[crs1026]

In my opinion, that is similar to the "law is law" attitude, which is flawed, but I am not going to delve into it.
Now to add on to your suggestion, they can also attach a display which shows the speed with the camera.

Is anyone aware of the difference in impact of enforcement devices in jurisdictions where the use is highly visible (there are countries, Ireland being one, where locations of speed enforcement devices are marked, to the point of even being indicated by GPS devices, let alone signs, flags, and flourescent markings) versus those using "stealth" approaches? Seems to me that there ought to be data showing which is more effective.

I won't argue "the law is the law", but I will argue that driving is an activity where care and attention must be commensurate with the lethal nature of the activity. More and more, society demands that lethal-potential activities require higher and higher standards of due care.

Expecting a driver to be fully aware of their speed at all times, and understanding that they may be enforced at any time, is a quite obvious expectation and not unreasonable as a quid pro quo for the privilege (and not the right) of being licensed to drive.

Personally I am OK with stealth enforcement - the old motto about honesty being what you do when you know no one is looking.

I am however sympathetic to drivers who misinterpret road scenarios because the road is overbuilt for the legal speed limit.

- Paul

 

[SubHuman]

... Expecting a driver to be fully aware of their speed at all times, and understanding that they may be enforced at any time, is a quite obvious expectation and not unreasonable as a quid pro quo for the privilege (and not the right) of being licensed to drive.

Personally I am OK with stealth enforcement - the old motto about honesty being what you do when you know no one is looking...

Yes, as I mentioned in another thread, some people seem to have a misguided attitude of "Since I didn't know anyone was looking, I shouldn't be accused of doing anything wrong".

 

[nfitz]

I have a speedometer app on my smartphone that uses GPS to calculate the speed I'm going. In my car, it registers and displays a different speed with different vehicles. Your WAZE app also has a speedometer, but it displays are too small to use regularly.

I normally find the speed displays on city streets plus or minus 1 km to what my display shows.

But I noticed my step-mothers car consistently is about 10% low. But I figure 80+year olds driving a bit slow is not the worst thing in the world.

 

[Admiral Beez]

I normally find the speed displays on city streets plus or minus 1 km to what my display shows.

When I lived in Fredericton in 2003-2007 there was an early two-digit speed display on the confederation bridge coming off PEI. We would always try to get it to go bonkers by hitting 100 kph for a few seconds. This was before speed cameras, and there were usually three or four RCMP cruisers on patrol for the entirety of the region.

But I noticed my step-mothers car consistently is about 10% low. But I figure 80+year olds driving a bit slow is not the worst thing in the world.

Our seniors need to get their speed on so they can make it clean to the timbits when they smash through the front windows.

Insight Into How and Why Older Drivers Crash Into Buildings

Today’s guest on the “Beyond Driving with Dignity” podcast is Mr. Mark Wright, co-founder of the Storefront Safety Council. In today’s show, Mr. Wright helps us gain a better understanding of just exactly what storefront crashes are, how big of a problem they are, who is causing them, and what...

affiliates.legalexaminer.com

 

[doady]

Yes, as I mentioned in another thread, some people seem to have a misguided attitude of "Since I didn't know anyone was looking, I shouldn't be accused of doing anything wrong".

That is the problem with Parkside Drive. It is not a place one would think there are people looking, where one might expect an extremely low speed limit. It is a four lane road, completely straight, and one side has no buildings, no sidewalk. It almost looks like a rural road, yet somehow drivers are misguided if they instinctively drive fast along such a road. A speed camera there is a trap, and an extremely lazy and ineffective way to make the road safer.

 

[nfitz]

That is the problem with Parkside Drive. It is not a place one would think there are people looking, where one might expect an extremely low speed limit. It is a four lane road, completely straight, and one side has no buildings, no sidewalk. It almost looks like a rural road, yet somehow drivers are misguided if they instinctively drive fast along such a road. A speed camera there is a trap, and an extremely lazy and ineffective way to make the road safer.

It would be one street where perhaps a 50 km/hr limit might make sense. At least until there's some lane narrowing or something.

 

[lenaitch]

I have a speedometer app on my smartphone that uses GPS to calculate the speed I'm going. In my car, it registers and displays a different speed with different vehicles. Your WAZE app also has a speedometer, but it displays are too small to use regularly.

A couple of links that discuss on-board speedometers vs. phone-based GPS

Just how accurate is your car's speedometer?

Noticed your car's speedometer reading lower than your GPS? There may be a good reason for it.

www.drive.com.au

Why GPS, OBD scanner and speedometer show different speed?

How higher speed on the speedometer than the GPS navigators, UN regulations for speedometer manufacturers, how the size of the tires affects the speedometer, and many other facts

hudway.co

 

[Admiral Beez]

A couple of links that discuss on-board speedometers vs. phone-based GPS

I last used that on the high speed train from Kaohsiung to Taipei. We reached almost 350 kph.

