiaries of this experiment in behavior modification: NYC pedestrians. As a longtime Manhattan resident, I mostly ignored drivers who speed (as both pedestrian and driver)... until I had a child. Then, as if dropped into a parallel universal, witnessing the frequency and flagrancy of speeding and blowing through red lights was stunning. Don't be fooled slug-like traffic on some NYC streets. Speeders are legion.
Without the fantasy of a traffic cop or speed trap on every corner, cameras are the next best -- or maybe better -- thing. It won't catch all offenders but it should discourage a big enough cohort to make a difference.
7
@L Fitzgerald wrote: "I appreciate caution around fears over a "wealth-transfer scheme" but this ain't it...
Without the fantasy of a traffic cop or speed trap on every corner, cameras are the next best -- or maybe better -- thing."
I too raised children and had concerns about crossing at my corner, the most dangerous in the neighborhood. But dismissing all all other concerns because of that never crossed my mind.
It is important to note the payments and follow the money.
It is important to understand just what compromises are made with wide installation of cameras.
It is important to understand why previous enforcement has been so ineffective.
I say this now as a very slow driver and a very long distance walker.
My experience this week with trying to get a traffic enforcement officer to prevent a driver from making a right turn from the left lane into a pedestrian-filled crosswalk is illustrative. The Officer explained that his only duty was preventing cars from going through red lights.
So there are other questions to be asked.
1
And biometric cameras in Hudson River Park with watch you recreate with your family. Waiting to read commentary in the near future about the stress created by removing the surveillance cameras because the AI satellites will have all the sensors needed to do it all. Innovation for the 21st century and competitive authoritarianism where emotions are illegal. C U There.
3
Anyone who opposes these cameras has never spent time near school crossings. As a longtime Queens resident, I consistently see cars running red lights, speeding up at yellows. And pity the poor kids who may have to cross a busy boulevard. Crossing guards are spat and yelled at with no recourse. These cameras are a small price to pay for safety.
13
Why do those cameras cost so much?
The cost should be based on the hardware/software provided and not on the potential revenues from tickets.
And both hardware and software are not that complicated.
The best hardware for this does not cost more than $2000 per camera. So, 2000 cameras times $2000 is 4 million dollars. This leaves us with 174 million to account for. So let's say a top programmer is paid $1000 per weekday!!!, and we use 12 of them for a year!!!, we can justify another 3 million dollars...
In short, someone is laughing all the way to the bank...
8
@SteveK How do you arrive at $2,000.00 per camera? Hi resolution, infrared, cameras with zoom capability. Mounting to guard against the weather and bullets. Installation. Upgrade. I've looked at the costs in Germany. This is not a cheap solution but one that works. Just like healthcare, we just won't admit when things are right, correct, save lives.
2
@US mentor,
The hardware is well understood. There is nothing too exotic about it. The real challenge is the software that needs to analyze a series of images, then order the hardware to zoom in or zoom out, and basically identify the car by separating the noise from the actual car image. This technology started in the 1980s in missiles, that needed to identify the real moving target from debris or any decoys. The calculations behind it are based on the Kalman filter (that essentially can provide a degree of confidence if something is simply noise (such as the leaves of a tree being moved by the wind) or pixels and lines that are part of the tracked object (the car) by only keeping around a covariance matrix and not all the historical data). Then once the object is identified, you can then track it over time and calculate the speed of it.
But nowdays, you can buy a whole electric car along with the same technology (that is used to automatically drive the car by studying what is a stationary object and what is moving object and how fast each moving object is moving relatively to your car).
So, yes, I set the upper limit of any such camera to the price of a Tesla car (batteries included)! Anything over it, is highway robbery.
So, maybe Tesla should get into the camera business and bring the prices down.
I am all for more visible cameras for speeding and red light running. I am frequently alarmed when crossing a street and suddenly realizing that the car/ truck /bike is not going to stop for the red light and jumping back. It is particularly bad at rush hour and in areas that are not policed . Drive the speed limit and don't run red lights and it won't affect you . Other countries have found these devices change dangerous illegal behavior.
