Yellow Vests Knock Out 60 Percent of All Speed Cameras In France (bbc.com) 417
Thelasko shares a report from the BBC: Members of the "yellow vests" protest movement have vandalized almost 60% of France's entire speed camera network, the interior minister has said. Christophe Castaner said the willful damage was a threat to road safety and put lives in danger. The protest movement began over fuel tax increases, and saw motorists block roads and motorway toll booths. Some protesters feel speed cameras are solely a revenue-generating measure which takes money from the poor. The BBC's Hugh Schofield, in Paris, said evidence of the vandalism is visible to anyone driving around France, with radar cameras covered in paint or black tape to stop them working.
Glorious (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Now knock out those who run the banks.
There's a plan for a run on the banks this weekend, I've heard. Nice idea, but I suspect the banks have plenty of legal protection against this, as in the US, and can just say "no".
Re: (Score:3)
Wrecking the financial system is not a *nice idea*. The people in the yellow vests will be the first to suffer.
Re: (Score:3)
Wrecking the financial system is not a *nice idea*.
Bankers keep telling me that. As long as deposits are insured by the government, every bank can collapse and nothing of value will be lost.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So who do you think insures the government?
Exactly, yellow vests. They are essentially keying their own cars.
Re:Glorious (Score:4, Interesting)
The French need to decide what kind of country they want to be. Issues like these should be resolved democratically, not through vandalism. Yet France has a long history of caving in to violent demonstrators, which has made street demonstrations more and more popular, and made any sort of sensible economic reforms impossible.
The latest polls show that a majority of the French support the vandals and rioters.
It doesn't have to be that way. They should look at Italy as a country that manages to be economically dysfunctional without political violence. France could do the same.
Re: (Score:3)
Americans used similar tactics to move the needles on civil rights, the Vietnam war, and the shitty police force in Baltimore.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Americans used similar tactics to move the needles on civil rights, the Vietnam war
The most influential protests in these movements were non-violent. The protests that were violent were likely counterproductive.
... and the shitty police force in Baltimore.
The shittiness of the Baltimore PD has not changed. They have repeatedly been caught planting and falsifying evidence, with no more than administrative action against the criminal cops.
Re:Glorious (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Glorious (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm 57 years old, black, and grew up in Baltimore.
You have no god damn idea what you're talking about.
The violence frightened good people out of our communities, and left us with a mostly desolate wasteland for years. My mom had to walk 8 blocks to get to a pharmacy. My parents eventually left because there wasn't a future for us there.
Dr. King did so much for us that violence never could. He proved that misguided folks like you never actually solve anything. You're giving credit to violence for things that
Re: (Score:3)
It will never work in the US because the people are brainwashing into thinking that they'll become zillionnaires if they don't make waves and work hard...
Re: (Score:3)
Hence their willingness to rock the boat and riot. And the government knows this, hence the extremely heavy-handed police response to riots (like 6 months of jail for someone who "liked"
Re: (Score:3)
every bank can collapse and nothing of value will be lost.
Definitely not the case as the government cannot faithfully insure all deposits in all banks. At some point the governments will collapse and the deposits will no longer be insured, and/or the currency they are based upon will be less valuable than toilet paper. This is an end-of-world scenario that always seemed more likely than an asteroid or super-bug. That said, these clowns do not have sufficient money on deposit to make that happen. They migh
Re: (Score:3)
In Europe, deposits are typically insured up to 100000€ [wikipedia.org], and this is backed by a fund into which the banks are required to pay, not the government.
It works the same in America, except the limit is $250k, and the FDIC fund is backstopped with tax dollars, so a big collapse that depleted the FDIC fund would mean the government "printing" money to make up the shortfall.
Will this lead to inflation? Unlikely. In a financial crisis, the big danger is deflation, not inflation. Following the 2008 crisis, the Fed "printed" $3.5 Trillion, and inflation remained near zero.
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed. Even though France can't "print money" like the US Fed can, the EU would ultimately back French deposits. The French government has a standing pledge to not allow any French bank to fail - though a total collapse would obviously require EU help.
Re: (Score:3)
. Following the 2008 crisis, the Fed "printed" $3.5 Trillion, and inflation remained near zero.
They didn't increase the money supply. At the same time they were printing trillions, banks were (due to fed incentives) depositing roughly the same amount with the Fed. The recent stock market excitement was the beginning of the cost of unwinding that.
