65 points

Road safety is bad mmkay

permalink
report
reply
26 points
*

Sure sure, the speed cam after the slope in the woods is for safety, mhm.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

I mean I don’t know how you could think it wouldn’t be. Well signposted camera will help you pay more attention to your speed on the slope, it’s woods so presumably animals could run out at you.

If you can’t see a bright fucking yellow speed camera, and haven’t been paying attention to the ten dozen signed, then that’s 100% on you.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

They are hidden here, not yellow bright.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Another stereotype busted for me. I really thought it’s an ex-Soviet thing. “Скажи-ка, дядя, ведь недаром в кустах ты прячешься с радаром?”

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points
*

Probably you should be breaking on the hill? Regardless of if your foot’s on the gas or you’re just letting the slope do the work, you’re still speeding which is a hazard.

Yeah, I’m sure it also racks up some revenue too. Why not get a few more bucks while keeping the careless on their toes?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

60 instead of 50 (because steep slope) is speeding?

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

cameras do NOT make the roads safer. it’s a revenue stream based off ripping off it’s citizens. if anything everyone slams on their brakes when they see one causing more accidents.

permalink
report
parent
reply
39 points
*

Why on Earth is this unfounded argument getting upvoted so heavily? Objectively the science says that it reduces injuries and deaths. Per the linked Cochrane systematic review of 35 studies:

Despite the methodological limitations and the variability in degree of signal to noise effect, the consistency of reported reductions in speed and crash outcomes across all studies show that speed cameras are a worthwhile intervention for reducing the number of road traffic injuries and deaths. However, whilst the the evidence base clearly demonstrates a positive direction in the effect, an overall magnitude of this effect is currently not deducible due to heterogeneity and lack of methodological rigour. More studies of a scientifically rigorous and homogenous nature are necessary, to provide the answer to the magnitude of effect.

People on the Internet will just upvote the most confidently incorrect shit as long as it has enough confidence behind it and it vaguely aligns with their preconceptions, I swear.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

I think the sentiment against them stems from the fact that there are ways to reduce speeds without feeling like they’re being used as a revenue stream.

Personally I like when there are warning signs saying “Speed camera in use ahead” since it has the effect of slowing down traffic and not feeling like a “gotcha” moment.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Maybe just drive the speed limit?

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

yes, because no one has ever gotten a ticket or in trouble for something they didn’t do.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

Except they do make it safer and because there’s always tonnes of signs around them you don’t get the brake slamming. They act as a deterrent. Plus accidents at lower speeds are inherently less dangerous.

Mobile speed traps, however, are a definite revenue boost.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

they do not post camera signs in US

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

They litterally demonstrably do. Either actually engage your brain and look things up instead of parroting nonsense or take your bullshit back to reddit.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

k

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Do you have a source for your belief that speed cameras make the road significantly safer?

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

In the vicinity of camera sites, the pre/post reductions ranged from 8% to 49% for all crashes and 11% to 44% for fatal and serious injury crashes. Compared with controls, the relative improvement in pre/post injury crash proportions ranged from 8% to 50%.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20927736/

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

However, whilst the the evidence base clearly demonstrates a positive direction in the effect, an overall magnitude of this effect is currently not deducible due to heterogeneity and lack of methodological rigour. More studies of a scientifically rigorous and homogenous nature are necessary, to provide the answer to the magnitude of effect.

permalink
report
parent
reply
60 points
*

Lemmy: Fuck cars!

Lemmy: Fuck the police!

Lemmy, when someone sabotages the most viable alternative to traffic stops to prevent people from speeding: Yes very good. This is good for society.

permalink
report
reply
34 points

The most viable alternative to traffic stops is a narrow chicane with solid bollards on either side, although oher traffic calming devices are available.

