Public Supports Automated Traffic Enforcement, Study Says

July 20, 2007

  • July 20, 2007 at 7:20 am
    Unbelievable says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    OK, pollster…..1,100 people as a random sample of millions of daily drivers…..get a clue…how many miles per day or year does this random sample drive, in what state and what age are they….sampling of this size is a joke yet our fine Congress believes any garbage put in front of them….do I need to bring up the ridiculous DUI laws in this country that are doing nothing to save lives onthe road but doing everything to tax social drinkers?….

  • July 20, 2007 at 7:34 am
    pollster says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    unbelievable…I’m sorry that you have a problem with the math, but that’s how it works.

    Now, you may have a problem with equal say for someone who drives once/week vs. someone that drives 10 times/day, but that’s a different issue. That’s a targeted poll interested in getting the opinion of a specific group (say republican vs. democrats).

    Let’s say I drop 300,000,000 M&Ms in a gymnasium. If I randomnly pull out 1,100 of them, and there is a possibility that any given M&M is selected, I can tell you to a certain degree of certainty (again, I think it’s 3%) how many red ones are there. I know it’s hard to believe, but it works.

  • July 20, 2007 at 7:48 am
    Chunky Monkey says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I think it’s a good possibility that eventually, there will be cameras covering every square inch of everything in this country considered “public”. So we might as well get used to it and stop scratching our butts when we think no one is looking.

    As wacko as some of our representatives on the hill go… I think those Nosy Nellies would even like cameras in our homes. But that’s another rant for another day.

    The cameras aren’t necessarily bad. I don’t know that they will serve as much of a deterrent. People who want to break the law are obviously willing to risk getting caught. If they want to trip up the camera, a simple alteration to their license plate will take care of that!

    I’d like to see some real data about how EFFECTIVE existing cameras are.

    Do they really reduce the rate of infractions? Do they really reduce the number of speeders? Have accident rates actually declined? Are police able to fight bigger and badder crimes? Are those ‘caught on tape’ being prosecuted fairly? Have repeat offenders stopped repeating?

    Unless those questions (and more) are answered, there’s not enough information to make an educated and iron clad case for relying on these cameras for crime-stopping.

    For the time being, I think traffic cameras only serve to create revenue for various parties.

    Some of you have made great points about how cameras take away a person’s right to due process and how a snapshot of a license plate and vehicle doesn’t prove who was actually comitting the crime.

    By having ‘electronic’ police, you’re only going to have half the story when it comes to an alleged crime. In other words, until the camera can undeniably prove who was behind the wheel, what can you really do?

    Anyone remember “innocent until proven guilty”?

  • July 20, 2007 at 8:01 am
    DG says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    The camaras in AZ take a picture of your license plate and the driver. I got snapped by one of those bad boys a couple years ago. I’m not a big fan of the things, but for the life of me, I cannot come up with a legitimate reason to do away with them.

    They certainly slow speeders down. Here they did studies with and without the camaras (they left the radar on, but didn’t take photos for awhile), and the speeds were dramatically lower. Accidents declined as well.

    In addition, you do have every right to go to court and fight the ticket. If you can prove you weren’t speeding or didn’t run the light, or it wasn’t you, you can have it removed. And really, is that any harder than if the police officer showed up to court and you had to prove him/her wrong?

    I think the they seem unfair because if you get caught by a cop (who, by the way, may not have even clocked you), you know right away and maybe you can talk your way out of it, but I don’t see any infringement on our privacy by this tool.

  • July 20, 2007 at 8:10 am
    HawaiiDuke888 says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    People with bad credit hate credit records and scores, but if we didn’t have it, credit would not be available. It keeps people straight, just imagine what kind of a financial system we would have without credit scoring. The rate of our home ownership is what it is because credit scoring keeps people straight.

    Same with traffic, we need to have a system to make sure our roadways safe. The more safe we can make them, the better. If anything goes, then we will be a third world country in no time. I know a bridge that is all Camera’d up, before people used to speed like crazy on it, now people drive the speed limit. The bottom line is, it works.

    People who don’t like these things just want to flip of America and violate the laws and the system as they please at your expeonse and my expense. Enough is enough with some of people who push America around. Time to put these folks out of business and learn to play the game the way we all agree it should be played.

  • July 21, 2007 at 12:05 pm
    Arnie says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I don’t know if the poll is acurate or not, however “unbelievable” is obviously of the kind that this is not a subject for debate. Why be so insecure on your position? Turn down the anxiety and stop at red lights!

  • July 20, 2007 at 1:04 am
    Unbelievable says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    1,100 respondents now is a REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLING of American opinion? Were they all police chiefs looking to generate easy revenue without adding officers? To think laws are passed on such ridiculous articles is laughable

  • July 20, 2007 at 1:43 am
    Skeptic says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I’ll translate this article into everday language: The government wants more money so they’ll get it anyway they can. End of story.

  • July 20, 2007 at 1:48 am
    Enough says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I’m sure that anyone that has time to take online surveys is probably not an accurate sampling.

    I would be fine with red light enforcement since there is no reason to run a red light, but speeding???

  • July 20, 2007 at 2:04 am
    Chuck says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    As a former police officer, I think camera enforcement is bunk. Besides the inaccuracy of some cameras, people are encouraged to stop abruptly causing more accidents. This is just another money-making scheme by our out-of-control politicians looking for ways to steal our money through automation.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*