7
@Peter Indeed. Every one of my close calls with almost getting hit were by Turning Cars. I had the right of way...the walk sign..was in the crosswalk...and a car that had the right of way to make a Turn onto the street I was crossing...the car was either not paying attention, was in a rush, and/or if an SUV, likely was looking further ahead down the road, and weren't looking Downward below their field of vision, and into the crosswalk where I was directly below the height of their massive SUV.
In one instance I had to run backwards, as the front of a turning SUV came at me.
The auto industry sure has done an effective job in marketing SUVs to Americans. They are believed to be 'safer' for drivers, more comfortable, more spacious, while certain specific models (Yukon, Escalade) have a luxury status appeal for certain demographics. What can we do to change this? Can we put an extra tax on SUVs..something to disincent people from buying them?
1
All I know is this... the level of importance we as a society have given to the automobile is perverted. Particularly in a place such as ....NYC? I am stupefied at how many people in NYC are essentially addicted to their cars, sputtering off a litany of reasons as to why they need one. Thing is, back in the day an entire family of 6 could pack their station wagon for a week's vacation out of state. No everyone needs their own vehicle, and typically that vehicle is... an SUV, which also comes complete with a list of 'reasons' for their choosing an SUV over a mere car.
SUVs clogging our streets, blocking the views of other drivers and pedestrians, and posing a much greater risk to pedestrians. I've almost been hit numerous times, while in the crosswalk and with the Walk sign, by SUVs who were making a legal turn ONTO the street I was crossing. They didn't slow down enough when making their turn, and, because I was IN the crosswalk as they turned, the driver, being so Elevated in their SUV, could not see me directly below them, as their field of vision was above my head.
SUVs are a scourge and do not belong on city streets. But of course, Americans being as overweight as they are, and enjoying their field trips to Walmart and BJs, well naturally they need such huge vehicles. Now we even have Yukons and Escalades on our streets. What's next....mass marketed army tanks?
Drivers may complain initially, but we have to figure out how to ween car dependence.
10
@Lisa
Most SUVs in Manhattan are Ubers. Small businesses may use mini vans.
1
10mph over the limited (35mph)?
If I drive in Manhattan and reach 15mph I grin like Forrest Gump on his riding lawnmower.
No problem with cameras for me.
11
Common sense:
a) Intersection cameras would be more effective at curtailing red-light violators if they were highly visible (e.g. painted w/yellow & black strips), rather than disguised. Drivers don't want to get ticketed, y' know. That's why some states park empty marked police cars on the side of highways - most drivers slow down when they see police cars.
b) Whats the difference between "Vision Zero" and "Zero Vision"? Vision Zero is like driving with "Eyes Wide Shut". Should be "Drive with 100% Vision" or "Envision Zero Deaths".
Well, it would be nice if people obeyed the law...
However, just to be clear, the motivation of this program is to make money. There is a "life cycle" to this sort of thing that I have seen play out in the Bay Area. It is driven by the fact that the majority of the money is made by the companies running the cameras.
Cameras are installed. Revenues boom. Everybody is happy (except the ticketed drivers). The drivers wise up and stop violating the law (at least in front of the cameras, anyway.) No significant change in accident statistics, btw. Revenues drop. There is both a fixed and a variable cost to the city, so eventually, the city cancels the contract, because it is costing money.
Onward to the next gimmick.
18
@Rufus So in the short run, the government gets extra money (which it claims to need) without raising taxes. In the medium term, the law is obeyed and safety is improved. If the government gives up in the long term, of course the effects diminish, but that’s hardly an argument for giving up.
2
@Rufus
"No significant change in accident statistics, btw. "
Link?
3
Lets just dispense with the cars and the speed traps in favor of an autonomous grid.
I’d be so in favor of no more automotive pollution, a ton of new tech jobs, and no cars parked out in front of my house.
Speed and red light cameras are primarily a wealth-transfer scheme, in most cases transferring wealth out of the local community to a distant camera company. Kickbacks of some of the revenue to city politicians induce them to authorize the cameras, but there is still a net transfer of money out of the local area, representing a poor financial arrangement for citizens and local businesses. There is little scientific evidence for significant safety enhancement, and some data suggest increased rear-end collisions due to red light cameras. Application of cameras to problem spots might have merit, but a blanket approach should be better evaluated.
