I was at a local political debate one time years ago and the candidates were asked if they supported more speed cameras in the county. They all said no because people slow down where the cameras are and they don’t meet their revenue targets. No mention at all about the fact that people slowing down should be the goal.

No, I didn’t take them off. I cleaned them on the car with wheel brushes and wheel cleaner. Only issue was having to roll the car forwards to be able to clean above the calipers since they are so close to the 19 inch wheels the wheel brushes wouldn’t even fit between them.

Then I sealed them with Gyeon Wet Coat which is a spray on pressure wash off sealant. Great for wheels.

 

My main issue with them is that I just don't trust the third party companies that process all of this and the due process issues it creates. They have incentive to overissue tickets in incorrect situations.

Also it seems you've never actually driven in Las Vegas. Outside of the Strip, it's far more suburban than urban. I rarely ever hit stop and go traffic. It's actually pretty easy to speed here, as I do on a daily basis. Lot's of big open straight roads where the traffic flows at 60+

 

hope and want aren't the main tools of the insurance industry. actuaries drive it all. crunch the numbers (risk, price, exposure, secret source factors) and quote to the customer. don't like it? too bad, so sad.

 

Well, from your own description, the proof is in the pudding. Goal or no goal, the fact is that a lot of people DO slow down for them. And, of course, politicians are often notorious for not telling the truth. They know that speed cameras are often unpopular (even when they are necessary)...so they are not going to go on public record for supporting them even if they secretly agree with them.

 

Either way, Vegas generates a huge amount of revenue for the state...they probably don't need to install cameras unless they simply want to force people to slow down.

 

Don' like it? Get insurance elsewhere...which is what they want when they price you out.

I'm not debating they they do slow people down...I'm debating why they are installed. I don't think politicians were lying about caring about revenue, if they were lying they would have said they didn't support them for reasons other than they miss revenue targets. If the goal was to slow people down they would have cameras on every road...because they do work but when they work they don't make them any money which is why they move them and hide them to catch people off guard.

Speed cameras are HUGE revenue generators. Did you know the companies that install them and maintain them for municipalities keep 50% of the revenue?

 

I don't know if this is true or not, but someone told me they successfully fought a red light camera ticket by sending a subpoena for the clerk who processed the pictures. The company that installed and manages the cameras are in Arizona. They didn't show up, ticket dropped. I had a coworker who fought one his son got driving his car. He told the judge that the person in the picture wasn't him, when the judge asked him who it was, he just shook his head. The judge was sure it was a relative due to the similarities in appearance, but because he couldn't prove it and my coworker kept his mouth shut, ticket was dropped

 

must be nice

 

Most states have accepted legal procedures you go through if the camera gets a shot of your speeding vehicle and you are not the driver. It can be complex, though, and a PITA to go through.

 

Of course I do....that's only common sense. Companies don't work for free.....it costs money to obtain, install, maintain, and insure these cameras against damage from vandalism, storms, and other hazards.

 

And nor do politicians, happily taking those brown paper envelopes to secure their vote to allow these companies to rip everyone off.

With no apologies for the cynicism, it really is all about lining pockets at the expense of others.

If red light and speed cameras were truly intended to be primarily a deterrent you'd see them fully disclosed and signposted, have much longer amber intervals on red lights and so on. In reality, amber intervals get cut to levels that significantly and deliberately increase red light infractions specially to generate more revenue, and speed limits are set artificially low in cases where prevailing speeds are higher, again with more of an eye on these sweet sweet dollars than road safety.

And just wait until we get introduced to the delights of average speed cameras...

 

Here here 👍

 

interesting that they are not marked where you are. Around here red light cameras are marked, on all four directions, even though the camera only captures one way. Also, the speed cameras are also marked.

 

So true, in a nutshell.
It's a big club and we're not in it. Lol

They need to earn their money and park a cop car at the light. 💯 📣 😃

Traffic light cameras are an income generating business.

Ps, it may have a positive side effect of people driving at their best behavior at the tradfic light, but still 100% all business $$$.

 

The camera, allows the cop for do another things. The advantage of having a speed light camera instead of a cop is that you don’t lose any points on your drivers license if you get caught. Also, any interaction that I don’t have to have with the police I’m happy with.