Don't take it as an example that printing money dosn't cause inflation - by itself it always does, often leading to the collapse of the currency. The Fed was very clever, and time will tell if they were too clever, as the other shoe has yet to drop.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You really think your savings account is anything more than a "float balance = 123.03;"?
I'm afraid that some day it will say 0.00 because the bank needs to shore up its reserves.
Have you forgotten the 2013 Cyprus bank run ?
Re: (Score:2)
Have you forgotten the 2013 Cyprus bank run ?
That happened because Cyprus does not control its own currency. America does. The Fed can handle any bank run by creating any amount of money needed.
Currency unions such as the West African Franc [wikipedia.org] work well because the members have similar economies, and have a clear agreement that there will be no bailouts.
The Euro tries to unify countries as different as Cyprus and Germany, with very different levels of income, productivity, and cultural expectations of financial responsibility. The convergence of inter
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I would hope it would at least be a "fixed balace = 123.03;" because floating point is subject to precision errors and is not a good method of representing financial data.
Banks do not use floating point. They use integers, with the balance in cents. So $123.03 is stored as 12303.
Many banks now use 64 bit signed integers with the balance in hundredths of a cent. So a balance of $123.03 is stored internally as 1230300, and then rounded and shifted when displayed.
This will work until Jeff Bezo's account balance goes over $922 Trillion.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It may come to that, but at the moment we're just trying to get a working lock on the front door.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The problems with banks and the poor is nearly a catch 22 problem, and oddly enough there isn't much the Bank Owners can do.
To really succeed in life, you need money upfront. If you are young and can buy yourself a good working car that can last over a decade, and a good condition home where you don't need to pay rent, money to go to school and be trained to be well qualified for the workforce. So if you had all this money upfront and used it wisely. You can probably have a good life.
The problem is most
There are way too many cameras including LPRs (Score:2, Insightful)
The 2010s will be known for invasion of privacy and technology used for evil.
Speed cameras = dishonest taxation (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Speed cameras = dishonest taxation (Score:4, Insightful)
Of all kinds of taxation, I'd prefer the speed cameras, because I can avoid paying by sticking to the posted speed limit.
Re:Speed cameras = dishonest taxation (Score:4, Insightful)
Except for the ones that malfunction. Funny how often that happens. Funny how in the US you have no right to challenge the payment in court if you think the device is broken.
Far better to have a lottery, if you want a tax you can avoid paying. At least there somebody wins.
Re: (Score:3)
Funny how in the US you have no right to challenge the payment in court
Well, there's your problem.
Re:Speed cameras = dishonest taxation (Score:5, Informative)
You live in a fucked up place if a contractor can levy random fines without legal recourse.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Funny how often that happens.
It almost sounds like you are making a snide comment about the government rather than the speed cameras. From this we can conclude that the speed cameras aren't actually your problem.
Re: (Score:3)
Your comment amounts to "as long as your victimizing someone else I'm cool with it". Not a good look.
Imagine a society that's paid for on the backs of the poor by telling them they are criminals and levying fines on them. Sounds like a society you prefer and that says a lot about you.
Also keep in mind that when faced with a revenue shortfall, the "posted speed limit" is lowered until you're a tax payer too. That's how it works now at least in the US and sounds like it works that way in France, too. It's
Re: (Score:3)
Unless they try to trick you into speeding. Say with a two lane open road that is normally 100 kph, then suddenly goes down to 80 with poor signage and the camera hidden behind a wall.
I think people would be mostly okay with speed cameras if they appeared to be honest attempts to reduce road accidents.
Also the mobile ones are just random number generates, totally worthless.
Re: (Score:3)
Obviously it's not a coincidence. It's also not a conspiracy.
It's road engineers looking at crash data and determining that people are consistently getting injured and killed on a section of road and a lower speed limit and better enforcement are needed.
Re: (Score:3)
It's road engineers looking at crash data and determining that people are consistently getting injured and killed on a section of road and a lower speed limit and better enforcement are needed.
Now that's funny!
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think it's a good solution but at least it serves to limit the revenue stream for the company that operates them.
Re: (Score:3)
Now, if this was to improve road safety, you'd expect them to do 2 things: issue loads of fines to speeders to remind them that they're being watched, and have speed traps in
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
It is illegal to drive over the speed limit. If yu break these laws you can be fined. Speed cameras are an automated method of fining people for breaking the law. If you don't want to pay the fine then don't break the law.
