RESEARCH - The Effectiveness of Speed Cameras

Otherwise the automated "enforcement" will remain a revenue tool primarily, with no "safety" accountability - other than the usual re-hypothicated statistical mumbo-jumbo.

If automated enforcement is so great for safety - how come there are more tickets issued over time in areas that have those systems installed?
(Shouldn't the revenue dry-up completely once everyone is so safe thanks to the automated enforcement?)

If automated enforcement is not about money - how come there are changes done to light's timing to increase revenue while increasing rear-end accidents?
(Isn't the point to prevent accidents?)

If automated enforcement is good for us - how come there are thousands of people in small town all over the US living way beyond poverty lines owing hundreds of dollars for automated tickets - going in and out of jails - because their $80 ticket grew into a $1000 debt?
(Isn't the point to make everyone happy and prosperous by removing the road-death-toll?)

The unpreventable deeds of the few (drunk, underage, racers) are used as an excuse to criminalize the many (85% driving over the posted limit).
This is not safety, this is slavery.

P.S. Do not believe the "prevented X number of collisions" for a second - stating that is just as valid as me saying that my prayers have prevented this planet from cracking open again and again.

I was not a supporter of photo radar.  I felt that some of the locations were selected according to potential volume of violators and not potential danger.

I was also not comfortable being asked to account for myself a month or more after an alledge violation.  Hell I sometimes don't remember what I had for lunch two days ago.

Having said that, perhaps drastic times call for drastic measures.

On top of the above, another problem with enforcing traffic laws with automated devices such as photo evidence is that the charges are laid under the strength of Sec 81 of the MVA that provides that the "owner" of a vehicle is liable for the actions of that vehicle.  In other words no driver penalty points, no follow-up for repeat/multiple offenses.

There's a monitory fine, but nothing remedial is avaiable to teach a lesson.  Sometimes money doesn't present the deterrent it should.  The old "any problem that can be solved with money isn't a real problem".

So.... consider the vast changes to the way "we do business" in BC with respect to driving....  maybe another is in order.

We've already made great "leaps forward" ????? Police officers can deem a driver guilty of driving with a blood alcohol level over limits at the roadside.  (that's a topic for another day)

So why not another "ground breaking" law change ?

I propose the govt. amend Sec 81 of the MVA.  If a charge is laid against the owner of a vehicle, that owner is deemed to be the actual driver at the time of the offense unless siad owner nominates the actual driver and that actual driver accepts responsibility.

OK now we have some teeth in charges against owners...

I don't know about you, but if I loan my truck to my brother in law and he gets a ticket in that manner and when I approach him to take reponsibility he says he'll pay the fine, but I'll have to eat the points, that's the last time he ever uses a vehicle of mine.

The current "owner charge" system works such that if the owner nominates a driver and the driver accepts, the driver is then charged as the driver.  If the driver won't accept then the owner is assessed the fine only.  It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out all the driver has to do is pay the owner for the ticket and nobody gets the points for the violation.

Now, areas of chronic speeding ?? School zones for example.  Permanent, or perhaps like red light cameras, moveable but permanently moounted camera intrastures.

I don't know the dollar breakdown.  I don't know what it costs for the equipment, the maintenance and the processing costs perviolation.

If the cost can be recouped in certain locations, then have the equipment there all the time.

In my neighborhood they have just installed one of those pernament speed reader boards by the local school ground.  "Your speed is _____ "

To heck with that.  How about "Your speed was ____, your ticket will be in the mail, have a nice day"

Prove it.

Show me statistical evidence that the wide, straight, arterial roadways where they were employed (South Granville Street, South-West Marine Drive, South-East Marine Drive, 400 block East Keith Road, etc etc) experienced a reduction in fatalities due to the presence of RCMP officers hiding in plain Dodge vans with a camera on a tripod behind them.

I'll tell you a story. I was once driving south on Grand Boulevard in North Vancouver, and observed that a vehicle had crashed into some bushes at the corner of an intersection; the driver was slumped over the wheel. Two or three vehicles had already stopped, and it was evident that people were attempting to render assistance; I couldn't imagine being able to add anything with my presence there, but a few blocks futher on, when I turned onto East Keith Road, I immediately spotted one of those radar vans. This being back in the days before mobile phones, I saw an opportunity to alert the emergency services to the situation, and pulled over behind the van, then hopped out to ask the police officers onboard to contact nearby police/ambulance services to attend the scene.

What a waste of time. What a farce. Those guys got so annoyed, so excited, demanding that I move my vehicle immediately as it was blocking their camera. They didn't give a flying f*ck about the emergency situation, only how many tickets they could hand out in the time they were there.

Save lives, my back foot.

When one of these radar vans is parked monitoring traffic, are there signs erected advising the public that this is a van containing a speed monitoring camera ?

From my experience when a van is spotted, some drivers slow to much less than the speed limit, causing drastic braking by other vehicles down the chain.