Traffic cameras exist to generate revenue, not to make the streets safer. Intersections with red light cameras almost always have shorter yellow lights, to increase revenue while making the intersection less safe.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Traffic Cameras can and do reduce speeding if implemented properly

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

They are less effective than traffic calming.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

What is “implemented properly” and how often does it happen?

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

No. Traffic cameras in your area are there to generate revenue.

The camera being covered here is not at an intersection so your offtopic comment about revenue is irrelevant. This is a camera on a stretch of road where drivers usually speed, the cameras are painted bright yellow to make them obvious and do a far better job of getting people to slow for hazardous corners than a sign ever did.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

In California the duration of yellow is determined by a formula incorporating the roads speed limit. If yellow light duration is less than the formula would set, the traffic ticket is dismissed. I’m guessing most states have a similar law.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Yes, and and those laws are frequently violated to farm more tickets.

permalink
report
parent
reply
30 points

Source on speeding cameras working for anything other than revenue generation?

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

If that were the case, they would be hidden.

They are a deterrent for speeding most of all.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

The ones around here, everyone just slows down getting to that intersection, and then picks up speed again after crossing through

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

In the UK (Where the op picture is) the police cannot collect the revenue from cameras and other fines. It all goes to the gov so the cops have zero financial incentive to install speed cameras.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
9 points

More crashes and deaths means less cars and people.

Double win for the environment.

Environmentalists should be encouraging speeding and drink driving.

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points

I dunno if you’ve tried, but I’m here to tell ya, cobble stone streets will absolutely stop speeding really quick.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Nope, just observed it on this weekend on a cobble stone street in very bad condition. It was a 30 km/h zone and other drivers where more about 50.

While I, who only had a driver’s license for 3 months, tried not to break the suspension of my car (obviously unfounded).

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

So it doesn’t work because your sample size = 1?

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points

How is this not “fuck the police” it’s a camera, controlled by the police, to surveil people.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

It only surveils idiots who are speeding.

Why is this not fuvk people who put pedestrians, cyclists and other drivers in danger

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

How do cameras make any difference?

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points
*

Traffic cameras ARE the police…

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

Shitposts!? On MY shitposting community!?? It’s more likely than you think!

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

Speed traps are just a tool to further monetize and rent seek car culture in the absence of public transit.

You can, in fact, hate both cars and infrastructure that exists solely to make using a car more expensive.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

They do not exist solely to collect revenue, although they certainly do that as well. They have been proven time and again to reduce speeding and fatalities, as other commenters in this thread have pointed out. As far as using traffic cameras to reduce police forces, I haven’t been able to find that exactly, but there are plenty of examples of deploying traffic cameras to work around a shortage of officers which works out to the same thing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

You know what else would reduce police forces? Eliminating car traffic entirely.

Cops spend the most time on ordinary traffic stops.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Lemmy users can believe in different things. We need differing opinions or it just stifles a website.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

LaLuzDelSol (on Lemmy): thinks Lemmy is one person

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Why do I keep talking to myself and contradicting every other thing I say?

(Taking this to its logical conclusion, in case I forget why I wrote this when I read it later and feel like arguing with myself about it)

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I generalize ofc but those are definitely the prevailing viewpoints, which seem contradictory.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Better rule: when someone sabotaged surveillance state infrastructure, don’t post footage of them doing it

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Lemmy try not to post crimes challenge - impossible. Granted, as far as crimes go, this one seems innocuous enough, but still.

I’ve been told repeatedly on c/piracy that lemmy is just too small to attract the attention of law enforcement and three-letter agencies

Paradoxically, I’ve also been told that lemmy is rife with state-sponsored troll farms, so…?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Those are different kinds of lemmings

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Narrowing roads and making them less straight also lowers speeding

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

For reasonable people yes, but those that go 30km/h over the speed limit every time don’t care and will always drive as fast as possible in those sections. I once met a guy who claimed to know down to the exact last km/h how fast he could drive until the car lost control in every single curve of a quite curvy road segment. Is it save to drive like that? Absolutely fucking not. Does he car(e)? Also absolutely fucking not.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

People like that are gonna cause accidents anyways.