8
@RC I don't think NYC's work that way.
1
Yes please! Unbelievable that people spend their time organizing against speed cameras - if you don't want a ticket, just drive within the speed limit. Cameras only go off if you're at least 10 mph over limit.
31
Zero sympathy for speeders. Speeding is a deliberate choice and it puts lives at risk. I wish they could put cameras on stop signs because in Queens, 80% of drivers roll right through them without a glance to see if there is a pedestrian in the crosswalk.
32
Our research shows that these cameras will save 20 lives per year while reducing tax bills due to publicly-funded emergency room care for injured people. Some of the commentators here question the efficacy of the cameras or the financial motives associated with putting them in. Yes, people in NYC speed, yes lives are lost as a result, yes the cameras are effective at reducing speeding, and no, the city will not profit greatly off of them.
12
Speed cameras? As if drivers could go the speed limit to begin with! Even in suburban NYC, the traffic is just too much on any given day. Northern Blvd. remains a stop and go, inch by inch, snaking trail every day the closer you are to the city limit.
They will do what they must I suppose. Good source of revenue I guess.
I am all for driving safely and within the law always.
5
@Elizabeth
I'm confused by your post. If the drivers can't speed due to traffic, how will the cameras generate revenue?
5
I agree with camera enforcement where there is a specific need/safety issues including school zones and heavy pedestrian traffic.
We have them placed in long open stretches of suburban arteries where they are not needed and clearly serve as one more tax.
And the profit motive of operators who often take 50% & City greed concerns. My friend was fired as camera ticket hearing officer because he didn’t find everyone guilty.
8
@Jeff M
By definition, maybe in Des Moines there are places where there are not safety issues with speeding cars, but in NYC there is “heavy pedestrian traffic” everywhere.
@Jeff M wrote: "And the profit motive of operators who often take 50% & City greed concerns. My friend was fired as camera ticket hearing officer because he didn’t find everyone guilty."
Thanks for expanding the discussion with this. There seems to be little interest in ensuring that enforcement is just; the major concern is that fines be enacted and paid. This combination of outsourced contracting and unjust collecting is just ripe for abuse.
But few seem to worry about the abuse of a political system that acts for us. Just make laws and penalties?
This article appears to present the issue as if it is unresolved and up for debate.
On the one hand you have actual data cited in the article showing that where cameras were implemented, crashes and fatalities were reduced.
On the other hand you have critics of the law stating that they will make streets more dangerous (no evidence provided), shouldn't be implemented because they won't prevent every single crash (makes zero sense), or are only there to generate revenue (why is generating revenue from people who break the law a problem? this is not explained).
I think what the critics really mean to say is, "I would like the freedom to speed, break the law, and - actual data shows - endanger the people around me, without paying a fine", which is really more an expression of a selfish desire than an argument constituting one side of a debate.
76
@Henry this quote from the car lobbyist is particularly funny:
"It’s an illusion of protection. It cannot prevent an accident or prevent someone from being hit by a car,” she said. “It’s everybody’s responsibility to follow the safety rules"
apparently "everybody" doesn't include drivers.
13
@Bogdan exactly what I was thinking. Of course everyone should follow the rules but if your'e driving a 3,000-5,000 pound vehicle it seems fairly obvious your must abide by the rules much more.
22
@Bogdan Ever since they invented "jaywalking" the auto industry tries to keep the burden on non-drivers to stay the hell out of the way.
4
If it improves on the arbitrary (or not so arbitrary in cases of racial profiling) nature of being pulled over, I am all for speed cameras.
4
Finally. Well overdue. Pedestrian crossing with the right of way and bikers of all ages are being killed like flies by speeding cars. Only those who don't respect the rules need to worry about the cameras. It's not an ambiguous requirement - drive at the posted speed limit. In a crowded city like NY, speeders should be held strictly liable for any damage they cause.
41
@C In NY wrote: "Only those who don't respect the rules need to worry about the cameras."