Re: (Score:2)
It is illegal to drive over the speed limit. If yu break these laws you can be fined. Speed cameras are an automated method of fining people for breaking the law. If you don't want to pay the fine then don't break the law.
Yes, it is illegal to drive over the speed limit; but, I'm wary of any law that is violated by the majority of the population.
Ideally, a free state wouldn't have any laws or regulations that the majority of the citizenry routinely breaks- when you have the majority of people being "law breakers", it's easy for authorities to abuse their power and target people they don't agree with (because they can point to laws they've broken).
Dictatorships, and communist regimes regularly did this. If you make it imposs
Re: (Score:2)
Except in this case it is not impossible not to be a lawbreaker and if so many people violate the laws it is only because so many people are arseholes.
Re:Speed cameras = dishonest taxation (Score:5, Insightful)
It is illegal to drive over the speed limit. If yu break these laws you can be fined. Speed cameras are an automated method of fining people for breaking the law. If you don't want to pay the fine then don't break the law.
Simple solutions for simple minds. The speed limit on most highways is too low. Modern cars a requite capable; they handle and stop very well. The fact is, traffic flow in my area is regularly at about 80 MPH on the highway, even though the limit is 65. When ~75% of people see no problem with breaking the law, it's not the people who are wrong, it's the law.
Re: (Score:3)
Not every car on the highway is modern and well maintained. If 25% of cars are not safe speeding and go the speed limit, it creates problems due to the uneven speeds of vehicles.
I've also observed that a lot of people, probably the majority, are idiots about slowing down when road conditions change. People still going 80 MPH in the pissing rain or snow. Enforcing lower limits corrects for this as well.
Most people think they're better then average drivers, which can't be true. Often, they are good drivers bu
Re:Speed cameras = dishonest taxation (Score:5, Informative)
I know how fast I can drive safely. If I'm in error, charge me when I do so.
Did you really just make the "I should be allowed to drive as fast as I deem safe until I cause an incident." argument?
That's all speed limits are. People who think they know better.
Are you under the impression that speed limits are just made up at random? Or are you actually aware that there are scientific methods, formulas, and guidelines used by engineers to determine what the proper speed for a particular stretch of road should be?
Re: Speed cameras = dishonest taxation (Score:3)
Speed limits are correlated with real danger of speeding, but cameras are anti correlated.
Speed traps are zones where there is a speed limit lowering without any reason or some kind of laughable reason. In the past, cops used to hang there to make their monthly quota of tickets. Nowadays it's speed cameras.
Re:Speed cameras = dishonest taxation (Score:4, Insightful)
That's why stretches of highway will go from 65mph to 35 when going through a small town in places like central LA.
You mean it isn't safe for highway traffic to flow as fast in a populated area? Holy shit, stop the presses, this must be some kind of conspiracy! Literally every highway (and I'm not talking about limited access freeways) I have ever been on lowers speed limits when you enter a city vs rural. Every single one.
This is not a revenue thing, this is a safety thing. The fact that these speed change zones are prime locations for speed cameras (or police officers) is completely logical. On ever road, prior to speed limit changes there are signs that say "speed limit XX ahead" with plenty of time for you to slow down before you get there. I've been busted before when I've missed a speed change, so I understand people's frustrations, but you know what happened next time I drove past that area? I slowed the fuck down when I was supposed to.
Re: (Score:3)
I know how fast I can drive safely.
You are no different from everyone else then. Everyone knows how fast they can drive. Everyone drives better than the majority of other drivers. Etc.
If I'm in error, charge me when I do so. Don't charge me for a crime I didn't commit.
They do: you're charged for endangering the life of others. Or would you want a plane pilot to not be charged for being drunk on the job until he's crashed the plane with every one on board?
Re:Speed cameras = dishonest taxThere is a way arn (Score:2)
Just don't drive too fast. Dammit.
Re: (Score:3)
Speed cameras are a dishonest and regressive way to tax the population. Don't let local politicians sell you on BS that it is for traffic calming and safety.
They have a point and they also don't have a point. There are speed camera firms that actually deliver presentations to municipal politicians on how they can 'maximise revenue' from speed cameras, I have seen camera footage taken by TV journalists who mounted a sting operation at a major speed camera exhibition in Europe. Those cameras these yellow vested hooligans can knock down for all I care. However, there is a street in my town where there are two schools and a communal home for blind people, the max s
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The equivalent with speed cameras is to lower the speed limit. 'the government lowered the limit o
Re: (Score:3)
In my area they would shorten green lights to 1 second on busy roads with no side streets to cause multi-hour delays, then they'd ticket drivers in the thousands who reasonably treated the signal as malfunctioning.