Studies have shown that accidents are more likely to be severe/fatal on wide, straight roads.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Speed cameras also won’t stop someone like that. Though they might take nice pictures of the wreck.

permalink
report
parent
reply
41 points
*

!fuckcars@lemmy.world

The absolute entitlement.

Edit: For those not wanting to read through this whole thing, speed cameras have been shown objectively in a systematic analysis of 35 studies to reduce traffic injuries and deaths.

Thirty five studies met the inclusion criteria. Compared with controls, the relative reduction in average speed ranged from 1% to 15% and the reduction in proportion of vehicles speeding ranged from 14% to 65%. In the vicinity of camera sites, the pre/post reductions ranged from 8% to 49% for all crashes and 11% to 44% for fatal and serious injury crashes. Compared with controls, the relative improvement in pre/post injury crash proportions ranged from 8% to 50%.

Authors’ conclusions: Despite the methodological limitations and the variability in degree of signal to noise effect, the consistency of reported reductions in speed and crash outcomes across all studies show that speed cameras are a worthwhile intervention for reducing the number of road traffic injuries and deaths. However, whilst the the evidence base clearly demonstrates a positive direction in the effect, an overall magnitude of this effect is currently not deducible due to heterogeneity and lack of methodological rigour. More studies of a scientifically rigorous and homogenous nature are necessary, to provide the answer to the magnitude of effect.

Edit 2: That being said, speed cams are objectively helpful aren’t the sole tool we should be using. Traffic calming is enormously beneficial and cost-effective for making places with roads safer for drivers and pedestrians.

permalink
report
reply
26 points

Is it the cars, or is it police using laws as revenue generators that intentionally affect the poor disproportionately?

permalink
report
parent
reply
39 points

You are allowed to drive the speed limit, even if you’re poor 😇

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points
*

Not if the speed camera runs your plates to determine you’re poor and notifies the police of an inbound precariat, letting them use their psychokinesis to entrap you into speeding.

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points
*

Would it generate revenue if people didn’t feel so entitled to put others’ lives in greater jeopardy to get to their destination 30 seconds faster? No? Not speeding is the easiest thing in the world; it’s an objective number not to exceed that you directly control and that your car tells you in real time, but at least in the US, drivers are in an arms race to see what kind of bullshit they can get away with, making cops less likely to pull them over. This means that when the average driver can – without warning and with precision – be dinged for speeding, they throw a tantrum about it and act like they’ve been victimized.

Ticketing does disproportionately affect the poor, and we should reform ticketing to change based on income, but can you seriously tell me with a straight face that the people doing this are doing it because they’re protesting socioeconomic injustice? Or because they’re entitled drivers who want to be able to speed with impunity? It’s the drivers here being entitled and thinking that they’re above the law. Personal vehicles are a privilege, not a right, but drivers don’t treat it like one. Over 100 people per day die to motor vehicle crashes in the US alone, and kinetic energy increases with the square of velocity; if drivers don’t like speed limits, they’re more than welcome to stay off the streets and stop thinking their personal convenience trumps people’s right to life.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

These cameras do nothing to improve safety. There is no meaningful scientific evidence that shows any difference improvement in safety.

Their only value is socioeconomic harm.

“after accounting for MVC increases in the control segment we found that neither camera placement nor removal had an independent impact on MVCs. In other words, speed cameras did not statistically contribute to an increase or decrease in the number of MVC.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3861844/#:~:text=after accounting for mvc increases in the control segment we found that neither camera placement nor removal had an independent impact on mvcs. in other words%2C speed cameras did not statistically contribute to an increase or decrease in the number of mvc.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

so the camera can’t be wrong? now someone has to go to traffic court if they want to fight it over a camera that’s 1 second off or uncalibrated?

