Re: OT: Speed Cams
der.hans wrote: [1] The photo radar flashes can cause a white out effect on the driver when they go off. This is a huge problem for motorcyclists as it blinds them for a second and worse blinds the car drivers near them[3]. I have even had my cabin white out due to a photo radar flash at dusk while I was on an access ramp waiting to get on the freeway. My eyes are just fine. Photo radar flashes are unsafe. I realize we're shutting this thread down, but I had to reiterate this one point of der hans: Those flashes make it just as unsafe as the speeders tripping them. That one on west-bound I10 at the end of the Sky Harbor runways has flashed in my eyes twice (others tripping it). The first time nearly incapacitated me with immediate onset of migraine headaches. I didn't make it to the 51 interchange before I had to pull over and puke my guts out. The location is right after the merge from 17 split, so the conscientious driver is monitoring the mergers, looking in that direction towards your mirror, and bang. Can't help but wonder what that might do to landing pilots too. --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: OT: Speed Cams
Can't help but wonder what that might do to landing pilots too. Probably nothing... Not to discredit your statement in any way, but to clarify the aviation detail: First, the light impulse will be too small, too far and too out of the way to be a concern, the landing pilot will be focus on runway and instruments. Pilots are also used to strobe lights. They have them on their airplane, other airplanes, some mark the way to the runway with the rabbit, and many runways have strobe lights at the threshold to differentiate them from the environment. I hate the cams too... :) Enrique A. Troconis Computer Geek for a living, Commercial Pilot/Flight Instructor by addiction. James Lee Bell writes: der.hans wrote: [1] The photo radar flashes can cause a white out effect on the driver when they go off. This is a huge problem for motorcyclists as it blinds them for a second and worse blinds the car drivers near them[3]. I have even had my cabin white out due to a photo radar flash at dusk while I was on an access ramp waiting to get on the freeway. My eyes are just fine. Photo radar flashes are unsafe. I realize we're shutting this thread down, but I had to reiterate this one point of der hans: Those flashes make it just as unsafe as the speeders tripping them. That one on west-bound I10 at the end of the Sky Harbor runways has flashed in my eyes twice (others tripping it). The first time nearly incapacitated me with immediate onset of migraine headaches. I didn't make it to the 51 interchange before I had to pull over and puke my guts out. The location is right after the merge from 17 split, so the conscientious driver is monitoring the mergers, looking in that direction towards your mirror, and bang. Can't help but wonder what that might do to landing pilots too. --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: OT: Speed Cams
Don't talk bad about the cops, they will come and take all your computers away ;-) http://carlosmiller.com/2009/04/02/phoenix-police-raid-home-of-blogger-whose-writing-is-highly-critical-of-them/ --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: OT: Speed Cams
Bryan O'Neal wrote: Cool, where can I get a copy of this report? -Original Message- From: plug-discuss-boun...@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us [mailto:plug-discuss-boun...@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us] On Behalf Of Josef Lowder Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 9:25 AM To: Main PLUG discussion list Subject: Re: OT: Speed Cams On 4/1/09, Bryan O'Neal bon...@cornerstonehome.com wrote: I have no issue with red-light cameras, if they provide a yellow light of adequate length to safely stop after noticing the light change, say 5 or 6 seconds. As for the speed cameras, well, I am agenst speed limits and believe it should be safe and prudent as seen by an officer and confirmed by a judge. As for the cameras in particular, no one has been able to make public a report showing they do anything other then annoy drivers. Accidents have not gone down ... Photo radar saves lives. Period. According to the Arizona State Department of Public Safety, because of photo radar, crashes are down by 12%, injuries have been cut by 17%, and fatality collisions are down by 29% on Phoenix-area highways. No clear-thinking person would want to eliminate photo radar simply because of their personal desire to want to disregard and disobey highway speed laws. Statistics are easy to fudge. Can we really trust the government to do an unbiased study on their own cash cow? Vaughn --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: OT: Speed Cams
Can't resist getting in on this one! :=) der.hans wrote: Am 02. Apr, 2009 schwätzte Josef Lowder so: On 4/1/09, Bryan O'Neal bon...@cornerstonehome.com wrote: I have no issue with red-light cameras, if they provide a yellow light of adequate length to safely stop after noticing the light change, say 5 or 6 seconds. As for the speed cameras, well, I am agenst speed limits and believe it should be safe and prudent as seen by an officer and confirmed by a judge. As for the cameras in particular, no one has been able to make public a report showing they do anything other then annoy drivers. Accidents have not gone down ... Photo radar saves lives. Period. No. Photo radar is a cash cow for the government and a company in Scottsdale. According to the Arizona State Department of Public Safety, because of photo radar, crashes are down by 12%, injuries have been cut by 17%, and fatality collisions are down by 29% on Phoenix-area highways. DPS came out with its study stating that photo radar had reduced accidents, but in the same announcement had to admit the study hadn't taken into account that there might've been reductions in the traffic due to the cost of gas ( the study was done during the height of the gas prices ) or due to people being unemployed and no longer on the road or any other reason. It was acknowledged that traffic known to be was down, but that wasn't considered as a potential reason for the reduction in accidentѕ. Don't forget that Arizona recently enacted a much tougher drunk-driving law. Although I have issues with the way it's being enforced, I think that such laws have had an impact in the past and this one is probably doing so now. I'll wager that in the past, a lot of freeway crashes have been caused by drunk twenty-somethings opening it up when they hit the highway at 2 AM. But the media deliberately obscures these and other factors. Just one example (not an effort to get the discussion further afield) When they made drugstores put their sudafed supplies under the counter, they claimed it was reducing the number of meth labs. Nonsense! They never tell you hat the Mexican drug cartels have made the drug cheap enough so American tweekers don't need to make their own. It's a bogus study. Heck, it starts off with Speeding is recognized as one of the most important factors causing traffic accidents., so it's not even trying to appear to be a neutral study. Photo radar has been around for decades in various forms. And yet, there is only one study touting photo radar's benefits and that study is biased, prejudiced and compromised? Ha, ha. Douglas Adams makes an appearance since the speed enforcement program is abbreviated as SEP. I think that explains how the government has been able to get away with the improper relationship of having a private company get bribed to do law enforcement. No clear-thinking person would want to eliminate photo radar simply because of their personal desire to want to disregard and disobey highway speed laws. I want photo radar eliminated because I'm opposed to big brother[0], illegal business contracts, allowing companies to masquerade as law enforcement, artificially dangerous road conditions[1], and Dukes of Hazzard style changing of speed limits in order to ambush people with the cameras[2]. Hear, hear! I'll go further - most people don't understand how the checks and balances between government and the people work. In many cases, oppressive laws don't get passed because the politicians know they're not enforceable. In other cases- alcohol prohibition, the military draft, the 55 MPH national speed limit, and Arizona's archaic sodomy laws, just to name a few- policies were reversed because of widespread refusal to comply. Giving the government more surveillance powers removes this check. We'll see states and cities piling on all sorts of laws in the name of health, safety, morality, the environment, and political correctness. Even if the laws accomplish little or nothing positive, they'll have a constituency to support them (cops, jails, prison guards, etc.) and there'll be nothing we can do about it. Vaughn In any case, there's a ballot initiative where we can partially vote them out. http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/131797 http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Arizona_Citizens_Against_Photo_Radar_(2010) http://camerafraud.wordpress.com/ [0] There are reports that the cameras are also taking HD video all the time. [1] The photo radar flashes can cause a white out effect on the driver when they go off. This is a huge problem for motorcyclists as it blinds them for a second and worse blinds the car drivers near them[3]. I have even had my cabin white out due to a photo radar flash at dusk while I was on an access ramp waiting to get on the freeway. My eyes are just fine. Photo radar flashes are unsafe. [2] Phoenix seems to be getting better