I hope this is an exaggeration. If not, do you have any articles on the subject? That seems like it would be a situation where pitchforks and torches would show up at the governors house.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Speed cameras are a dishonest and regressive way to tax the population. Don't let local politicians sell you on BS that it is for traffic calming and safety.
If you hate Speed Cameras, move to South Carolina- not only are speed cameras not used, they're against the State constitution.
Everything else in the state sucks, but at least there aren't any speed cameras for you to worry about.
Re: (Score:3)
Speed cameras have their place -- in residential areas where car traffic mixes with pedestrians and cyclists. Problem is that some areas implement them on highways with already ridiculously low speed limits.
In residential areas, speed cameras are actually better if they can replace human cops who have more "discretion" to stop people because their car looks "suspicious." (Driver wrong color, car not new/posh enough, etc). At least speed cameras can't go on fishing expeditions, run the papers of all passe
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Problem is that the greater the speed in an accident the more likely someone is to be seriously injured or killed. Further the *PUBLIC* roads are just that a shared public resource.
Your rights to go as fast as you want stop at my nose.
Get back to me when you are a happy for killing someone in an accident to be treated as murder.
In the meantime speeding is a crime, and speed cameras only punish those who choose to recklessly endanger other people for their convenience and/or pleasure.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Death rates are lower on the Autobahn. Perhaps instead of going after speeders, go after people who hog the left lane which impact those behind them. Maybe go after those who don't signal their intent which can also affect those around them.
Speed doesn't kill. Idiots do.
Re: (Score:3)
Good example of why the Autobahn is safer. It is illegal to pass on the right, which means you can only pass on the left. Furthermore, you can only be in left lanes if passing, so as soon as there is space on the right, you need to move over. Refusing to leave the left lane to allow a faster vehicle to pass is a finable offense.
In any case, get over yourself. You are not the police, and you have no right to try and enforce the laws on the road. In fact, your pig-headed behavior makes things less safe for ev
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Speed cameras = dishonest taxation (Score:4, Insightful)
[outside perspective here, I live in the US] The autobahn is a limited access freeway system designed specifically for high speed with strictly enforced laws that are implemented to avoid crashes (no riding in the left lane, for instance)
Most of the crashes I've witnessed or read about on our road system involve someone doing something stupid at an intersection, like turning left in front of someone (personally experienced that one), running a red light, pulling out in front of someone, improper lane changes, crashing into light poles, things like that. Most of those things aren't a problem on a limited access freeway system. I would guess that the vast majority of the freeway crashes we see here are the result of people not paying attention. It amazes me how I STILL see people texting, doing their makeup, reading, or one of 100 other stupid things while driving.
Re: (Score:3)
[outside perspective here, I live in the US] The autobahn is a limited access freeway system designed specifically for high speed with strictly enforced laws that are implemented to avoid crashes (no riding in the left lane, for instance)
Also, only about half of it has no speed limit, and even those portions have an "advisory speed limit" of 130 kph (~80 mph). It's not illegal to exceed this speed, but if you exceed it and there's an accident you're presumed to have acted unreasonably for purposes of any liability evaluation.
In addition, since we're talking about speed cameras, though, it should be pointed out that those are rarely, if ever, used on limited access highways, so the autobahn is a red herring.
Re:Speed cameras = dishonest taxation (Score:4, Interesting)
Here in BC, a couple of years ago the government increased the speed limit on some highways, from 100-110 to 130 km/h IIRC. This year they decreased over half back down due to the increase in number of accidents. These were mostly limited access highways.
Re: (Score:2)
What is there to explain?
Accidents on the autobahn look like this [badische-zeitung.de].
under posted speed limits are the issue 70+ in 55 (Score:3)
under posted speed limits are the issue 70+ in 55 zone are very common. And some of the work zone 45 is just asking to get blow en off the road for trying to go that slow.
Also the 24/7 work zones when no one is working and / or there are walls in place.
If we real speed limits and did not over do the work zones. On road with an posted 70 you don't drop that 45 for an work zone unless it's really needed. and 2 lanes each way on half of the road work zones is not really ok to be lowed to 45.
Re: (Score:3)
Problem is that the greater the speed in an accident the more likely someone is to be seriously injured or killed. Further the *PUBLIC* roads are just that a shared public resource.