Once past the van, the traffic resumes it's "normal" flow, the speeders speeding the law abiders travelling at a legal speed.

The drivers who don't see the van and are nabbed, don't even know they've been caught for several weeks.

It remains a mystery to me how this "saves lives by reducing excessive speed."

Are we saying that after getting a number of these tickets, people become fed up with the fines and slow down ?

Since the tickets in BC were issued to the "owners" of the vehicles apprehended, there was no remedial/follow-up action taken against the drivers (ie, no points), just the monetary fines.

Those who say photo radar is a money grab.....

Our traffic law enforcement system is intended to track drivers who continually disobey traffic laws.  That's why on top of the initial prescribed fine for particular offenses, through ICBC there is a second graduated fine system (penalty point premiums and driver risk premiums) and on top of that, regular reviews by Drive Safe BC that can result in further remedial action such as license suspensions.

We hear on this site, many apprehended violators asking "how can I avoid the penalty points and just pay the fine."

Now, with the photo radar system, we have people thinking a plain traffic fine system with NO penalty points is the way to go ????

I have to agree such a system of "road taxation" without accountability sounds a lot like, if not a money grab, at least a "pay as you go speeding program."

As I stated in an earlier post, in suggesting that photo radar might be a very good way of curbing speeding in particular locations of concern.  By installing permanent radar spots by playgrounds and school, we are creating a form of "speed bump".  In doing so we must realize that traffic will only be slowed in that particular area.

At the time I had suggested permanent photo radar in certain areas, I had not read the RAC Foundation report on the UK's camera program.  I have now learned from that report that the most successful application of photo radar in the UK are the permanently located radar camera sites.  In the UK they have about 6000 speed cameras, of which 3500 are permanently installed at locatons of concern, the balance, mobil.

Our strongest tool in curbing dangerous driving behaviour is a system that places continuous accountability on each driver.  Fines alone do not place that continued onus on drivers.

Driving is a linear action.  It continues along a stretch of roadway.  A "snap shot" of one action at one point along a corridor may not be indicative of the actions of a driver.

Personally with the technology available, I'd much rather see some form of disguised traffic montiring vehicle, equipped with multiple cameras catching offenders committing multiple and continual offenses along a stretch of roadway.  Such footage would go a long way to create dialogue and interest from the motoring public.  Much like the videos that have been enjoyed my many of the "homeless person" standing on the median holding the sign stating he is a police officer monitoring distracted driving behaviour.

There is no reason why points can't be added to the insurer of the vehicle, and a definite must in my opinion to make automated enforcement extremely effective, rather than just a fine.

You should think before making statements like this.

1. There's no requirement for an owner/insurer of a vehicle to even hold a Driver License.
2. You can't give a driver penalty points for somebody else's violation.

Duh!

What world are you living in, anyway?

1. If the insurer doesn't have a drivers license, then a log book would be "Mandatory" for the vehicle to be driven by a licensed driver, failure to do so could result in cancelation of insurance & fine, first offense 1 year, then if the same person one year later wants to insure a vehicle with still no drivers license, a huge insurance increase, if caught a 2nd time longer cancelation and higher increase & fine. Very strict consequences even if you don't hold a license.                           

Think on this.  In the vast majority of cases, vehicles that are driven by someone other than the owner are either company vehicles or family vehicles.

Demanding "Mandatory" log books is absurd. In the case of Class 1,2 3 & 4 operation, drivers will already have been required to fill in a Pre-Trip Inspection for the day, including hours of operation. If you're a Class 1 driver, you should know this. But even with other company vehicles, it's completely unrealistic to suppose that the driver can't be identified, that paperwork isn't filed, records kept, to identify the culprit after the fact of an electronic ticket. Doesn't matter if it's a 5-ton Moving Truck or a Hertz Rental car.

When it comes to family vehicles, do you really imagine a social dynamic wherein a teenager borrowing a parent's car, or perhaps the wife of a man who is no longer medically fit to drive himself, will fill in your "Mandatory" log book before heading out to pick up the pizza? Give your head a shake. Again, I say Duh! only even louder.

The law has to be changed anyway's in order to add points for automated enforcement, correct?

Incorrect, so far as I'm aware. Certainly with the Speed Camera Vans in use back in the 90's, where the owner could nominate the driver responsible, points would be added to that driver's license on conviction.

This process of Driver Nomination - including adding points to a Commercial Driver's NSC Profile - may be researched here.

The fact is, it really isn't an issue. No company is going to tolerate having their vehicles driven unsafely, nor is any vehicle owner. Upon receipt of the ticket, they will take effective action to prevent a recurrence.  So all this crap about mandatory this and log book that and strict consequences/fines is so much unnecessary hyperbole. Redundant noise, is what I'm saying.

Hey, I know a joke. Do you know what are the three longest years in a Truck Driver's life?

Grade Six!