Re: OT: Speed Cams
On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 09:43 -0700, Craig White wrote: On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 09:24 -0700, Josef Lowder wrote: On 4/1/09, Bryan O'Neal bon...@cornerstonehome.com wrote: I have no issue with red-light cameras, if they provide a yellow light of adequate length to safely stop after noticing the light change, say 5 or 6 seconds. As for the speed cameras, well, I am agenst speed limits and believe it should be safe and prudent as seen by an officer and confirmed by a judge. As for the cameras in particular, no one has been able to make public a report showing they do anything other then annoy drivers. Accidents have not gone down ... Photo radar saves lives. Period. According to the Arizona State Department of Public Safety, because of photo radar, crashes are down by 12%, injuries have been cut by 17%, and fatality collisions are down by 29% on Phoenix-area highways. No clear-thinking person would want to eliminate photo radar simply because of their personal desire to want to disregard and disobey highway speed laws. The state tried to increase revenue with these cameras and implemented a system where there was only a single financial penalty for being captured on photo radar. No points against your license, no report to insurance...just money. While there is a direct correlation to speed and fatalities, there's no accommodation for reasonable and prudent, only a hard line between 75 76 mp/h where money changes hands. 76 mp/h during rush hours is infinitely more dangerous than at 11:00 pm when the traffic is sparse. If speed were the only issue, let's just lower the speed limits everywhere and people will be much safer. I am quite certain that if the speed limit on the 101 was 45 mp/h, there would hardly be any fatalities. Craig Except in the case of Criminal speeding (20+ mph over the posted limit). Even at 4:00AM with no other traffic around, the DPS will come to your home or workplace and haul you off to jail, no other evidence is required for a conviction, and you can't defend yourself against a camera. A little to Big Brother for my liking. --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
RE: OT: Speed Cams
After reading the report it did not seems as if they conducted the survey in a professional scientific manor. -Original Message- From: plug-discuss-boun...@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us [mailto:plug-discuss-boun...@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us] On Behalf Of Vaughn Treude Sent: Friday, April 03, 2009 8:48 AM To: Main PLUG discussion list Subject: Re: OT: Speed Cams Bryan O'Neal wrote: Cool, where can I get a copy of this report? -Original Message- From: plug-discuss-boun...@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us [mailto:plug-discuss-boun...@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us] On Behalf Of Josef Lowder Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 9:25 AM To: Main PLUG discussion list Subject: Re: OT: Speed Cams On 4/1/09, Bryan O'Neal bon...@cornerstonehome.com wrote: I have no issue with red-light cameras, if they provide a yellow light of adequate length to safely stop after noticing the light change, say 5 or 6 seconds. As for the speed cameras, well, I am agenst speed limits and believe it should be safe and prudent as seen by an officer and confirmed by a judge. As for the cameras in particular, no one has been able to make public a report showing they do anything other then annoy drivers. Accidents have not gone down ... Photo radar saves lives. Period. According to the Arizona State Department of Public Safety, because of photo radar, crashes are down by 12%, injuries have been cut by 17%, and fatality collisions are down by 29% on Phoenix-area highways. No clear-thinking person would want to eliminate photo radar simply because of their personal desire to want to disregard and disobey highway speed laws. Statistics are easy to fudge. Can we really trust the government to do an unbiased study on their own cash cow? Vaughn --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: OT: Speed Cams
On 4/1/09, Bryan O'Neal bon...@cornerstonehome.com wrote: I have no issue with red-light cameras, if they provide a yellow light of adequate length to safely stop after noticing the light change, say 5 or 6 seconds. As for the speed cameras, well, I am agenst speed limits and believe it should be safe and prudent as seen by an officer and confirmed by a judge. As for the cameras in particular, no one has been able to make public a report showing they do anything other then annoy drivers. Accidents have not gone down ... Photo radar saves lives. Period. According to the Arizona State Department of Public Safety, because of photo radar, crashes are down by 12%, injuries have been cut by 17%, and fatality collisions are down by 29% on Phoenix-area highways. No clear-thinking person would want to eliminate photo radar simply because of their personal desire to want to disregard and disobey highway speed laws. --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: OT: Speed Cams
On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 09:24 -0700, Josef Lowder wrote: On 4/1/09, Bryan O'Neal bon...@cornerstonehome.com wrote: I have no issue with red-light cameras, if they provide a yellow light of adequate length to safely stop after noticing the light change, say 5 or 6 seconds. As for the speed cameras, well, I am agenst speed limits and believe it should be safe and prudent as seen by an officer and confirmed by a judge. As for the cameras in particular, no one has been able to make public a report showing they do anything other then annoy drivers. Accidents have not gone down ... Photo radar saves lives. Period. According to the Arizona State Department of Public Safety, because of photo radar, crashes are down by 12%, injuries have been cut by 17%, and fatality collisions are down by 29% on Phoenix-area highways. No clear-thinking person would want to eliminate photo radar simply because of their personal desire to want to disregard and disobey highway speed laws. The state tried to increase revenue with these cameras and implemented a system where there was only a single financial penalty for being captured on photo radar. No points against your license, no report to insurance...just money. While there is a direct correlation to speed and fatalities, there's no accommodation for reasonable and prudent, only a hard line between 75 76 mp/h where money changes hands. 76 mp/h during rush hours is infinitely more dangerous than at 11:00 pm when the traffic is sparse. If speed were the only issue, let's just lower the speed limits everywhere and people will be much safer. I am quite certain that if the speed limit on the 101 was 45 mp/h, there would hardly be any fatalities. Craig -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: OT: Speed Cams
On Apr 2, 2009, at 9:43 AM, Craig White wrote: If speed were the only issue, let's just lower the speed limits everywhere and people will be much safer. I am quite certain that if the speed limit on the 101 was 45 mp/h, there would hardly be any fatalities. Aside from road-rage shootings... PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: OT: Speed Cams
On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 09:24 -0700, Josef Lowder wrote: Photo radar saves lives. Period. So does driving responsibly... and, you know, paying attention. According to the Arizona State Department of Public Safety, because of photo radar, crashes are down by 12%, injuries have been cut by 17%, and fatality collisions are down by 29% on Phoenix-area highways. I've seen a couple accidents (literally 2) take place first-hand due to people reacting to the sight of the cameras. Apparently panic induced, the individuals abruptly slammed on their brakes to avoid a picture. I'm not saying that the drivers behind those vehicles shouldn't have been at a safer distance, but the cameras don't only prevent accidents, in some cases they cause them. I also take the DPS statistics with a grain of salt, as it does generate a healthy amount of revenue for the state that they'd like to continue receiving. No clear-thinking person would want to eliminate photo radar simply because of their personal desire to want to disregard and disobey highway speed laws. Okay, this argument could be made for any number of things that the laws restrict us from partaking in... in the name of protection. The entire notion that the government does things against the will of the people, and that people accept it... well, it greatly saddens and disturbs me. I say that because I've definitely heard more complaints than praise about the speed cameras. Cheers, Josh --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: OT: Speed Cams
