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
1788 messages, Last post on Nov 14, 2009 at 3:43 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: vcheng (Feb 23, 2009 8:06 am) Well, that assumption which you would make would be incorrect. Like I said : If I WANTED to turn this into a Google "posting battle" I could do so. And it would prove nothing except that Edmunds has a lot of storage space. You will learn the truth if you keep looking for it. The truth will align you with me. Opposition to photo radar is mostly about speeders wanting to speed unimpeded. That's the truth.
|
|
|
Replying to: vcheng (Feb 23, 2009 8:17 am) No matter how fast they are set to, speeders are still going to oppose photo radar. If Obama came out today and set all USA highway speed limits to 85 MPH , you think any of the police organizations would say, "OH, OK, now that people can drive 85, we can remove our photo radar gear because we can stop doing speed enforcement!!" ?????????????????????? Nope. Higher speed lmits will not affect photo radar installations at all.
|
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Feb 23, 2009 8:31 am) |
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Feb 23, 2009 8:24 am) I would continue to debate about the issue and not personalities. The post about speed limits only serves to highlight the point that "safe and prudent" speed limits are what is important, not just blind adherence to one speed limit enforced by one mechanism that must be obeyed unquestioningly. I want a police officer to give a ticket to the dingbat driving at 65 mph in a snow storm just because the limit is 65, ABSOLUTELY. This is thus one more point that speed limits are part of police work, and should be done by the police. Your desire for "alignment" is respected, but not reciprocated unfortunately. It just reminds me of the old story about three blind men asked to feel an elephant and describe what the "truth" about what an elephant looks like. I regard myself as one of those blind men and not a know-it-all human being. I shall of course exercise my right to continue evaluating new evidence as it presents itself in this forum and elsewhere, so that any opinion I may form is updated based on evidence. |
|
|
vcheng says ,"not just blind adherence to one speed limit enforced by one mechanism that must be obeyed unquestioningly. " There is no such thing as "blind adherence" to speed limits. If you want them raised, then get politically active and get them changed. But until they are changed to YOUR PERSONAL LIKING, they MUST BE OBEYED regardless of whether or not YOU think they are too low.
|
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Feb 23, 2009 8:46 am)  I do support your point about being involved in determining proper speed limits, just like the good people of British Columbia did that you posted above in one of your few links. And my belief in our system of government is so strong that I truly believe that we as a society will find the correct way to use photo radar or not all, or with some limits. So I have no problem with what you have just said.
|
|
|
Replying to: vcheng (Feb 23, 2009 8:48 am) I'm saying for people who insist on higher speed limits, then get active and get them set where you want them. Until they are set WHERE YOU PREFER THEM TO BE, you must obey them.
|
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Feb 23, 2009 8:52 am) Of course speed limits should be obeyed. And police should continue to ticket speeders as laid down by law. It is just that the use of photo radar in its present form is not the correct or legal tool for that purpose, at least that is what I think. |
|
|
What determines placement of photo radar ? I believe that intersections with short yellow lights are chosen to maximize revenue. How many accidents are caused by rear ending people who stop short at intersections with photo radar ? Quite a long time ago I used to really speed. I was on the Ohio Turnpike doing well over 100. Even though I stopped for gas I made it from one end to the other so, fast, they gave me a speeding ticket. My solution was to throw my toll ticket into the back seat. I told them I lost it. All they did was charge me the maximum toll from one end to the other. They had no way to figure my speed. As far as using GPS to determine taxes on miles driven, this is because we are driving less and using more fuel efficient cars. There is a loss of revenue on gas taxes as a result. There will be no credit for driving fuel efficient vehicles. This will easily defeated. Disable your GPS trans ponder 4 or 5 days a week. Tell them you are now in a car pool. Then short out the antenna, or cover it with a metallic shield for the 4 or 5 days. There will no doubt be a market for stolen trans ponder chips from cars parked in airports etc. for long periods of time. I always go to court on any tickets I get. Once the cop lost his ticket book. The judge chewed him out for wasting everyone time. He said we were all not guilty. I rarely speed now like I once did, but I have little respect for incompetence and even less for greed for extra revenues.
|
|
|
Replying to: pat85 (Feb 23, 2009 9:34 am) I thought greed only applied when you "already had enough of something and are still trying to get more of it." ??? |
|
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
