Comments on: The Speed Camera Lottery

By: Don

Don — Thu, 28 Oct 2010 16:55:25 +0000

Great now only if those damn things can accurately tell me how fast I am doing, or maybe perhaps it’s my brand new Honda Accord.

All I know is on a road that I take home everyday, I play a game. There is one of those speeding signs that alert you how fast you are doing.

Every day I get up to 35MPH (the speed limit on this road), put the car on cruise control, and I note the speed limit it tells me that I am going.

And every day it is a different number ranging up OR down as much as 7 MPH. It’s usually in 3 to 4 MPH range, but it is sure a hoot and a hollar when it goes over 40 MPH.

This is probably why cops I know tell me that they have a magic number that they don’t go after because of well, you know inaccuracies that don’t exist with radar guns, and the cars themselves.

By: David Hembrow

David Hembrow — Wed, 27 Oct 2010 15:02:25 +0000

Kevin says "I support photo radar speed enforcement, as practiced in the UK." Unfortunately, a shift to the right in British politics has resulted in these cameras being switched off, much to the delight of the right wing press, but leading to more speeding and complaints from the bereaved.

By: Rich

Rich — Tue, 19 Oct 2010 20:28:00 +0000

This is a great idea for all non-restricted roadways (where pedestrians, cyclists, and people are). As for on highways – 100mph will cut everyone’s mpg in half and double our consumption for gasoline – a very bad thing. Traffic already goes 75 where it’s safe. How much value are you really gaining by going 25mph faster on those straight sections? There is no need for 100mph cars, only a want. But we will NEED more efficient vehicles and forms of transportation, as well as supporting current forms a lot more – such as cycling and rail. Faster is not the answer to our problems, smarter is.

By: John

John — Thu, 07 Oct 2010 21:40:53 +0000

Commenting on above comments 9 then 8– of course we will have 100 mph personal devices– nothing crazy about it at all, just a matter of time. Think well into the future– be farsighted. Like I said, it is then instructive to wonder how we will get there. Trains are not personal enough. Oh, they will arrive, but saying they will supplant cars is like saying air travel and planes supplant cars.

Absolutely put a device in my car to see how well I drive, including not bothering others, not touching lines, keeping distance from others, signaling as we should, and the many other subtleties of safe and efficient driving. Then, set it to forget speeds to some extent. I’d much rather have this than have to go through electronic speed traps that don’t record other facets of safe driving. A 35 mph hour tailgater can kill. An 80 mph highway driver can be as safe as anyone out there. Comment 8 is quite practical. An extension of this is to be able to tell on truly bad drivers, as written in my blog.

John
Number one Google search for “best driver in the world”

By: doug

doug — Thu, 07 Oct 2010 00:57:48 +0000

100mph speed limits? Crazy. A better investment for the long term is 300mph trains.

By: Michael Prager

Michael Prager — Wed, 06 Oct 2010 19:41:50 +0000

I like this idea but forget the lottery cameras. How about allow drivers to voluntary put a device in their car that tracks their driving (like was decribed in Traffic). Then you can get a reward if you get above a certain grade 90% safe driving or something. Once a month 3 winners are picked from those who have 90% saftey rating that month. It would not have to be the government either, it could be an insurance company, business if we are talking about a fleet or maybe even the car company. These devices would also serve to provide some feedback to the driver about their driving, what should they improve on, etc.

By: Bossi

Bossi — Wed, 06 Oct 2010 06:04:27 +0000

Nuts to work: I’d take up driving all day, going in endless loops back and forth past the lottery cameras!

By: Kevin Love

Kevin Love — Wed, 06 Oct 2010 01:54:31 +0000

I support photo radar speed enforcement, as practiced in the UK.

The cameras must be pervasive enough to ensure that all speeders get caught. And fines must be high enough to positively deter speeding.

As for the lottery concept, I do not approve of gambling. Put the money into the public treasury to be used for public goods like public transportation, health care, education, etc.

By: Scott

Scott — Wed, 06 Oct 2010 01:27:19 +0000

I also wonder exactly how 100 mph on our existing highways is going to work. I drive 45-50 mph on the interstate because that’s about as fast as is comfortable on my motorcycle. Am I going to be mixing it up with 100+ mph traffic or will I suddenly be relegated to back roads and city streets?

I also can’t imagine subjecting the poor Honda Civic I used to drive to 100 mph. It was most efficient at 45mph in 5th gear and the engine was unbearably loud at speeds above 65 mph. Most of our vehicles just aren’t efficient at such high speeds, if they are even capable of going that fast.

By: Scott

Scott — Wed, 06 Oct 2010 01:13:51 +0000

I have to agree with Fred. Most of the roads around here (southern Maine) have speed limits that are set much too high for the types of low-speed transport that they see. Add the “extra 10″ on top of that and you have people driving 55 mph on a narrow, curvy road with many cyclists and pedestrians where a speed of 35 mph is much more appropriate.