I have to concur with the other critics of speed cameras. Any statistical data generated by the DPS should be carefully examined and verified before making conclusive statements. I do agree speed does play a role in severity of accidents and it should be considered a factor in decreased time for reaction, however the bigger issue is the fact that people do not pay attention to the road to begin with. Some other statistics I have seen show that talking on the phone while driving decreases the reaction time to levels of an intoxicated person. The studies did not even mention dialing the phone. Only talking and it did not really matter if it was hands-free or not. Also one may argue that putting cameras all over the place causes people to pay more attention to spotting the cameras and less on driving itself. Which also is not the optimal for driving. Just my 2 cents. On Apr 2, 2009, at 10:11 AM, Eric Cope wrote: link to those statistics? On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 9:24 AM, Josef Lowder j...@actionline.com wrote: On 4/1/09, Bryan O'Neal bon...@cornerstonehome.com wrote: I have no issue with red-light cameras, if they provide a yellow light of adequate length to safely stop after noticing the light change, say 5 or 6 seconds. As for the speed cameras, well, I am agenst speed limits and believe it should be safe and prudent as seen by an officer and confirmed by a judge. As for the cameras in particular, no one has been able to make public a report showing they do anything other then annoy drivers. Accidents have not gone down ... Photo radar saves lives. Period. According to the Arizona State Department of Public Safety, because of photo radar, crashes are down by 12%, injuries have been cut by 17%, and fatality collisions are down by 29% on Phoenix-area highways. No clear-thinking person would want to eliminate photo radar simply because of their personal desire to want to disregard and disobey highway speed laws. --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: OT: Speed Cams
On 4/2/09, Eric Cope eric.c...@gmail.com wrote: link to those statistics? http://photoenforcement.azdps.gov/Questions/ A comprehensive statistical analysis was recently conducted by the Arizona State University for the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) and the Arizona Department of Public Safety (DPS) following the first ever United States Freeway program. When examining the crashes the study used non-peak hours which amounted to approximately 18 hours per day on the weekdays and all day during the weekend. It was determined that during the peak or rush hour periods, traffic was slowed below the posted speed limit due to congestion. The program results were dramatic: - The program reduced average speeds by approximately 9 mph. - Total collisions were reduced by 44% to 54% - Total injury crashes were reduced by 28% to 48% - Single vehicle crashes were reduced by 59% to 63% - Sideswipe collisions were reduced by 33% to 48% - Rear end collisions ranged from a 14% increase down to a 23% decrease dependent upon which of the comparison models were used. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Speed kills. Murder (and manslaughter) are illegal. Preventing murder and/or manslaughter from reckless, irresponsible driving (i.e. speeding in violation of posted speed laws) is not in any way an intrusion on individual rights. There is no sensible basis for opposing photo radar speed limit enforcement. Opposition to photo radar is tantamount to advocating legalization of murder and/or manslaughter in any form by any means. --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: OT: Speed Cams
Personally to me the fact whether or not speed cameras save lives is irrelevant. The #1 reason the speed cameras were installed was due to the money they would bring in, not for our safety. Yet when people complain about them, they try to play the safety card instead of just admitting they are loving their new cash cow (and so is the company that installed the cameras that is getting a cut of the profits). --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: OT: Speed Cams
Did you read the report? Statements like not statistically relavant don't speak well for the study. Statistical variations of 20% speak for the poor (very noisy) data, at least in my opinion (receiving a PhD degree in statistical signal processing for what its worth). Those results should be taken with a large grain of salt. I'll read more of the report later... Eric On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 10:55 AM, Josef Lowder j...@actionline.com wrote: On 4/2/09, Eric Cope eric.c...@gmail.com wrote: link to those statistics? http://photoenforcement.azdps.gov/Questions/ A comprehensive statistical analysis was recently conducted by the Arizona State University for the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) and the Arizona Department of Public Safety (DPS) following the first ever United States Freeway program. When examining the crashes the study used non-peak hours which amounted to approximately 18 hours per day on the weekdays and all day during the weekend. It was determined that during the peak or rush hour periods, traffic was slowed below the posted speed limit due to congestion. The program results were dramatic: - The program reduced average speeds by approximately 9 mph. - Total collisions were reduced by 44% to 54% - Total injury crashes were reduced by 28% to 48% - Single vehicle crashes were reduced by 59% to 63% - Sideswipe collisions were reduced by 33% to 48% - Rear end collisions ranged from a 14% increase down to a 23% decrease dependent upon which of the comparison models were used. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Speed kills. Murder (and manslaughter) are illegal. Preventing murder and/or manslaughter from reckless, irresponsible driving (i.e. speeding in violation of posted speed laws) is not in any way an intrusion on individual rights. There is no sensible basis for opposing photo radar speed limit enforcement. Opposition to photo radar is tantamount to advocating legalization of murder and/or manslaughter in any form by any means. --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: OT: Speed Cams
On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 10:55 -0700, Josef Lowder wrote: There is no sensible basis for opposing photo radar speed limit enforcement. Give me a break... if the people don't want it, and the government is supposed to work for the people, that is a sensible basis. Opposition to photo radar is tantamount to advocating legalization of murder and/or manslaughter in any form by any means. Wow... that is probably the most absurd oversimplification I've seen on this list so far. Murder and Manslaughter have very different definitions and legal implications. --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: OT: Speed Cams
Maybe I'm too idealistic, but I don't believe that they were put in place only for the money. The company that built the cameras is not getting a cut of the profits. They are getting paid according to a contract that they've signed with the government. If no revenue was generated from tickets as a result of the cameras, they would still get their money according to the contract. There is no dollar amount that can be set for the value of a life. Accidents and injuries on the highways are now lower than they were before the cameras were put in place. The most likely variable that influenced the reduction in injuries is the presence of the cameras. It's my opinion that the people that are against cameras have a disregard for the lives of others. In the past, I thought that it may even be a good idea to create an additional class of driver's license for people that could prove that they are capable of driving safer at higher speeds. Having more extensive driving exams and frequent and strict car inspections for these people would allow them to drive maybe an extra 10mph over the posted limit with designated plates or something. My views on this changed after I had my daughter. :) The problem is that no matter how well you can drive, you still have to be concerned about everyone else on the road. There have been times when I'm driving down the road at the speed limit and paying attention to the road (in front of me, primarily) to have someone pass in the adjacent lane some 20+mph faster than me. They came up so quickly that perhaps in the timing of my rearward glances I missed them and then all of a sudden they're beside me and gone. Maybe they're a really good driver, but it shocks the beejeezus out of me. Now what if I had decided to change lanes, or if anything unexpected were to happen? Debris on the road? What if I were someone that didn't have good reflexes? I would be really mad if that person caused me to have an accident. I would be heartbroken and destroyed if anything were to happen to my daughter as a result of someone else's disregard for safety. There are many arguments for and against the speed cameras, like the right to face your accuser in court. If you've had your picture taken by one of these cameras, you were breaking a law. If you were to get pulled over by an officer, you would most likely get a fine and points on your license. Your insurance may go up. If you've had a couple accidents in the past and already have enough points you may lose your license. If you get your picture taken, you only have a fine. It's a trade-off that I think is acceptable. On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 11:20 AM , Charles Jones wrote: Personally to me the fact whether or not speed cameras save lives is irrelevant. The #1 reason the speed cameras were installed was due to the money they would bring in, not for our safety. Yet when people complain about them, they try to play the safety card instead of just admitting they are loving their new cash cow (and so is the company that installed the cameras that is getting a cut of the profits). --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: OT: Speed Cams
