h a l f b a k e r yWe are investigating the problem and will update you shortly.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
I'd like the drivers who speed in my community to slow down but the initial expense is too high for city hall to put photo-radar on every block.
I think concerned citizens should share in the cost, implementation and financial gain of photo radar.
One photo radar unit apparently costs between $80,000-$100,000.
But the potential earnings would pay it off in a few months. (If your cut of $100 fine was only $10 and you caught an average of 100 cars per day).
Personal Speed Camera
Personal_20Speed_20Camera
Different in equipment but *very* similar in concept. An individual rather than a community thing. [st3f, Nov 25 2005]
[link]
|
| |
Why not go the whole hog? If you had a privitis(z)ed police force, then you could fine drivers for all manner of 'dangerous' acts. |
|
| |
Hmm...I think I'm more for the text-message network that warns people of speed traps such as these. Now, I'm all for safe driving, but I think it should come from good driver education and experience, not fines. |
|
| |
If you want to increase the number of photo radar traps, you could probably start building and selling a cheaper version of the same technology. I think there are only a few companies that produce these kinds of cameras, and $80,000 sounds like they are overcharging the police. |
|
| |
I think vandalism might be a problem if folks understand that the cameras are privately owned. |
|
| |
<later> Actually, I think many of them are privately owned and the municipality just gets a cut. Maybe vandalism isn't an issue. |
|
| |
Watch for a new generation of targetable EMP devices at the hobbyist level. |
|
| |
// I think it should come from good driver education and experience, not fines // |
|
| |
The world would be a nicer place if we all could be educated into doing the right thing. When we speed we KNOW that its wrong and against the law. By choice we do it anyway. A stiff fine tends to make us comply more readily than simply a training course to tell us what we already know. |
|
| |
Overall I don't feel very comfortable with a private citzen enforcing the law. If he should get despirate enough he very well could start creating bogus incidents of speeding just so that he can increase his bottom line. |
|
| |
[aside]The UK government is discussing
putting down a networked digital
camera network in place and reading
the number plates. Ostensibly this is to
help the police catch stolen vehicles but
would be ideal for a country-wide
network of speed cameras; not ones
that meaure your speed at a point, but
ones that measure your elapsed time
between two known points, allowing
you to be fined on your average speed.
(reported on BBC Radio 4. Hopefully I
have captured the gist accurately) |
|
| |
This, if implemented, will put an end to
speeding in the UK. Maybe if we have
this automated system to stop speeding
this will allow the police to focus on
what I believe to be a major cause of
accidents: dangerous driving within the
speed limit. |
|
| |
//elapsed time between two known points// |
|
| |
So if I took the scenic route, double the distance at double the speed, the answer is the same? |
|
| |
That all depends on how close together
these cameras are put. The closer together
the more 'creative' you have to be. |
|
| |
Maybe this network could be financed by
people buying government bonds into
speed cameras. |
|
| |
I would be for this idea, if speed limits were set reasonably in my area, or if there was much chance of adjustments being made but they're not and there isn't so I'm not. But the principle of the thing is sound, so I won't fish either. Meh. |
|
| |
This idea increases the financial incentive to obey the speed limit: "I should drive slow or else I have to pay a fine" Great... BUT
This idea also decreases the moral incentive to obey the speed limit. "So what if I'm speeding through this school zone with these kids playing here, I'll just pay another $%&$ing $150 fee to the $!%!^ers ... I guess the $1560 they got from me so far this year wasn't enough .... presses on the gas pedal with rage ... OR ... isn't $1560 they got from me enough? I'm not paying a cent more ... they can put me to jail if they must ... presses on the gas pedal with rage" ... OR .. $10 file? that's cheap .. I'm in a hurry
Moral incentive is just as important to consider as financial incentive. I'm not sure whether the net balance would be in favor of long term safety improvement. [-] |
|
| |
Ha! A few years ago, I was surprised to find that in New York City, the sheriffs are essentially unpaid bounty hunters. They raise money by impounding the cars of parking scofflaws, then taking a piece of the fees paid by the owners to get their cars out of the pound. |
|
| |
So maybe City Hall would be amenable to your scheme. There are certainly enough red-light scofflaws to pay for it. Or perhaps the sheriffs will take care of it. I am wondering if there is some money to pay to made underwriting a townships' equipment in return for a piece of the action? |
|
| |
/But the potential earnings would pay it off in a few months./ |
|
| |
If this is truly the case, then City Hall should buy the cameras themselves. |
|
| |
I'm always pretty uncomfortable about placing law-enforcement in private hands, it's the goverments' job. And what [Texticle] said. |
|
| |