I don't know about AZ's speed cameras but the red light cameras and the toll booth runner cameras here, in Florida, zero in on the driver with a crystal clear, high definition image of whos driving. It then takes a snapshot of the rear license plate. (Florida has no front plate) There's no way out of it. They even send you the picture in the mail along with the ticket. Standing in traffic court, you can't tell the judge "it wasn't me, your Honor". He's got all the proof he needs right in front of him.

 

on relatively uncongested highways, ticketing someone doing say 85 on cruise control is beyond stupid. yes there's a 'legal speed limit' but going to hugely expensive lengths to collect fines shows it's more about money than safety.

mmarshall, you remember the days of a national 55 speed limit on highways, which was so beyond stupid, yet there are still those that defend it and even those who want to bring it back.

 

Drivers are aware of this in some states, and some are even trying ways around it......like disguising themselves or wearing Halloween masks.

 

I myself am not in favor of bring it back. There are places where 55 is adquate, but also places where, as you note, it is needlessly slow. I did not totally support it when it was in place, though I am a firm believer in obeying traffic laws, even when you disagree with them. And the cameras themselves give you a leeway, so you're not going to be zapped until you get into the 65-70 range.

The 55-limit actually did make SOME sense, though, in the 1970s when it was first enacted. One must remember that it was not enacted for speed/revenue reasons, but as a national fuel-saving measure during a time of serious oil shortages and scarce, expensive gas. Cars, back then, did not have the aerodynamics and efficient powertrains they do today, and, as a rule, gas consumption increased rapidly with speed. That is much less the case today.

 

I remember when I had my suspension done on my GS I had to leave the car over night and have a car rental place pick me up. On the way to the office the representative from the rental place was blowing through the cameras at 15 mph over and would simply lower his visor to hide his face. I thought it was awesome.

 

Speed cameras being taken down... now that's what I'd like to see here (France). We got close to 1000 speedcameras in France. And even though they're preceded by a warning to the drivers, they still bring in a lot of cash to the State.

 

I may be wrong but in Jersey,there's red light violation cameras that will ticket the owner of the vehicle but no points are given.
Probably because the driver can be identified.

 

You just had to go there.

 

Good, straight into the dumpsters with those things.

(And OT, but I know the 55 limit made no sense then or now, I'm old enough to know and remember never obeying that law.)

 

I live in Arizona and will give my two cents on this!

The vehicles looked unoccupied from the outside (minivans where the occupant was in the back). The shooter shot the entire van up, so as to him meaningly shooting the operator inside, nobody will know. Very sad situation for the family of the victim. After this, they used remote monitoring of the vans.

They can be intimidating.



I am glad they came down, but honestly, I knew where almost all the cameras were. And even if I did not, they had 2 large Yellow Signs stating "Photo Radar Ahead" before every camera. One was half a mile before and the other was 300 ft before the cams.

The cameras were a pain in the ***, because everyone would speed, see the signs/cams and slam on the brakes. Even if they were not speeding enough for a flash, they would still slam. A 65mph zone would go down to 55 just because people were scared.

The one thing I like about the cameras, the Highway Patrol was not out there running radaras much, so as long as you see the signs or knew where the cams are you pretty much did not have to worry about getting a ticket.

I think if you live here and get a Speed camera ticket, you need to pay more attention to the road and stop being an Idiot. The SIGNS ARE HUGE!

Arizona did not lose all speed cameras, the Department of Public Safety did not renew their contract with redflex for all Freeway Cameras and Mobile Cameras. Each city still has their own contracts for their intersections.

I have never once received a Camera ticket, and I have a lead foot.


Also, while I do not like the speed cameras, I do like the red-light cams. People should not be running red lights. One problem, the red-light cams have speed cams built in, so if the light turns yellow and you speed up to make the light, you might get popped for speeding.

 

As a receipient of one of those tickets, please allow me to clarify a few points (pun intended).

The camera's take a very high definition photo of the driver of the car and your licence plate, and are triggered at 11 mph over the posted speed limit. They are oftened positioned after a speed limit drop, say from 65 to 55 (that's where I got mine) Hwy 51S @ Indian School for the locals.

One poster asked about being cited, and that is the main issue with these. According to our constitution, you are allowed to confront your accuser in a court of law, and that's why the majority go unpaid.

They first mail you the ticket ($180) or so, with the time, date, speed, and the photo's they took. You can dispute that you were the driver by sending a copy of your drivers licence showing you don't match the driver in their picture, or you can pay it. Those were the only options available when I got mine.
If they don't receive anything from you, they send another in 2 weeks. At that point, you are in jeoprady of being served with a summons, which qualifies you for the constitutional point earlier. Your accuser has confronted you. You then must appear in court, and are at their mercy.

Or, you happen to live in a gated community and don't answer any calls from the gate phone for 120 days from when you received the ticket, when it expires.

 

Given the poor aerodynamics, lack of overdrive transmissions, and higher-speed inefficiency of the cars of the period (1970s), 55-60 probably did make sense from a fuel-saving point of view. The largest Cadillacs and Lincolns, weighing 5000 lbs. +, and with 460-500 cu. in. V8s, were lucky to get 10-12 MPG, even in cruise mode. But in one way, as you note, it did not make sense. The majority of public, used to driving at higher speeds even with expensive gas and long lines at the pump, simply never accepted that law....and it was virtually impossible to enforce and real amount of ffectiveness, given the millions of cars and drivers. So, from the point of view of trying to actually having it on the books and trying to enforce it, I agree with you..it did not make sense.