On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 14:57 -0400, Dorian A. Monroe, II wrote: It's my opinion that the people that are against cameras have a disregard for the lives of others. Wow... that is quite the opinion then. I'm sorry you're so willing to sell people short before even getting their side of things. I can't say that it speaks too highly of your interpretation of the world (everything is black and white, right?). --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: OT: Speed Cams
Am 02. Apr, 2009 schwätzte Josef Lowder so: On 4/1/09, Bryan O'Neal bon...@cornerstonehome.com wrote: I have no issue with red-light cameras, if they provide a yellow light of adequate length to safely stop after noticing the light change, say 5 or 6 seconds. As for the speed cameras, well, I am agenst speed limits and believe it should be safe and prudent as seen by an officer and confirmed by a judge. As for the cameras in particular, no one has been able to make public a report showing they do anything other then annoy drivers. Accidents have not gone down ... Photo radar saves lives. Period. No. Photo radar is a cash cow for the government and a company in Scottsdale. According to the Arizona State Department of Public Safety, because of photo radar, crashes are down by 12%, injuries have been cut by 17%, and fatality collisions are down by 29% on Phoenix-area highways. DPS came out with its study stating that photo radar had reduced accidents, but in the same announcement had to admit the study hadn't taken into account that there might've been reductions in the traffic due to the cost of gas ( the study was done during the height of the gas prices ) or due to people being unemployed and no longer on the road or any other reason. It was acknowledged that traffic known to be was down, but that wasn't considered as a potential reason for the reduction in accidentѕ. It's a bogus study. Heck, it starts off with Speeding is recognized as one of the most important factors causing traffic accidents., so it's not even trying to appear to be a neutral study. Photo radar has been around for decades in various forms. And yet, there is only one study touting photo radar's benefits and that study is biased, prejudiced and compromised? Ha, ha. Douglas Adams makes an appearance since the speed enforcement program is abbreviated as SEP. I think that explains how the government has been able to get away with the improper relationship of having a private company get bribed to do law enforcement. No clear-thinking person would want to eliminate photo radar simply because of their personal desire to want to disregard and disobey highway speed laws. I want photo radar eliminated because I'm opposed to big brother[0], illegal business contracts, allowing companies to masquerade as law enforcement, artificially dangerous road conditions[1], and Dukes of Hazzard style changing of speed limits in order to ambush people with the cameras[2]. In any case, there's a ballot initiative where we can partially vote them out. http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/131797 http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Arizona_Citizens_Against_Photo_Radar_(2010) http://camerafraud.wordpress.com/ [0] There are reports that the cameras are also taking HD video all the time. [1] The photo radar flashes can cause a white out effect on the driver when they go off. This is a huge problem for motorcyclists as it blinds them for a second and worse blinds the car drivers near them[3]. I have even had my cabin white out due to a photo radar flash at dusk while I was on an access ramp waiting to get on the freeway. My eyes are just fine. Photo radar flashes are unsafe. [2] Phoenix seems to be getting better about this by actually posting the speed limit changes far enough in front of the cameras to actually read the new numbers before getting to the cameras. Tempe, however, appears to be changing signs to lower speed limits :(. For months there was photo radar after freeway interchanges where the speed limit had changed, but there was no sign to indicate the change. [3] Getting blinded as you're legally turning left after a yellow on a motorcycle sucks. Period. ciao, der.hans -- # http://www.LuftHans.com/http://www.LuftHans.com/Classes/ # Molotov Bible - religion thrown at other people in order to cause an # explosive situation - der.hans--- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: OT: Speed Cams
Don't forget that the current implementation of the speed cams are not just still-frame cameras that snap a picture if you trigger them, they are HD live-feed video cameras as well. If there were enough of them spread about, your movements could easily be tracked by noting what time you left your house, and passed other cams on the way. Of course this can also be done via satellite or just having a member of a 3-letter agency follow you :) I personally did not know that the cameras had video until someone tried to dispute a ticket and they were shown a full video sequence. --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: OT: Speed Cams
quoting, *There is no dollar amount that can be set for the value of a life. * That's an interesting topic. To save some one's life from, let say, traffic collisions, costs $1,000,000, but we can save 10 burn victim's lives for $100,000, then, not only can we put a price on human life, we can put a cost on saving human lives in perspective. Obviously, these particular numbers are fake, however there are numbers associated with saving every single life, and because we live in a place of finite resources, we must decide how we use those resources to save some, if any, of those lives. It is nice to dictate via the government that we save all lives, but its at least impractical, and at most statist. In reference to the rest of your post, you will never eliminate all risk from your or your daughter's life. If driving on the freeway is too risky for your life (or your daughter's), then choose to drive on surface streets, or walk, or bicycle, or stay home and pay for others to bring their goods and services to you. I have a son and I mitigate the risks associated with begin alive every single day, and its our role as parents to not only mitigate life's risks, but teach this risk mitigation to our kids as well. Eric On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 11:57 AM, Dorian A. Monroe, II dorian.mon...@cox.net wrote: Maybe I'm too idealistic, but I don't believe that they were put in place only for the money. The company that built the cameras is not getting a cut of the profits. They are getting paid according to a contract that they've signed with the government. If no revenue was generated from tickets as a result of the cameras, they would still get their money according to the contract. There is no dollar amount that can be set for the value of a life. Accidents and injuries on the highways are now lower than they were before the cameras were put in place. The most likely variable that influenced the reduction in injuries is the presence of the cameras. It's my opinion that the people that are against cameras have a disregard for the lives of others. In the past, I thought that it may even be a good idea to create an additional class of driver's license for people that could prove that they are capable of driving safer at higher speeds. Having more extensive driving exams and frequent and strict car inspections for these people would allow them to drive maybe an extra 10mph over the posted limit with designated plates or something. My views on this changed after I had my daughter. :) The problem is that no matter how well you can drive, you still have to be concerned about everyone else on the road. There have been times when I'm driving down the road at the speed limit and paying attention to the road (in front of me, primarily) to have someone pass in the adjacent lane some 20+mph faster than me. They came up so quickly that perhaps in the timing of my rearward glances I missed them and then all of a sudden they're beside me and gone. Maybe they're a really good driver, but it shocks the beejeezus out of me. Now what