So there's no need to "worry about" unjust penalty? No need to worry about corruption in whatever contractor is chosen to act in the public's name.
Hey, even wars can be rationalized with that justification.
1
Installing red light cameras at every traffic light location where there is a cross-walk would enhance pedestrian safety far more. I spent most of my life in Manhattan. Drivers hardly ever used to run red lights. Not any more! Running the red light seems almost the norm now. Red-light fines should be very heavy (at least $100 for the first offense) - with a suspension of your driving license if you receive three or more in a 12-month period. Speeding? Not that important, at least in Manhattan. Traffic is so bogged down that hardly anyone CAN speed.
12
Where is lawful due process when the ticket issued is to the owner of the vehicle and not necessarily the person driving?
3
@Tmac My understanding is the way they justify it is that these tickets don't give you points on your insurance, since they can't prove you were driving. I guess they assume that you can get the money from whoever was driving your car at the time.
(I don't agree with this, but that's the way it's presented.)
4
@Tmac If you can't trust the person driving your car - then don't lend it to them!
4
@Lizbeth I don't know how it works in NY. Each state has a different definition of "driver". The most effective system is one that takes a picture of the driver, the front license plate, and the rear license plate. No discrimination. George Bush gets the same treatment as you!
4
What do we do with alternative forms of transportation. I have been cruising down the west side hwy going a cool 25mph and have seen either electric unicycle contractions or unlicensed (no plates) modified dirt bikes or scooter zip by with regard to the laws of the road.
Bloomberg dropped the default speed in NYC to 30 miles an hour; not to be outdone, our current mayor dropped that default speed to 25 mph. A distinction without a difference, which is to say both edicts, minus enforcement, amount to mere political stunts. The last thing a cop in a patrol car wants to do in my neighborhood is give a moving-violation ticket of any kind, so they don't. Given that reality, speed cameras are the *only* form of enforcement.
Having lived around the corner from a public school for the last 20 years, I'm sure those who will be hurt the most in the early stages will be the school bus drivers -- and they should be fined double.
6
@gking01 pedestrian fatalities have dropped along with the reduction in speed, so... maybe you're wrong?
3
Corporate America decided a certain number of death are acceptable if it increases profits. For example, they delayed mandatory backup cameras even though it meant a few hundred toddlers would be crushed to death. But we can do better than that. Time is money, but speed kills. Let's drive as if it were our loved ones whose lives we want to keep safe.
7
Can't we come up with a standard, easy method of knowing when we are in a speed limit school area. Constantly searching for the School Zone signs which are too often hidden away behind obstacles or trucks is killing my neck. Color the pavement?
Also, I constantly use a street that has two schools [one religious and open one day a week] almost next to one another. 30-20-30-20-30 signs all visible at once. Fast-slow-fats-slow-fast. That in itself is dangerous.
The AAA once published that confusing and difficult to see signage is a major cause of accidents. I bet we are about to really prove that belief.
6
@Richard How about smart street signs? Signs that transmit the speed limit to a receiver in one's car and that displays the speed on the dash, and generates warning sounds if one is over the speed limit?
5
@Richard
Yes! There is a really easy standard! It's called the speed limit, which in NYC is 25 MPH unless posted otherwise.
Let me break it down for you: if you are in a car and you are going over 25 MPH and you are not on a highway or a roadway with a posted speed limit sign indicating otherwise, you are violating the law! So your rule of thumb should be "I shouldn't be driving over 25 MPH unless a sign told me otherwise".
Now you don't have to worry about finding a school zone sign! You can just assume you should be driving 25 MPH because that's the speed limit in New York. No mystery!
7
It's fascinating how many people behave as though speeding is a right that big bad government is taking away. It's not. In fact, a license to drive is a privilege.
There is no "right" to speed, period.
79
@John L The US Supreme Court has repeatedly stated that there is no right to privacy on a public way. so pictures of speeders and their cars are legal.
10
this is great news, and one more positive effect of a democratic state legislature. now let's install some more red-light cameras.
20
@Bogdan Get rid of the FDR and the BQE next! Down with cars in the city!
Part of the story has to include an inquiry into drivers (who could they be?) that alter their license plates. As George Orwell wrote in Animal Farm, "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."
