Sign In Join 



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

What is this discussion about? Safe Driving


Messages Page 26 of 179
1
...
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
...
179
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

#248 of 1788
Re: Wow [larsb] by oregonboy
Jan 15, 2009 (5:35 pm)
Reply

Replying to: larsb (Jan 15, 2009 1:53 pm)

The point that I was making with the 5 Phases of Budget-Driven Social Engineering is that once that door is opened, you can be certain that the applications will become more far-reaching and invasive. The profit-motive is a powerful force and the bureaucratic machine is remorseless.
#249 of 1788
Re: Wow [oregonboy] by larsb
Jan 16, 2009 (5:55 am)
Reply

Replying to: oregonboy (Jan 15, 2009 5:35 pm)

My response to that is "SO FRICKIN/FLIPPIN WHAT?" if they are making money from voluntary contributors ?????
 
Anyone who
 
a) knows there are cameras around, and
b) keeps speeding on, brother !!
 
is a willing and giving participant to the local budget crisis.
 
If you don't want to be "speed taxed" then just stop excessively speeding. It doesn't get any easier or more straight forward than that.
#250 of 1788
Re: OK now you make me break out stats [vinnyny] by xrunner2
Jan 16, 2009 (6:59 am)
Reply

Replying to: vinnyny (Jan 15, 2009 2:56 pm)

Would agree that one should pass in left, move to right to let faster drivers move on in left lane. BUT, there are exceptions. Such as in 3 lane interstate with brisk moving traffic in all lanes at tail end of rush hours, but left lane a little faster then middle and right. If I am in left lane and satisifed with speed AND line of cars ahead of me, there will be intimidators who will tailgate and want me to move over to slower lanes. There are many cars ahead of me and I am keeping a tight, but not tailgater small gap with car ahead of me. My opiinion is that initimidator will not be able to go faster than I am, and I will usually not move over for this situation.
#251 of 1788
Re: Wow [larsb] by dtownfb
Jan 16, 2009 (8:18 am)
Reply

Replying to: larsb (Jan 15, 2009 1:08 pm)

has crime gone down in Tempe since the police officers have more time on their hands?
 
The 17 percent drop in accidents can easily be attributed to Americans driving fewer miles in 2008 or more people using public transportation to save money. I'm not sure one year gives you enough data to support that photo radar is reducing accidents.
#252 of 1788
Re: OK now you make me break out stats [larsb] by grbeck
Jan 16, 2009 (8:35 am)
Reply

Replying to: larsb (Jan 14, 2009 6:06 am)

larsb: Tailgating is almost ALWAYS a result of someone WANTING TO GO FASTER.
 
First, not everyone who tailgates is exceeding the speed limit. So, if everyone - the person tailgating, and the vehicle in front - is driving the speed limit, or even, say 9 mph over, photo radar will not catch them, by your own admission.
 
This is especially true on urban and suburban streets, where most people do drive the speed limit or about 10 mph over.
 
Second, on limited access highways, if someone is WANTING TO GO FASTER, than the proper response for the person in front should be to yield.
 
That is why limited access highways have multiple lanes, and one is generally called the "fast lane."
 
Don't see how photo radar will solve that problem.
#253 of 1788
Re: Fastest drivers usually most reckless [xrunner2] by grbeck
Jan 16, 2009 (8:36 am)
Reply

Replying to: xrunner2 (Jan 14, 2009 6:24 am)

xrunner2: On any given 25 or less mile commute I do, I see numerous incidents of the "faster, fastest" drivers intimidating other drivers in left lane by tailgaiting at perhaps 15-20 over posted limit to push lead driver to move over.
 
That shows the need for better lane discipline, not photo radar.
#254 of 1788
Re: Wow [larsb] by grbeck
Jan 16, 2009 (8:42 am)
Reply

Replying to: larsb (Jan 15, 2009 1:08 pm)

larsb: Now that the system is broader and issuing more violations, it'll soon be easier to tell if the cameras are making a dent in the accident numbers. There are good signs, Johnson said: In 2008, the number of accidents fell 17 percent.
 
Maybe for the gullible and uninformed...but not those of us who realize that accidents and fatalities dropped dramatically throughout the nation in early 2008, thanks to reduced driving, brought about by higher gas prices, and then the recession.
 
That quote "proves" nothing, except that photo radar advocates apparently can only "prove" its effectiveness by latching on to a trend that is taking place throughout the nation.
#255 of 1788
Re: Wow [grbeck] by larsb
Jan 16, 2009 (9:05 am)
Reply

Replying to: grbeck (Jan 16, 2009 8:42 am)

There you go again, accusing people who don't think as you do of merely being "gullible and uninformed." ( you really need to reign in that behavior - it's neither attractive nor effective in helping you make your point - you just irritate people when you say that. )
 
Can't post a link, but an editorial today in the Tempe Republic news was written by a local who passes through the most-strictly-enforced photo radar areas in Tempe every day.
 
He says he "has noticed people driving slower" in the areas where most of the cameras are. He himself makes sure he slows down in those areas.
 
That's the second recent article ( the other one was a freeway driver who drives
daily in the photo radar freeway areas ) which was commented on by a local that they appreciate the slower-moving traffic and the reduced number of speed demons on the roads.
 
That's all the cameras need to do. Slow down excessively speeding drivers. They are serving the intended purpose, AND taxing the excessive speeders to help with revenue.
 
For those who drive according to the posted laws, nothing will change. For those who drive anyway they want, smile and wait for the flash. For those who ignore your photo radar ticket, don't complain later when things get worse for you.
 
The laws are there to govern us because speeders cannot be trusted to do it ourselves. Speeders have no one to blame but themselves.
 
Blaming the guvmint for sending you a speeding ticket is like blaming someone else for anything YOU YOURSELF have done - immature and an indicator of lack of character.
#256 of 1788
Re: Wow [larsb] by fintail
Jan 16, 2009 (9:46 am)
Reply

Replying to: larsb (Jan 16, 2009 9:05 am)

"commented on by a local that they appreciate the slower-moving traffic and the reduced number of speed demons on the roads. "
 
Probably a Buick driving retiree, or an self-righteous hybrid pseudo-motorist....
#257 of 1788
Re: OK now you make me break out stats [xrunner2] by euphonium
Jan 16, 2009 (10:13 am)
Reply

Replying to: xrunner2 (Jan 16, 2009 6:59 am)

My opiinion is that initimidator will not be able to go faster than I am, and I will usually not move over for this situation.
 
And why should you? I agree with your opinion.
 
Have you noticed the proponents of driving too fast use all kinds of non applicable reasons for you to get out of their way? They resent you playing "speed cop", expect you to "get out of their way". They imply it is discourteous to prevent them from breaking the speed limit law. They mention "lane discipline" while ignoring "speed discipline".
 
Well, their attitude gives me courage to stay at the speed limit in the Left, fast, lane.
 
If you don't do your duty by blocking the speeder and he crashes down the road and kills himself, you have aided and abetted his reckless driving by contributing to his selfish and reckless driving style.

Messages Page 26 of 179
1
...
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
...
179
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion
To POST a message, please Sign In.

New? Join Now!

Forum Tools

Please sign in.
Email Address:

Password:

Forgot Password?

Search Forums

Enter Keyword(s)

Advanced Search

Browse by Vehicle



View All Vehicles
Advertisement
Ask the Community
See What People Are Asking

Browse by Board

Browse by Topic


View All Topics

Today's Chats

Advertisement