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points
  1. if you drive at the speed limit you won’t have a problem

  2. the speed camera will be well signposted (car on the left so this is the UK) while it’s not a legal requirement that they have signposts I’ve never come across a fixed camera that isn’t

  3. If you don’t break the law you won’t have a problem

  4. the camera is painted bright yellow for visibility

  5. once again for the those at the back who are hard of thinking: don’t speed and you won’t get fined

  6. usually for first time offences if you’re just a bit over the limit you’ll get the option of a speed awareness course.

  7. You’ve probably come to expect odd numbered points to tell you to not break the law by now, so I’ll mix it up: if you get caught breaking the law and get a slap on the wrist, don’t keep breaking the law.


I do agree though that the fining structure should be reformed, it should be a percentage of income with some provision in place so the super rich can’t get out of paying their appropriate share too.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
  1. If you don’t break the law you won’t have a problem

this MF is a bootlicker if I’ve ever seen one.

there are a million ways a cop would fuck you over, primarily being “not white” or looking at them wrong, NOTHING to do with law.

I’ll give the UK a break as they’re not nearly as bad as the US, but cops are not your friends and that sentence quotes is a joke.

“if you got nothing to hide, let me search your car”

fuck no.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

People trying to argue with this point, but the point is that if the punishment for a crime is fine, then the crime only punishes the poor.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I’m cool with impounding cars and putting drivers in jail.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

That’s an issue yes, but objectively America needs to slow down. Accidents above 70 have a sharply increased chance of death. Nobody needs to be doing more than 65. Electric cars also use a lot more energy and tire material to go above 65 and gas cars are using more gas to do it. This generally happens because in order to maintain those speeds they’re constantly accelerating and braking around other cars.

I’m sorry driving isn’t fun, it was never meant to be once we obliterated mass transit in the US. It’s meant to get you to the destination, preferably safely.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I’m sorry driving isn’t fun, it was never meant to be once we obliterated mass transit in the US. It’s meant to get you to the destination, preferably safely.

You’ve never been in a fun car on a fun twisty back road. This is what driving should be, as we should not be dependent on driving to get everywhere.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

There are no speed limits on German motorways yet the death and accident rate is not higher that in their neighbours’ countries. Go figure.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

This is the most Lemmy thread ever. If only my instance hadn’t blocked hexbear. ❤️❤️❤️

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I’m glad I could help to make your day just a bit more magical. 🎆🎇✨

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points
*

If speed cameras are less biased than humans when issuing tickets, I see them as a fairer method of speed enforcement. Also safer for BIPOC individuals to receive a ticket in the mail, as opposed to a roadside traffic stop.

permalink
report
reply
4 points
*

I don’t disagree, but I also think speeding is the least dangerous thing that happens on the road.

Where are the cameras catching tailgaters, people who don’t signal, people cutting others off, people cruising in the left and not passing, people blatantly running stop signs, people texting or doing makeup?

These behaviors are all far more dangerous.

Speeding is a psychological problem. You can’t take a four-lane, straight, flat, state highwayswith few cross-roads, and all of a sudden it’s a 20MPH zone because there’s a high school on it (and an elevated crosswalk at that), then throw a camera on it and make a money generating machine.

I mean, you can…Rhode Island does it. At least in the poorer neighborhoods. They don’t do it in the nice neighborhoods (well, most of them…I guess Blackstone Blvd is like the one exception). But it’s not really doing anything but pissing people off.

Maybe just…don’t build the highschool on a four-lane, flat, straight state highway with few cross-roads? Ain’t nobody living in walking distance of it anyway.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

You’re right that streets should be designed such that low speeds feel inevitable and not something you have to think about, and that they should serve one purpose and not two (no stroads). And highways should completely bypass cities, because the idea that they should cut through them is just absurd.

Where are the cameras catching tailgaters, people who don’t signal, people cutting others off, people cruising in the left and not passing, people blatantly running stop signs, people texting or doing makeup?