if I had decided to change lanes, or if anything unexpected were to happen? Debris on the road? What if I were someone that didn't have good reflexes? I would be really mad if that person caused me to have an accident. I would be heartbroken and destroyed if anything were to happen to my daughter as a result of someone else's disregard for safety. There are many arguments for and against the speed cameras, like the right to face your accuser in court. If you've had your picture taken by one of these cameras, you were breaking a law. If you were to get pulled over by an officer, you would most likely get a fine and points on your license. Your insurance may go up. If you've had a couple accidents in the past and already have enough points you may lose your license. If you get your picture taken, you only have a fine. It's a trade-off that I think is acceptable. On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 11:20 AM , Charles Jones wrote: Personally to me the fact whether or not speed cameras save lives is irrelevant. The #1 reason the speed cameras were installed was due to the money they would bring in, not for our safety. Yet when people complain about them, they try to play the safety card instead of just admitting they are loving their new cash cow (and so is the company that installed the cameras that is getting a cut of the profits). --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: OT: Speed Cams
No offense but you are missing the most important point here. I don't believe anyone is against enforcement of laws. But the fact remains that cameras will not stop anyone from driving like a maniac. Is a matter of fact the cameras appear (no study provided) to reduce the law enforcement presence on the roads which in my opinion is actually a very bad thing. Someone who is doing 20 mph over the speed limit may not give a damn if he/she gets a picture taken but that person will be compelled to care when is cuffed in the back of the police car and being charged with criminal speeding. BTW, most of the tickets aren't validated against the make and model of your vehicle so anyone can make a mockup of your license plate and speed getting you tickets left and right. You will have to explain that it's not your car. So in my view Sped Cams are just an inadequate substitution for real law enforcement. - Greg The bottom line in this matter is simply whether (A) there should be enforcement of established laws or whether (B) blatant disregard for established laws should be tolerated. Your premise seems to be B, that if the people do not want enforcement of any given established law, then it is sensible for them to just ignore, disregard, and/or disobey it at will. My premise is A that all laws that have been established by governing authorities in a civilized society should be enforced. Which is sensible, and which is clearly not sensible? I agree that murder and manslaughter have very different definitions and legal implications. However, the fact that they have different definitions and legal implications does not in any way make the underlying premise incorrect. That foundational premise is that for anyone to cause the death of another person by reckless driving (including exceeding posted speed limits) is manslaughter. And part two of this premise is that if anyone knowingly and intentionally facilitates the commision of a fatal act such as manslaughter, that can be shown to be murder in the second or third degree. Therefore, it is most assuredly *not* either absurd or an oversimplification to point out that failure to maintain and vigorously enforce established safety laws by all means possible is tantamount to advocating legalization of murder and/or manslaughter. Those who argue against enforcing established laws clearly do not have any reasonable, sensible, or justifiable basis for their arguments. --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: OT: Speed Cams
On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 12:58 -0700, Josef Lowder wrote: On 4/2/09, Joshua A. Andler scis...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 10:55 -0700, Josef Lowder wrote: There is no sensible basis for opposing photo radar speed limit enforcement. Give me a break... if the people don't want it, and the government is supposed to work for the people, that is a sensible basis. That is absurd. It is not, by any logic or reason, sensible to oppose enforcement of laws that exist to protect human life. Oh, but see, this is starting to sound like a bullshit excuse for a pro-life debate. When the laws were not voted on by the people, and the people had no say in them, well... it sounds like prohibition in that way. So yes, it is sensible to oppose them if it is not the will of the people. Why not just go all the way and outlaw driving altogether? Nationally that would be ~40,000 lives saved a year... after all, if the goal is to save lives, that will solve all of our traffic related fatality issues. Now THAT would be absurd... The bottom line in this matter is simply whether (A) there should be enforcement of established laws or whether (B) blatant disregard for established laws should be tolerated. Your premise seems to be B, that if the people do not want enforcement of any given established law, then it is sensible for them to just ignore, disregard, and/or disobey it at will. My premise is A that all laws that have been established by governing authorities in a civilized society should be enforced. Which is sensible, and which is clearly not sensible? I think that there is enough blatant disregard for all kinds of laws that it is a moot point. In AZ, if you and your wife had partaken in any sex acts other than straight up, missionary position, it was illegal (until 2001). Were those archaic laws of 1901 still sensible? (no, I don't want to know about your prude and boring sex life ;)) Okay, there was a request to end this thread that showed up... I'll respect that, but I do think we should set up an OT list, I think enough discussions have been ended this way to merit it. Cheers, Josh --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: OT: Speed Cams
On Apr 2, 2009, at 1:09 PM, Alan Dayley wrote: Take it off list please. +1 PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: OT: Speed Cams
On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 12:54 -0700, Lyle Tuttle wrote: clip, clip There are many arguments for and against the speed cameras, like the right to face your accuser in court. If you've had your picture taken by one of these cameras, you were breaking a law. So, you're telling me that both my speedometer and my GPS (both reading the same MPH, and both double-checked as correct against the portable speed read-out devices) were wrong, and the camera was correct? Maybe that's what caused my wife, riding with me, upon seeing the flash, to exclaim What the heck? That can't be us! as she looked at the GPS, plainly visible to her, reading well below the trigger point for the camera. Look, I'm not stupid. I KNOW where the cameras are, and I do not choose to give my money away.so why would I speed past them? After speaking with a Judge friend of mine about which court I would face, my $182.50 payment was made to save the additional court costs, as these machines never fail...right? If you think for one minute that these were NOT installed to generate revenue, you are not very politically awaresorry if that offends you... I agree that it's about the money but I think what's unstated is that if it was off and you were only going 74 and not 76 mp/h, it's still 9 over the posted limit of 65. But it is all about the money. Craig -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
RE: OT: Speed Cams
Cool, where can I get a copy of this report? -Original Message- From: plug-discuss-boun...@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us [mailto:plug-discuss-boun...@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us] On Behalf Of Josef Lowder Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 9:25 AM To: Main PLUG discussion list Subject: Re: OT: Speed Cams On 4/1/09, Bryan O'Neal bon...@cornerstonehome.com wrote: I have no issue with red-light cameras, if they provide a yellow light of adequate length to safely stop after noticing the light change, say 5 or 6 seconds. As for the speed cameras, well, I am agenst speed limits and believe it should be safe and prudent as seen by an officer and confirmed by a judge. As for the cameras in particular, no one has been able to make public a report showing they do anything other then annoy drivers. Accidents have not gone down ... Photo radar saves lives. Period. According to the Arizona State Department of Public Safety, because of photo radar, crashes are down by 12%, injuries have been cut by 17%, and fatality collisions are down by 29% on Phoenix-area highways. No clear-thinking person would want to eliminate photo radar simply because of their personal desire to want to disregard and disobey highway speed laws. --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
RE: OT: Speed Cams
