It’s insane the lengths that some people will go to save a few seconds on their commute, while also endangering others.

  • Rom [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    If people are driving too fast on a road then the road is badly designed. Speed cameras are a bandage covering up the problem of shit infrastructure.

    • mondoman712@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Better infrastructure would be great, but there will always be places where you will need to drive slower than the designed speed, and drivers should be able to follow that if they’re going to be allowed to pilot a large and dangerous vehicle.

    • wopazoo [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Traffic calming and speed cameras are carrot and stick in lowering the speed of roads. Lowering the design speed of roads alone is never going to stop drivers in a hurry from driving dangerously fast. People aren’t deterred from commiting crimes by heavy penalties, they are deterred by the chance of getting caught. Automatic traffic enforcement raises that chance to 100%.

      • Rom [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Lowering the design speed of roads alone is never going to stop drivers in a hurry from driving dangerously fast

        Why wouldn’t it? If drivers feel unsafe speeding down a road then they simply won’t speed, rendering speed cameras unnecessary. If you see a speed bump ahead of you aren’t you going slow down?

        • wopazoo [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Speed cameras are applicable to all roads, from the 30 km/h residential street to the 140 km/h highway. Speed cameras are also self-funding and thus have a negative cost. Fines collected by speed cameras can be used to finance road redesign and traffic calming measures.

          • Scrollone@feddit.it
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            It’s not like that in every country. For example, speed cameras in Italy can’t be placed in 30 km/h zones

          • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            They can also be used to kickback to the politician and the lobbyist who work for the company that profits from them.

            • wopazoo [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Please explain to me where the money to redesign and rebuild like half the city’s roads is going to come from if not from a transitional period of speed cameras.

              Say, why are you such a virulent opponent of speed cameras? Do you find yourself to be a chronic speeder?

                • wopazoo [he/him]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Lol the absolute state of speed camera opposers

                  If you don’t drive, you have literally no reason to oppose speed cameras. Speed cameras reduce the negative externalities of cars at literally no cost to you. If you don’t drive, you cannot get a speed ticket.

                  Also, for the China fans out there, consider how the widespread implementation of automatic traffic enforcement cameras in China that do things from watching if you’re speeding, to watching if you’re driving in multiple lanes at once, to watching if you’re wearing a seatbelt have massively improved driving conditions and reduced road chaos in China. Automatic traffic enforcement makes driving better.

                  • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    Well yeah, because China is a functional country that wants to actually decrease traffic violations.

                    The point of American cameras is to raise funds. That’s why there’s no immediate feedback for when you get a ticket. They don’t want people to connect their driving to consequences, they want the consequences to be distant with no immediate impact.

                    All it would take is for traffic cameras to flash drivers when they get a ticket. It’d be that easy. Yet it will never happen.

            • mondoman712@lemmy.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              The same can be said for anything that the government contracts out. Road building is another good example, and there’s a lot more money to go around there than with speed cameras.

        • pingveno@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I was once passed by someone who was speeding along a narrow, windy road while I was following the speed limit. That entire length of road is a no passing zone. If they had passed slightly later, they would have had a head-on collision with another automobile that was coming the opposite direction. Some people will just do dumb things, no matter the road design.

    • 7bicycles [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      I mean so what’s to be done then. I agree on “redesign pretty much every street or road” but like, until then, it’s just a great big free for all?

          • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Why not? It’s obviously a huge hazard and people can’t be trusted to use it safely. So for the public health and safety this road should be closed. This also means the poor council doesn’t need to maintain this road anymore saving money in the long run. Maybe a train could even replace where the road was increases throughput and safety for everyone.

            • 7bicycles [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              1 year ago

              Why not?

              Because that’s hardly what can be considered a realistic solution. Again, not against it, but what, are you gonna close down like 90% of roads? Only some of them, if so, which ones, and how is stuff handled on the ones that remain open?