You’ll never get a real answer because the types of people that post these idiotic disingenuous complaints about speed cameras have nothing to say to the simple question:
I don’t know about other places, but at least in the US it’s mostly because the speed limit doesn’t match the scale of the road. A wider road = higher speed limit to most people’s subconscious. You have to actively watch your speed to not end up speeding, because we build neighborhood roads that are large enough to be marked 45, but it’s a neighborhood, so it’s a 25mph zone.
The number of drivers that don’t actively drive is a whole other issue.
Edit: This argument assumes that they aren’t an adrenaline junkie, or entitled asshole, and didn’t realize they were speeding.
Or maybe I was just out during the day and didn’t have a chance to respond until now?
I didn’t post a complaint about speed cameras and certainly not a disingenuous one at that. I was just pointing out an incorrect assumption made by an official quoted in the article.
I do think it’s kinda silly that your response to the fact that cameras don’t have a means to control traffic or stop accidents is to ask why I don’t drive the speed limit.
I do.
And cameras still can’t stop me from getting into an accident.
And cameras still can’t stop me from getting into an accident.
Are you stupid? The whole premise is that the risk of actual consequences will slow people down, which in turn reduced the risk of getting into an accident.
If traffic cameras worked to prevent traffic violations they wouldn’t be revenue streams. People would just rationally follow the traffic laws to avoid consequences. Yet, in the real world, we know it will only slow down the people who think about consequences.
You’ll never get a real answer because the types of people that post these idiotic disingenuous complaints about speed cameras have nothing to say to the simple question:
Why not just drive within the speed limit?
I don’t know about other places, but at least in the US it’s mostly because the speed limit doesn’t match the scale of the road. A wider road = higher speed limit to most people’s subconscious. You have to actively watch your speed to not end up speeding, because we build neighborhood roads that are large enough to be marked 45, but it’s a neighborhood, so it’s a 25mph zone.
The number of drivers that don’t actively drive is a whole other issue.
Edit: This argument assumes that they aren’t an adrenaline junkie, or entitled asshole, and didn’t realize they were speeding.
Or maybe I was just out during the day and didn’t have a chance to respond until now?
I didn’t post a complaint about speed cameras and certainly not a disingenuous one at that. I was just pointing out an incorrect assumption made by an official quoted in the article.
I do think it’s kinda silly that your response to the fact that cameras don’t have a means to control traffic or stop accidents is to ask why I don’t drive the speed limit.
I do.
And cameras still can’t stop me from getting into an accident.
Are you stupid? The whole premise is that the risk of actual consequences will slow people down, which in turn reduced the risk of getting into an accident.
If traffic cameras worked to prevent traffic violations they wouldn’t be revenue streams. People would just rationally follow the traffic laws to avoid consequences. Yet, in the real world, we know it will only slow down the people who think about consequences.
They can be both lol. Prevent traffic violations for the people that care about the consequences, and a revenue stream from people that don’t.
Better than nothing.
They literally can’t be both. If the camera is a revenue stream then people are constantly getting tickets, which means nothing has been solved.
I don’t really care about motorists, but that doesn’t stop me from acknowledging these as a scam