 

[reaperexpress]

+ 3km/ph is the threshold

3 kilometres per pico-hour is 3 000 000 000 000 km/h, which is 3000 times the speed of light. That seems like a very generous threshold.

 

[afransen]

Arbitrarily lowering the speed limit and slapping down a speed camera is the r/thereifixedit solution to road safety. All we need is a few superfluous traffic signals.

 

[txlseries4]

Safety advocate, residents question council decision to make speed cameras more visible​

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/toronto-plan-larger-speed-camera-signage-reaction-1.7573794

I have my doubts that the people in favour of more and bigger signs for speed cameras would be as enthusiastic about warning TTC riders that fare inspectors are going to board, or that cyclists should be cautioned a block ahead about police enforcing the HTA. Only one of these scenarios results in any meaningful amount of damage, injury, and death.

Between 2020 and 2024, there were only 20 cyclist-pedestrian collisions reported to police. Contrast that with 6,094 collisions involving cars and pedestrians. Even the number of firearm discharges/shootings doesn't come close in those five years -- 1,952.

As a whole people don't seem to consider cars to be the danger they are and instead in this bizarre world attribute danger to bikes.

Arbitrarily lowering the speed limit and slapping down a speed camera is the r/thereifixedit solution to road safety. All we need is a few superfluous traffic signals.

Lowered speed limits are associated with greater survival rates and less severe injuries for a person hit by a car. What about that is arbitrary?

 

[afransen]

Lowered speed limits are associated with greater survival rates and less severe injuries for a person hit by a car. What about that is arbitrary?

I support appropriate speed limits, but they should be concordant with the road design. Taking a road designed for 60 or 70 kph and lowering the speed limit to 30 or 40 kph is just a recipe for noncompliance. The actual safety comes from changing the roadway design to force the lower speeds, not by reducing the speed limits.

 

[txlseries4]

I support appropriate speed limits, but they should be concordant with the road design. Taking a road designed for 60 or 70 kph and lowering the speed limit to 30 or 40 kph is just a recipe for noncompliance. The actual safety comes from changing the roadway design to force the lower speeds, not by reducing the speed limits.

I do too but so strictly following this ethos with the reality of city budgets means "budget friendly" mitigation methods that do show to be effective (no, not to the same degree as a redesign) get tossed out the window instead of used. All or nothing approach is just dumb.

 

[reaperexpress]

I do too but so strictly following this ethos with the reality of city budgets means "budget friendly" mitigation methods that do show to be effective (no, not to the same degree as a redesign) get tossed out the window instead of used. All or nothing approach is just dumb.

Selecting cameras over traffic calming purely for financial reasons supports the public perception that they are a cash grab. Rather than spending the money to make the road feel slower, they'd rather give tickets to the vast majority of people driving down the street.

In my opinion, they should have clearly established speed cameras as a minor supplementary measure to catch unusually reckless drivers, not a solution on its own.

If the majority of people are not obeying the speed limit, then clearly it feels reasonable to drive faster than the speed limit. Which means there's something wrong with the road design (or possibly the speed limit). You first need to make physical changes to get speeding down, then you use cameras to catch the remaining small percentage of reckless drivers.

Rather than the knee-jerk reversals that we've seen from Councils in Toronto and Vaughan, I think confidence would better be restored by introducing a warrant process for speed cameras.

How about "you can only install a speed camera if at least 50% of traffic is already obeying the speed limit". If more than 50% are speeding then clearly you need to make changes to the street design first, to make the speed limit seem more credible.

The engineering standard practice is that the speed limit should be the 85th percentile speed, meaning that 85% of vehicles are obeying the speed limit. 50% is already a very generous threshold.

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

Safety advocate, residents question council decision to make speed cameras more visible​

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/toronto-plan-larger-speed-camera-signage-reaction-1.7573794

I have my doubts that the people in favour of more and bigger signs for speed cameras would be as enthusiastic about warning TTC riders that fare inspectors are going to board, or that cyclists should be cautioned a block ahead about police enforcing the HTA. Only one of these scenarios results in any meaningful amount of damage, injury, and death.

Between 2020 and 2024, there were only 20 cyclist-pedestrian collisions reported to police. Contrast that with 6,094 collisions involving cars and pedestrians. Even the number of firearm discharges/shootings doesn't come close in those five years -- 1,952.

As a whole people don't seem to consider cars to be the danger they are and instead in this bizarre world attribute danger to bikes.


Lowered speed limits are associated with greater survival rates and less severe injuries for a person hit by a car. What about that is arbitrary?

Maybe include pseudo speed camera warning signs to get the motorists guessing which ones are real. Except then those signs could become targets of vandalism.