True, or simply require auto manufactures to put limiters as factory standard equipment making it imposable for any car to ever drive above 75mph. The fact is it is not about safety, if it was points would be used and repeat offenders would have their licenses revoked. -Original Message- From: plug-discuss-boun...@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us [mailto:plug-discuss-boun...@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us] On Behalf Of Craig White Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 9:44 AM To: Main PLUG discussion list Subject: Re: OT: Speed Cams On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 09:24 -0700, Josef Lowder wrote: On 4/1/09, Bryan O'Neal bon...@cornerstonehome.com wrote: I have no issue with red-light cameras, if they provide a yellow light of adequate length to safely stop after noticing the light change, say 5 or 6 seconds. As for the speed cameras, well, I am agenst speed limits and believe it should be safe and prudent as seen by an officer and confirmed by a judge. As for the cameras in particular, no one has been able to make public a report showing they do anything other then annoy drivers. Accidents have not gone down ... Photo radar saves lives. Period. According to the Arizona State Department of Public Safety, because of photo radar, crashes are down by 12%, injuries have been cut by 17%, and fatality collisions are down by 29% on Phoenix-area highways. No clear-thinking person would want to eliminate photo radar simply because of their personal desire to want to disregard and disobey highway speed laws. The state tried to increase revenue with these cameras and implemented a system where there was only a single financial penalty for being captured on photo radar. No points against your license, no report to insurance...just money. While there is a direct correlation to speed and fatalities, there's no accommodation for reasonable and prudent, only a hard line between 75 76 mp/h where money changes hands. 76 mp/h during rush hours is infinitely more dangerous than at 11:00 pm when the traffic is sparse. If speed were the only issue, let's just lower the speed limits everywhere and people will be much safer. I am quite certain that if the speed limit on the 101 was 45 mp/h, there would hardly be any fatalities. Craig -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
RE: OT: Speed Cams
I've seen six, all on the I-10 within a few months of install; but people seem calmer now. -Original Message- From: plug-discuss-boun...@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us [mailto:plug-discuss-boun...@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us] On Behalf Of Joshua A. Andler Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 9:53 AM To: Main PLUG discussion list Subject: Re: OT: Speed Cams On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 09:24 -0700, Josef Lowder wrote: Photo radar saves lives. Period. So does driving responsibly... and, you know, paying attention. According to the Arizona State Department of Public Safety, because of photo radar, crashes are down by 12%, injuries have been cut by 17%, and fatality collisions are down by 29% on Phoenix-area highways. I've seen a couple accidents (literally 2) take place first-hand due to people reacting to the sight of the cameras. Apparently panic induced, the individuals abruptly slammed on their brakes to avoid a picture. I'm not saying that the drivers behind those vehicles shouldn't have been at a safer distance, but the cameras don't only prevent accidents, in some cases they cause them. I also take the DPS statistics with a grain of salt, as it does generate a healthy amount of revenue for the state that they'd like to continue receiving. No clear-thinking person would want to eliminate photo radar simply because of their personal desire to want to disregard and disobey highway speed laws. Okay, this argument could be made for any number of things that the laws restrict us from partaking in... in the name of protection. The entire notion that the government does things against the will of the people, and that people accept it... well, it greatly saddens and disturbs me. I say that because I've definitely heard more complaints than praise about the speed cameras. Cheers, Josh --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
RE: OT: Speed Cams
Of course, if we outlawed cars entirely we would never have auto accidents... And their would be no need to spend all that money on understructure, of course our society based on specialization and cheep transport would also collapse, but hey, they numbers look great ;) Their is a certain amount of responsibility and risk associated with driving, it is why you need to be licensed to do so. The fact that a camera can not distingue between safe maneuvers (merging into open space to the front and right) and dangerous behavior like squidding through traffic, is a problem. _ From: plug-discuss-boun...@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us [mailto:plug-discuss-boun...@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us] On Behalf Of Grzegorz Furmanek Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 10:45 AM To: Main PLUG discussion list Subject: Re: OT: Speed Cams I have to concur with the other critics of speed cameras. Any statistical data generated by the DPS should be carefully examined and verified before making conclusive statements. I do agree speed does play a role in severity of accidents and it should be considered a factor in decreased time for reaction, however the bigger issue is the fact that people do not pay attention to the road to begin with. Some other statistics I have seen show that talking on the phone while driving decreases the reaction time to levels of an intoxicated person. The studies did not even mention dialing the phone. Only talking and it did not really matter if it was hands-free or not. Also one may argue that putting cameras all over the place causes people to pay more attention to spotting the cameras and less on driving itself. Which also is not the optimal for driving. Just my 2 cents. On Apr 2, 2009, at 10:11 AM, Eric Cope wrote: link to those statistics? On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 9:24 AM, Josef Lowder j...@actionline.com wrote: On 4/1/09, Bryan O'Neal bon...@cornerstonehome.com wrote: I have no issue with red-light cameras, if they provide a yellow light of adequate length to safely stop after noticing the light change, say 5 or 6 seconds. As for the speed cameras, well, I am agenst speed limits and believe it should be safe and prudent as seen by an officer and confirmed by a judge. As for the cameras in particular, no one has been able to make public a report showing they do anything other then annoy drivers. Accidents have not gone down ... Photo radar saves lives. Period. According to the Arizona State Department of Public Safety, because of photo radar, crashes are down by 12%, injuries have been cut by 17%, and fatality collisions are down by 29% on Phoenix-area highways. No clear-thinking person would want to eliminate photo radar simply because of their personal desire to want to disregard and disobey highway speed laws. --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
RE: OT: Speed Cams
Just for those who may not know, a Squid is a motorcyclist who weaves in and out of traffic http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=squid _ From: Bryan O'Neal [mailto:bon...@cornerstonehome.com] Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 2:19 PM To: 'Main PLUG discussion list' Subject: RE: OT: Speed Cams Of course, if we outlawed cars entirely we would never have auto accidents... And their would be no need to spend all that money on understructure, of course our society based on specialization and cheep transport would also collapse, but hey, they numbers look great ;) Their is a certain amount of responsibility and risk associated with driving, it is why you need to be licensed to do so. The fact that a camera can not distingue between safe maneuvers (merging into open space to the front and right) and dangerous behavior like squidding through traffic, is a problem. _ From: plug-discuss-boun...@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us [mailto:plug-discuss-boun...@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us] On Behalf Of Grzegorz Furmanek Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 10:45 AM To: Main PLUG discussion list Subject: Re: OT: Speed Cams I have to concur with the other critics of speed cameras. Any statistical data generated by the DPS should be carefully examined and verified before making conclusive statements. I do agree speed does play a role in severity of accidents and it should be considered a factor in decreased time for reaction, however the bigger issue is the fact that people do not pay attention to the road to begin with. Some other statistics I have seen show that talking on the phone while driving decreases the reaction time to levels of an intoxicated person. The studies did not even mention dialing the phone. Only talking and it did not really matter if it was hands-free or not. Also one may argue that putting cameras all over the place causes people to pay more attention to spotting the cameras and less on driving itself. Which also is not the optimal for driving. Just my 2 cents. On Apr 2, 2009, at 10:11 AM, Eric Cope wrote: link to those statistics? On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 9:24 AM, Josef Lowder j...@actionline.com wrote: On 4/1/09, Bryan O'Neal bon...@cornerstonehome.com wrote: I have no issue with red-light cameras, if they provide a yellow light of adequate length to safely stop after noticing the light change, say 5 or 6 seconds. As for the speed cameras, well, I am agenst speed limits and believe it should be safe and prudent as seen by an officer and confirmed by a judge. As for the cameras in particular, no one has been able to make public a report showing they do anything other then annoy drivers. Accidents have not gone down ... Photo radar saves lives. Period. According to the Arizona State Department of Public Safety, because of photo radar, crashes are down by 12%, injuries have been cut by 17%, and fatality collisions are down by 29% on Phoenix-area highways. No clear-thinking person would want to eliminate photo radar simply because of their personal desire to want to disregard and disobey highway speed laws. --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
