Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views Photo Radar
1787 messages, Last post on Nov 06, 2009 at 9:07 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Like most states, Arizona is desperately seeking additional revenue. They have recently begun installing photo-radar units (mobile and fixed) on highways throughout the state and it has had the effect of generating additional revenue. Those who don't like it have taken matters into their own hands, vandalizing cameras, pushing for special initiatives to ban the cameras and/or putting polarized covers over their plates. Some restrictions apply to camera enforcement: -Fines are levied only on the registered owner of the vehicle, no license points are accrued and insurance companies are not notified. $165 for less than 20mph over, 250 for more than 20mph over. -Cameras are set to record only cars traveling at 11mph over the limit (55 or lower zones) or 10mph over (65mph or higher zones). What do you think? |
|
| Foes vandalize Speed cameras. | |
|
I have "longtime" been an advocate of getting people to slow the heck down. Speeding is dangerous, illegal, wasteful, and unfortunately, WIDESPREAD. There have already been articles in the Phoenix newspaper about how people are noticing the slower-moving traffic on the freeways and how people who have always wanted the "flow" to be slower are loving the stress-free drive. Even if it "IS" only a money grab, which is fine with me because they are not going to grab any of MY money, I'm all for it. Lower speeds mean more survivable accidents, more time to react to problems, less wasted fuel, and less stressed drivers. If the speeders want to pay $157 a pop for the right to drive 11 MPH over the limit, then let them. I'll not be with them. |
|
|
Replying to: andys120 (Dec 16, 2008 10:54 am) |
|
|
and find myself in the middle on this subject. -IMO Civil Disobedience should stop at the point of vandalism, wrecking speed cameras is never justifiable. OTOH I have no problem w installing a polarized "blocker" cover over the plate. -Photo Radar is clearly a revenue enhancement measure with limited safety benefits but since there's no points on the license or insurance surcharge it's actually cheaper to get a ticket from the robot than to incur the insurance surcharges from a ticket issued by a police officer. The State is going to get it's piece whether thru photo radar fines or increased taxes--at least you can avoid fines. -Contrary to Laserb, Arizonians do not drive that fast, especially considering the excellent highway network. Average speeds are no higher here than back home in NH. -From what I have seen, unlike in many areas, Arizona speed limits are reasonable of the most roads. They are often close to the 85th Percentile Speed which is where most traffic engineers say it should be.
|
|
|
Replying to: andys120 (Dec 16, 2008 1:49 pm) That seems like a lot of speeding to me. Maybe not for some areas of the country I'm sure. If they put them in SoCal, they might get 40,000 tickets in an HOUR !!! |
|
|
Aren't these revenue creation masquerading as safety infractions easy to fight? Something along the lines of signing an affidavit stating you weren't the driver? "Uh yeah my friend Bob was driving the car that day...I can't remember his last name...he lives three towns over" 
|
|
Driving Tip: Fight a Photo Radar Ticket (Business Week)
|
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (Dec 16, 2008 3:07 pm) Having said that, I once got a photo ticket for running a red light in Boston. Since I go to court on every summons (sometimes even parking tickets) I appeared in Boston District Court. The magistrate came in and asked those who had gotten a photo ticket to raise their hand and about 6 of us did so. Then and there she dismissed all of them. Apparently she felt that at least some of the points in the Business Week article where applicable to Massachusetts law. BTW- in 45 years of driving that's the only time I've ever been cited for running a light or a sign.
|
|
|
Replying to: andys120 (Dec 16, 2008 3:21 pm) The guy running the mobile camera got fired and the city ended the photo radar contract early. On the other hand, my elderly mother got a ticket a few months ago for going about 45 in a 30 mph zone - she was just trying to "keep up with traffic." She paid it and then sold her car.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Photo Radar
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
