Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

1. 

   dorpus, 17 Oct 2003 @ 8:44pm

   
   

   The standard bourgeoise argument

   Speed laws seem stupid until someone careening down the street kills your little brother.
   
   What if it happened when no witnesses were around, so the guy gets off scot free?
   

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

2. 

   euman, 18 Oct 2003 @ 12:07pm

   
   

   Cameras

   Ummm, sorry, but cameras *do* actively reduce accidents - my wife works in transport and I can assure you that the statistics back up their use all the way. Speed laws are there for a reason and if people ignore them and endanger other people then they ought to be punished. Road crimes are not punished severely enough in general - cars are dangerous things.

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

3. 

   MissinLnk, 18 Oct 2003 @ 8:20pm

   
   

   Re: Cameras

   Ok, so you're actually saying that having a camera that takes a picture and mails you a ticket days later is better than a cop in a patrol car that physically stops you immediately?

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

4. 

   Anonymous Coward, 19 Oct 2003 @ 9:17am

   
   

   Re: The standard bourgeoise argument

   ...outstanding!
   
   More power to the driver for removing a slow learner from the gene pool. He should get his road tax and vehicle inspection fee waived for the next year.
   
   Of course, in Japan, where tha maximum speed limit is just over 40 miles per hour on the highway and just over 30 miles per hour on pretty much any other street, all kids have to do is dart across the street with their hand in the air and it's all the "professional" driver's fault.
   
   Guess what?! Kids still get run over on a regular basis.... and more often than not, the driver isn't speeding. Perhaps children are stupid and immature and in general need of parental supervision all the time. The most remarkable thing I've ever seen on Japanese streets are the dogs who wait for the cross walk signs to turn green before crossing the road. I'm pretty sure that the (de)selection rate is pretty high for the dogs who don't learn this trick, but hey if a dog can do it...
   
   Streets and cars and dangerous. Would you let your kid play in an active constructions site... of course not... So, why the hell should it be the diver's fault when a kid gets hit... yet another "think of the children" argument.
   
   

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

5. 

   Anonymous Coward, 19 Oct 2003 @ 9:23am

   
   

   Re: Cameras

   Actually, there have been documented cases of cameras *increasing* accident rates. Specifically, there was a camera in D.C. that snapped yellow light runners... thing is, that the regular timing that the traffic engineers had set the light to didn't produce enough... uh revenue. So, they lowered the yellow light timing and increased both the revenue generated by the traffic camera and the accident rate doubled at that particular intersection (resulting in a fatility, I believe).
   
   Of course, if we really want to get picky, we should probably be talking about the sucide rate of cops that have been on traffic duty for more than a year.

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

6. 

   Anonymous Coward, 19 Oct 2003 @ 1:33pm

   
   

   Re: The standard bourgeoise argument

   hahaha, yes. You're british aren't you?

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

7. 

   Anonymous Coward, 19 Oct 2003 @ 1:36pm

   
   

   Re: Cameras

   Forks are also dangerous if used incorrectly. Should we regulate them? BTW, I've never seen a study that details what role outrageously slow drivers play in auto accidents. I'd imagine its as high as the speeders and the law-abiders.

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

8. 

   Richard, 19 Oct 2003 @ 3:31pm

   
   

   Hey, I have an idea...

   Instead of complaining about the speed cameras, how about you FREAKING SLOW DOWN!

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

9. 

   Beck, 19 Oct 2003 @ 4:23pm

   
   

   Re: Cameras

   Yes, there were cases where the authorities noted that red-light cameras reduced accidents in intersections. what they "forgot" to mention is that accidents in the approaches leading up to the intersections increased by a larger amount because fearful people were slamming on their brakes for a yellow light when it was safer to proceed through, causing many rear-end collisions.

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

10. 

    AMetamorphosis, 20 Oct 2003 @ 7:57am

    
    

    Cameras are cowardly

    I'm glad to see the British saying NO to these invasive cameras by any means necessary. I personally will assist in destroying these types of camera's if they become prevalent in the United States in my community. What some of you seem to forget is that we live in a democracy. This means that if a majority of the voters do not want this type of technology, they have the right to stop it.
    Its a waste of taxpayer money and it assumes that everyone is a criminal or has criminal intent. The thinly veiled disguise of " Homeland Security " is wearing thin. Terrorist don't give a hoot about cameras. Camera usage for jobs that need to be done by humans are a cowardly way for the government to raise revenue without providing any type of true " service ". Who gives a shit if a camera records an incident if it doesn't stop the crime ? Wow, we now know who killed so & so because the camera caught the incident , but so what ? The person is still dead.

    [ link to this | view in thread ]

11. 

    Tubby Bartles, 20 Oct 2003 @ 9:47am

    
    

    Speed cameras in Germany

    I lived in Germany for 5 years, and at first I *hated* the speed cameras there.
    
    By the time I left, I came to appreciate them. They had two effects, one expected and one unexpected.
    
    The expected effect is that people strictly adhere to speed limits. Speed cameras work when they are ubiquitous -- if you know that WHENEVER you speed you will get caught, they work quite well. (As opposed to the cameras in the study which are sporadic -- no different than cops, so it doesn't surprise me).
    
    The unexpected effect was on the attitude towards the cops. Since the cops aren't there to deal with the little stupid infractions (cameras enforce most traffic laws -- red lights, speed, even tailgating), they are your friends. You see a cop in your rear-view mirror, you don't think "oh no, better check what I'm doing" -- you think "oh, how nice, he's here to protect me".
    
    I'm now a big fan -- even though I was caught by them a couple of times myself...
    
    -- Kevin

    [ link to this | view in thread ]

12. 

    AMetamorphosis, 20 Oct 2003 @ 10:50am

    
    

    Right to Privacy

    This is taken from an article in USA Today.
    " At a time when ordinary people parade their private lives on television for fame and fortune — and when government surveillance has increased in response to crime and terrorism — many Americans have gotten used to being watched, privacy experts say. But they may also be growing weary and ready to rebel. People are feeling inhibited because of this sense of being under surveillance, whether it's security cameras in stores or increasingly surveillance in public places," says Sobel of the Electronic Privacy Information Center. The public is approaching a breaking point with respect to privacy violations. "
    

    [ link to this | view in thread ]