RE: OT: Speed Cams
Opposition to photo radar is tantamount to advocating legalization of murder and/or manslaughter in any form by any means. Wow... that is probably the most absurd oversimplification I've seen on this list so far. Murder and Manslaughter have very different definitions and legal implications. Quick we need to out law fast food stat! It's Murder! --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
RE: OT: Speed Cams
I believe their contract gives them a base amount plus an amount variable with the number and severity of the tickets generated. In turn they assume all liability for installment and maintenance of the cameras (save graffiti and other vandalism that does not require technical repair to resume operation of the camera) and the state picks up the cost of enforcement. Rite now it does not make that much money for the state. I can't find the stats but the last I heard was something really small like $50K/Mo in net revenue due to the unenforceable nature of the tickets. -Original Message- From: plug-discuss-boun...@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us [mailto:plug-discuss-boun...@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us] On Behalf Of Dorian A. Monroe, II Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 11:57 AM To: Main PLUG discussion list Subject: Re: OT: Speed Cams Maybe I'm too idealistic, but I don't believe that they were put in place only for the money. The company that built the cameras is not getting a cut of the profits. They are getting paid according to a contract that they've signed with the government. If no revenue was generated from tickets as a result of the cameras, they would still get their money according to the contract. There is no dollar amount that can be set for the value of a life. Accidents and injuries on the highways are now lower than they were before the cameras were put in place. The most likely variable that influenced the reduction in injuries is the presence of the cameras. It's my opinion that the people that are against cameras have a disregard for the lives of others. In the past, I thought that it may even be a good idea to create an additional class of driver's license for people that could prove that they are capable of driving safer at higher speeds. Having more extensive driving exams and frequent and strict car inspections for these people would allow them to drive maybe an extra 10mph over the posted limit with designated plates or something. My views on this changed after I had my daughter. :) The problem is that no matter how well you can drive, you still have to be concerned about everyone else on the road. There have been times when I'm driving down the road at the speed limit and paying attention to the road (in front of me, primarily) to have someone pass in the adjacent lane some 20+mph faster than me. They came up so quickly that perhaps in the timing of my rearward glances I missed them and then all of a sudden they're beside me and gone. Maybe they're a really good driver, but it shocks the beejeezus out of me. Now what if I had decided to change lanes, or if anything unexpected were to happen? Debris on the road? What if I were someone that didn't have good reflexes? I would be really mad if that person caused me to have an accident. I would be heartbroken and destroyed if anything were to happen to my daughter as a result of someone else's disregard for safety. There are many arguments for and against the speed cameras, like the right to face your accuser in court. If you've had your picture taken by one of these cameras, you were breaking a law. If you were to get pulled over by an officer, you would most likely get a fine and points on your license. Your insurance may go up. If you've had a couple accidents in the past and already have enough points you may lose your license. If you get your picture taken, you only have a fine. It's a trade-off that I think is acceptable. On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 11:20 AM , Charles Jones wrote: Personally to me the fact whether or not speed cameras save lives is irrelevant. The #1 reason the speed cameras were installed was due to the money they would bring in, not for our safety. Yet when people complain about them, they try to play the safety card instead of just admitting they are loving their new cash cow (and so is the company that installed the cameras that is getting a cut of the profits). --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: OT: Speed Cams
On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 1:09 PM, Alan Dayley ala...@consultpros.com wrote: Please stop this thread. Yes, it is appropriately marked OT for off-topic. Yes, many on this list enjoy law/politics/ethics/etc. discussions. However, every time in recent history that we have had an off topic thread go to long, people leave this list and the group. Seconded... although for full disclosure I should note that every time I see a traffic cam, I'll I imagine a zombie George Orwell smashing it to bits with a cricket bat. ... david [.dh] huerta haystackproject.com --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: OT: Speed Cams
Bob Hope - You know you are getting old when the candles cost more than the cake. On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 10:08 AM, Charles Jones charles.jo...@ciscolearning.org wrote: Just a note to my fellow phoenix drivers. Yesterday it was announced that the federal government has allocated $275 million in stimulus money for the purchase of 350 speed cameras to be put up in the Phoenix area. We all know about the speed cams on the 51 and such, but these are being put on the surface streets! They even have already planned where they will go: http://media.bonnint.net/az/15/1516/151641.jpg I also heard on the radio this morning that they are lowering the 11mph overspeed grace limit down to 5mph, which means if you go 5 mph over, you will get auto-ticketed by a speed cam, and more likely to be pulled over by police using radar. P.S. Apparently due to current flaws in litigation, you do not have to pay a speedcam ticket as the law says you must be served in person (How are they to know that you received the mail with the ticket, so they can't put a warrant out for your arrest for not paying it). This has been a public service announcement :-) --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss Yes that is true. They'll try at least twice for 120 days and if they do manage to serve you then you'll pay a little more. If you're hard to nail down at your residence it's a gamble you might take. Also If you respond at all you've been served. -- JD Austin Twin Geckos Technology Services LLC j...@twingeckos.com 480.288.8195x201 http://www.twingeckos.com --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: OT: Speed Cams
I should have added an additional P.S. that I heard this on the radio, and they specifically said it was NOT an april fools joke, but they could have been duped, or just trying to make the joke more believable. For our sake I hope so! Charles Jones wrote: Just a note to my fellow phoenix drivers. Yesterday it was announced that the federal government has allocated $275 million in stimulus money for the purchase of 350 speed cameras to be put up in the Phoenix area. We all know about the speed cams on the 51 and such, but these are being put on the surface streets! They even have already planned where they will go: http://media.bonnint.net/az/15/1516/151641.jpg I also heard on the radio this morning that they are lowering the 11mph overspeed grace limit down to 5mph, which means if you go 5 mph over, you will get auto-ticketed by a speed cam, and more likely to be pulled over by police using radar. P.S. Apparently due to current flaws in litigation, you do not have to pay a speedcam ticket as the law says you must be served in person (How are they to know that you received the mail with the ticket, so they can't put a warrant out for your arrest for not paying it). This has been a public service announcement :-) --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: OT: Speed Cams