Your rights to go as fast as you want stop at my nose.
Get back to me when you are a happy for killing someone in an accident to be treated as murder.
In the meantime speeding is a crime, and speed cameras only punish those who choose to recklessly endanger other people for their convenience and/or pleasure.
I would share your view (about the existence of speed limits anyway, if not of cameras) if speed limits in the US were reasonable, and if enforcement were uniform.
Instead, the reality (and everyone knows it) is that speed limits are set too low, and therefore almost everybody speeds an "acceptable" amount, except for a few antisocial types who think they are doing good by driving under the limit but who actually create danger through the high speed differentials that they create.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Just a wild thought here, but perhaps speed limits are set based on the likelihood of crashes that cause serious injury or death as determined by road engineers, rather than your wildly inaccurate perspective about what is the "right" speed for a particular road.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Now we know you're lying or you drive while the right color and not looking poor.
Wow, speed cameras have the technology to see whether the driver looks poor ?
Re: (Score:2)
The flashing sensor is a great idea that cannot happen in the US. Our system of fair play, justice and taxation is normally about sticking the other guy with the bill. If we had a perfect system that fined people for misbehavior evenly and everywhere, and actually acted to slow people down, there'd be riots.
The cops-in-bushes system of speed control is mostly about hiding the cost of government on the unlucky. It's very similar to how our hospitals work: you get sick, you pay for yourself and a % of everyon
Hit them in the pocket (Score:5, Insightful)
Such a large-scale action is not done without some central organization.
Obviously the union leaders know how much money the bosses pocked from the revenue generated by this cameras.
By cutting this revenue the bosses are much more likely to listen to their demands.
Also, it is a case of "You keep our pay low, we can lower your pay"
Re: (Score:3)
They are not organised - they have no leaders - the action is not coordinated ...
They do not have one set of demands
They do not have one agenda
The unions are not in control
Some of them have no real demands ...they just like attacking stuff ...
Re:Hit them in the pocket (Score:5, Interesting)
Such a large-scale action is not done without some central organization.
You'd be surprised how like minded people will copy good ideas from each other. Central organisation would be proven if it all happened at once. The yellow vests however have been best described as copycats at every stage of their protest.
Oooh look 10 people in Paris occupied a toll booth! A day later you hear about gilets jaunes occupying toll booths over the country. It's very much a monkey see monkey do kind of a movement.
errors (Score:3)
So, no, I am not a fan of speed cameras either.
Won't somebody think of the children?! (Score:2)
> Some protesters feel speed cameras are solely a revenue-generating measure which takes money from the poor.
*which takes money from the speeders.
Re: (Score:2)
And as a result drivers are speeding up (Score:2, Informative)
These devices may not be able to take pictures but they still measure speed. And the results are damning:
They detect a 30 % increase [fr] of rides [yahoo.com] above the speed limit. The lessons of all this are clear:
Re: (Score:2)
Part of the problem, at least in the US, is the idea that the success of a street or a road is measured by how many cars can travel on it (the road capacity).
Which sometimes makes sense - that's a great way to measure an interstate between two places.
But when it comes to streets and roads in close p
Re: (Score:2)
These devices may not be able to take pictures but they still measure speed. And the results are damning:
They detect a 30 % increase [fr] of rides [yahoo.com] above the speed limit. The lessons of all this are clear:
The data are open to interpretation. The lesson to me is that the speed limit is too low, if so many people want to go over it.
Re:And as a result drivers are speeding up (Score:5, Insightful)
"30% more french drivers are breaking the law and putting others life in danger"
If you set the limit to 0 then 100% of drivers will break the law, yet that doesn't put "others life in danger". This is nothing but rhetoric.
The percentage of drivers speeding is an indicator of the reasonableness of the limits, not of the behavior of the drivers. This has been known since at least the 70's, likely much longer.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: disruptions lead to loss of jobs (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Some of them do. See: the Trump's Wall.
Very few people who are going without pay actually support it to get the wall. What Trump's wall actually represents is his willingness to let hundreds of thousands of people suffer because he can't get his way.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Better to give the average working person "free shit" than only giving mega-corporations and defense contractors "free shit." (Wars paid for at public expense, corrupt defense contracts, tax breaks for moving to a city.)
The rich have been getting "free shit" for decades in the US; why are you so against the rest of the people getting a bit of a leg up?
Re: (Score:2)
Evidently, they believe there are more important things than having a job. It'd be nice if Americans thought that way.