7
If NYC was normal it might work however it is a city plagued with problems which almost makes it unmanageable like NY Transit Agency.
How about actually looking at the evidence or asking a scientist rather than "a program manager for the National Association of City Transportation Officials". Whether speed cameras actually reduce speeding, crashes, or injuries is a fact that can be researched, not an opinion you need to report both sides of.
9
@David the issue has been researched and - surprise! - driving slower does reduce accidents.
43
@Bogdan so does not moving at all. So what is really the target speed? I would be all for this if the speed limit were not the ridiculously slow 25 MPH. It will clog up NYC streets in ways that we cannot even imagine. Multiple the reduced speed by 10000 cars and you get gridlock. What ever happened to look both ways before crossing? We'd be better off banning cell phones while walking.
6
Good.
I drive in Manhattan once or twice a month, during the day. No problem. I used to drive like a cabbie. But not any more.
I've mellowed.
On the Avenues once you get a fresh green light if you keep your speed to 25 to 35, you'll hit green lights for quite some time. And won't get a ticket even if they install 10,000 cameras.
Even if I wasn't already on board, this would put me on board: "Around schools that already have speed cameras, the number of crashes dropped by an average of 15 percent to 2,442 a year, down from 2,870, according to a city analysis of data from 2012 to 2016. During that time, fatalities fell by an average of 55 percent, dropping to eight from 18 a year; severe injuries fell by 17 percent, to 134 from 162 a year."
Speed cameras work.
Please don't install them on I-684 unless we get some more Texas-like speed limits.
30
Great news!
Anything to increase the safety of New Yorkers is a good idea.
But will this help with delivery bikes, clueless folks on rental bikes, anyone on skateboards and powered scooters?
The cameras are a good start, but more will need to be done.
34
@Mon Ray Such as resuming enforcement of the Don’t Block the Box law, which would improve average traffic speed enormously without reducing safety.
Much more! The city could make so much money fining all the speeding cars running red lights, bicycles going against traffic, parking wherever they feel like..... could use the money to pay a decent wage to clean the filthy streets and get the homeless some shelters....
1
Anyone who is against speed cameras is against speed limits. Or, more precisely, anyone who is against speed cameras is against *enforcing* speed limits, which is essentially the same thing. Is there anyone out there who thinks we should eliminate speed limits?
51
@Ken
Me! I'm against speed limits.
"Reasonable and Prudent" is just fine.
Speed limits just create a new revenue stream for government.
The Germans seem happy enough with their Autobahns.
10
@Eric "General speed limits in Germany are set by the federal government. There are two default speed limits: 50 km/h (31 mph) inside built-up areas and 100 km/h (62 mph) outside built-up areas. While parts of the autobahns and many other freeway-style highways have posted limits up to 130 km/h (81 mph) based on accident experience, congestion and other factors, many rural sections have no general speed limit."
1
@Eric Remind me, are there pedestrians on the Autobahn?
7
Congratulations New York! Speeding is a public menace and has been tolerated for too long. It is the cause of many accidents and increases their severity (it's physics) and frankly, totally uncivilized. There is no meaningful reduction in travel times by speeding, particularly in urban and suburban locations. Most vehicles, regardless of the speed they travel, arrive to wait at the next stop light. I hope my state and cities follow this legislative example.
22
As always, this is just another ploy to extract more money from the citizens. Speed is a factor in accidents, but not the only factor.
14
@Thomas Smith - so, because speed is only one factor, we should not enforce speed limits?
28
@Thomas Smith this so-called "ploy" would not work if drivers didn't break the law in the first place.
17
@Thomas Smith Yes, the other factor is trapeze artists.
2
Why have speed limits if we aren't going to enforce them?
We can't afford to put enough cops on the street to enforce all our laws, so cameras are an adjunct to their assigned task, for which we pay them.
On the other hand, though, it is difficult to always go slowly. You speed up unconsciously. We're a nation in a hurry.
If we caught every lawbreaker, we all lose our licenses, and many of us would go to jail. In all truth, we want other people to obey the laws, but let us cut corners.
3