The technology to do this is more challenging then detecting speeding. Red-light cameras are also very common, because they are relatively easy to implement. I believe there is some tech for texting while driving at least, but I’m not sure how automated it is.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

people cruising in the left

This is a camera on a single lane road in the UK. They should be driving on the left.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

You sure showed them…

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Force = Mass times Acceleration.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

As pointed out already, acceleration here is massive, as collision takes split seconds.

A more useful formula is: F=m*∆V^2 /2, where F is the force, m is mass, ∆V is speed difference (essentially your entire speed if you’re gonna hit the wall, and that’s very likely).

Notice that speed in this formula is squared, so doubling the speed results in four times the impact.

22% higher speed leads to 50% higher impact.

41% higher speed doubles the impact energy.

Etc. etc.

Also, mass of your car, even though it’s not squared, impacts the result greatly. Twice as heavy car will exert twice the energy at the same speed.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

and the acceleration of a collision is measured in split seconds, so the acceleration is going to be way higher than your velocity suggests.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
*

Sure. But speeding doesn’t cause collisons nearly to the level of any of the other things.

Going slow is a great way to reduce damage once a collision has occurred. Artificially slowing down roads (by throwing up a camera and a sign and nothing more) doesn’t do shit to prevent collisions in the first place. It might slow down the road. It might make someone panic and jump on their brakes to avoid a ticket. It might get people paying closer attention to their speedometer than to the crosswalk up ahead.

Put another way, you’re referencing the second law. Second law doesn’t matter until the first law is broke. Don’t act upon an object, won’t be no actions upon another object.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

It’s less a problem with racial profiling and more a problem with it being a poverty-tax.

Enforcing a flat-rate fee structure with speed cameras disproportionately hurts low-income drivers (who are already economically unstable), and allocating state/city funding toward road maintenance instead of public transit infrastructure pushes people into a loop of auto costs-> traffic fines -> loss of work -> more financial insecurity, ect.

True enough: reducing officer interactions is a good thing, but those cops end up spending that saved time escalating other non-violent interactions instead. If that’s your goal, you should be de-funding and reforming law enforcement, not automating fine collection.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Well said. My biggest issue is tickets funding road maintance, rather than traffic calming and transit. But flat-rate is also a big issue.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

All true. It could be a positive step but very small change by itself. Police are one part of criminal justice system that need massive reform.

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

Reminds me of a past mayor of the city I live in. One of his talking points was too get rid of the speeding cameras in the city. He came into office and did a photo op covering the first camera. A few weeks later his son died due to an accident caused by wreckless speeding driver in City center.

permalink
report
reply
13 points

Speeding cameras wouldn’t have changed that.

“There is little evidence” that automated traffic enforcement is an effective tool at either “improving traffic safety [or] limiting violent interactions between law enforcement and drivers during minor traffic stops … when enforcement is predicated simply on the assessment of financial sanctions," the group Fines and Fees Justice Center argued in its report.

https://usa.streetsblog.org/2024/03/20/is-automated-enforcement-making-u-s-cities-safer-or-just-raising-revenue

Not to mention, many cameras are hidden and create false positives. They get mailed tickets and have to spend a day in court.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

caused by wreckless speeding driver

The driver may have been reckless (irresponsible), but the incident was not wreckless (lacking a wreck)

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

That’s sad.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Did it convince him to change his mind on that his policy on the cameras? Or did he just continue on?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

Certainly not an accident. That was a entirely preventable collision

permalink
report
parent
reply

Lemmy Shitpost

!lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!


Rules:

1. Be Respectful

Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.


2. No Illegal Content

Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)


3. No Spam

Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.


4. No Porn/Explicit

Content


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.


5. No Enciting Harassment,

Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

6.You Should Know

7.Comedy Heaven

8.Credible Defense

9.Ten Forward

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)


Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 11K

    Posts

  • 245K

    Comments