Such as? What other annoyances should they be able to take into their own hands, simply because they are willing to be violent and antisocial about it?
There are times for civil disobedience, but I'm not sure "I don't like speed cameras" is such a grand principle as to make it worth it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:speed cameras are a revenue source (Score:4, Insightful)
Along with that, most are placed in areas where lower income people are. More than likely because they don't have the money or power to fight against it.
Really ? How much money does it cost to drive slower ?
Re: (Score:2)
"Really ? How much money does it cost to drive slower ?"
Dunno, how much is your life worth to you? How much of it do you spend commuting? The poorer someone is, the more time they have to spend commuting, due to nimbyism. Refusing to build housing where jobs are therefore represents a theft of time from the poor.
Re: (Score:2)
My commute varies, but even when it's long, it's cheaper just to stay under the speed limit. It saves gas too.
Re: (Score:3)
My commute varies, but even when it's long, it's cheaper just to stay under the speed limit. It saves gas too.
Someone with a two hour commute (which is not uncommon) can save substantial time per year by speeding, if they don't get caught or crash. I didn't ask you about fuel costs. I asked you about life costs. How much of your life are you spending commuting? For some people for whom it is a significant percentage, it's worth the risk. You're not really living if you're spending your life commuting.
Re:speed cameras are a revenue source (Score:5, Informative)
Depends on what the speed limits are. You like to pretend that's not part of the equation but it's essential to this form of taxation.
Also, it simply doesn't work this way except for sociopaths like you. People drive at speeds reasonable for prevailing conditions and drivers are consistent in their perception of safe speeds. When speed limits are reasonable, compliance is high. When limits become sufficiently low, drivers tend to ignore them. Governments exploit this when they set limits. They want an adequate supply of speeders so they deliberately set limits too low. If they aren't getting enough, they lower limits. Happens everywhere in the US.
Understanding this, it's clear to see that the cost of this is actually high. People waste time, safety is actually worse and expensive infrastructure is underutilized.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You can probably afford the speeding tickets then.
That was the original point, right? That wealthier people have the means to fight the ticket or policy, or absorb the fines. That's why the cameras are supposedly more prevalent in poorer areas. The people there have less time and resources to fight an unpopular policy.
Re: (Score:2)
I have no problem with them in cities -- traffic which mixes with pedestrians and cyclists shouldn't really exceed 30 mph, and most cameras are set to trip at 35-40 mph. Also, better to get a $50 ticket from a camera than spend half an hour interacting with an armed revenue agent (aka a cop), who might also go on a fishing expedition, search your car, and plant something.
The problem is camera use on highways where traffic doesn't mix with other road users, and speed limits are set below the safe speed of t
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
(..) from 70 to 35 in 200 meters so something really too short.
For the safety of the public, please take your car to the garage. Your brakes need fixing.
If his car can't slow down that fast, they do need fixing; however, with that said, generally you'll see more accidents in areas where the speed limit changes frequently and dramatically. If one person slows from 70 to 35 in a short period of time, the idiot behind him who is half asleep might not notice and run into the back of him. Yeah, that would be the idiot's fault; but it's generally best not to have accidents.
Re: (Score:2)
Driving on the public highway is really not a private act.
Re:Speed cameras (Score:5, Insightful)
You mean like this study which says they reduce accidents and fatalities? http://www.lse.ac.uk/News/Late... [lse.ac.uk]
Or maybe the one that specifically looked at Arizona and found no difference in number of collisions (though didn't look at injuries) and certainly didn't find a negative impact? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p... [nih.gov]
Maybe you want a wide spread study of some 550 speed cameras which showed a reduction in accidents and fatalities and at the same time directly looked at the very speed cameras that the Daily Mail and some other worthless rags claimed (incorrectly) increased accidents? https://www.theguardian.com/uk... [theguardian.com]
Or this one from America that said also accidents are reduced and overall driver behaviour in the area improves: https://www.dailysignal.com/20... [dailysignal.com]
I would give you result number 5 from my Google search but it's the same study as result number 2 and I don't want to waste your time.
Re: (Score:3)
You mean apologia for revenue generation that ignores that increasing yellow light and all-red times slightly provide all of the benefits with none of the ticket nazi action?
Re:Bout time (Score:5, Insightful)
"Vive la France" is the correct writing.
Overall this shows that there's a threshold on how high pressure the politicians can put on the population. They often tend to forget that they actually are placed there to serve the citizens, not being the masters.