On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 10:08 AM, Charles Jones charles.jo...@ciscolearning.org wrote: Just a note to my fellow phoenix drivers. Yesterday it was announced that the federal government has allocated $275 million in stimulus money for the purchase of 350 speed cameras to be put up in the Phoenix area. We all know about the speed cams on the 51 and such, but these are being put on the surface streets! They even have already planned where they will go: http://media.bonnint.net/az/15/1516/151641.jpg I also heard on the radio this morning that they are lowering the 11mph overspeed grace limit down to 5mph, which means if you go 5 mph over, you will get auto-ticketed by a speed cam, and more likely to be pulled over by police using radar. P.S. Apparently due to current flaws in litigation, you do not have to pay a speedcam ticket as the law says you must be served in person (How are they to know that you received the mail with the ticket, so they can't put a warrant out for your arrest for not paying it). This has been a public service announcement :-) --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss This has been a public service announcement :-) Is any part of this an April fool's joke? -- Mike Schwartz Glendale AZ schwa...@acm.org --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: OT: Speed Cams
This is part of an april fools joke that KTAR is doing this year. Last year the april fools was turning the 101 and the 51 into toll roads. each costing $1.01 and $0.51 respectivly. this is the link to their story http://ktar.com/?nid=6sid=1112673. Usually it's either the next day or at least near the end of the day when they do their announcment of April Fools!. So don't worry this is just an april fools joke. On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 10:15 AM, Mike Schwartz mike.l.schwa...@gmail.comwrote: On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 10:08 AM, Charles Jones charles.jo...@ciscolearning.org wrote: Just a note to my fellow phoenix drivers. Yesterday it was announced that the federal government has allocated $275 million in stimulus money for the purchase of 350 speed cameras to be put up in the Phoenix area. We all know about the speed cams on the 51 and such, but these are being put on the surface streets! They even have already planned where they will go: http://media.bonnint.net/az/15/1516/151641.jpg I also heard on the radio this morning that they are lowering the 11mph overspeed grace limit down to 5mph, which means if you go 5 mph over, you will get auto-ticketed by a speed cam, and more likely to be pulled over by police using radar. P.S. Apparently due to current flaws in litigation, you do not have to pay a speedcam ticket as the law says you must be served in person (How are they to know that you received the mail with the ticket, so they can't put a warrant out for your arrest for not paying it). This has been a public service announcement :-) --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss This has been a public service announcement :-) Is any part of this an April fool's joke? -- Mike Schwartz Glendale AZ schwa...@acm.org --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss -- Kenny McHenry --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: OT: Speed Cams
on this note I'd like to say that Miami florida is just now starting to feel the joys of the red light cameras! On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Charles Jones charles.jo...@ciscolearning.org wrote: Just a note to my fellow phoenix drivers. Yesterday it was announced that the federal government has allocated $275 million in stimulus money for the purchase of 350 speed cameras to be put up in the Phoenix area. We all know about the speed cams on the 51 and such, but these are being put on the surface streets! They even have already planned where they will go: http://media.bonnint.net/az/15/1516/151641.jpg I also heard on the radio this morning that they are lowering the 11mph overspeed grace limit down to 5mph, which means if you go 5 mph over, you will get auto-ticketed by a speed cam, and more likely to be pulled over by police using radar. P.S. Apparently due to current flaws in litigation, you do not have to pay a speedcam ticket as the law says you must be served in person (How are they to know that you received the mail with the ticket, so they can't put a warrant out for your arrest for not paying it). This has been a public service announcement :-) --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss -- :-)~MIKE~(-: --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
Re: OT: Speed Cams
ktar announced about half an hour ago that the 350 speed cameras was an april fools joke. http://ktar.com/?nid=6sid=1113496 . It was a good one and at least I got a few laughs out of it. On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 11:17 AM, mike havens bmi...@gmail.com wrote: on this note I'd like to say that Miami florida is just now starting to feel the joys of the red light cameras! On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Charles Jones charles.jo...@ciscolearning.org wrote: Just a note to my fellow phoenix drivers. Yesterday it was announced that the federal government has allocated $275 million in stimulus money for the purchase of 350 speed cameras to be put up in the Phoenix area. We all know about the speed cams on the 51 and such, but these are being put on the surface streets! They even have already planned where they will go: http://media.bonnint.net/az/15/1516/151641.jpg I also heard on the radio this morning that they are lowering the 11mph overspeed grace limit down to 5mph, which means if you go 5 mph over, you will get auto-ticketed by a speed cam, and more likely to be pulled over by police using radar. P.S. Apparently due to current flaws in litigation, you do not have to pay a speedcam ticket as the law says you must be served in person (How are they to know that you received the mail with the ticket, so they can't put a warrant out for your arrest for not paying it). This has been a public service announcement :-) --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss -- :-)~MIKE~(-: --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss -- Kenny McHenry --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
RE: OT: Speed Cams
I have no issue with red-light cameras, if they provide a yellow light of adequate length to safely stop after noticing the light change, say 5 or 6 seconds. As for the speed cameras, well, I am agenst speed limits and believe it should be safe and prudent as seen by an officer and confirmed by a judge. As for the cameras in particular, no one has been able to make public a report showing they do anything other then annoy drivers. Accidents have not gone down and they are not a significant form of net revenue (gross yes, but not net) As for the reduction to a 5MPH grace, it will make it hard to merge in traffic safely. As for April fools, since I don't see anything on the ADOT page (http://www.dot.state.az.us/CCPartnerships/News/index.asp) or on the AZ Republic page (http://localsearch.azcentral.com/sp?catId= http://localsearch.azcentral.com/sp?catId=aff=1100searchkeyword=searchca tegory=*keywords=camerasaddress aff=1100searchkeyword=searchcategory=*keywords=camerasaddress=) I am guessing it is another KTAR joke. _ From: plug-discuss-boun...@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us [mailto:plug-discuss-boun...@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us] On Behalf Of mike havens Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 11:17 AM To: Main PLUG discussion list Subject: Re: OT: Speed Cams on this note I'd like to say that Miami florida is just now starting to feel the joys of the red light cameras! On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Charles Jones charles.jo...@ciscolearning.org wrote: Just a note to my fellow phoenix drivers. Yesterday it was announced that the federal government has allocated $275 million in stimulus money for the purchase of 350 speed cameras to be put up in the Phoenix area. We all know about the speed cams on the 51 and such, but these are being put on the surface streets! They even have already planned where they will go: http://media.bonnint.net/az/15/1516/151641.jpg I also heard on the radio this morning that they are lowering the 11mph overspeed grace limit down to 5mph, which means if you go 5 mph over, you will get auto-ticketed by a speed cam, and more likely to be pulled over by police using radar. P.S. Apparently due to current flaws in litigation, you do not have to pay a speedcam ticket as the law says you must be served in person (How are they to know that you received the mail with the ticket, so they can't put a warrant out for your arrest for not paying it). This has been a public service announcement :-) --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss -- :-)~MIKE~(-: --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
