• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

When Tech Goes Too Far

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Technology is awesome…except when it is used against us. This speed camera not only catches you speeding, it checks your insurance, seatbelt and calls the cops.
 
You've got to be kidding me...(but I know you're not.)

What a shame that public safety resources are turned on the people that can be easily caught and not focused on finding actual criminals: violent, white collar, etc.

Not that I'm for driving w/o seatbelts and insurance...but I guess this is now a money-making venture. I suppose I should be grateful that it's being automated so that maybe law enforcement people might be re-directed toward crime?
 
I support the useless spending on devices that take people's hard earned money and that have shown no scientific evidence for actually increasing safety. Every time I see a cop on the side of the road trying to get speeders I think that is a great use of tax payer dollars.
My state doesn't use cameras for traffic enforcement, but I patiently wait the day that it comes and I can think of how many lives were saved by issuing traffic tickets to people.
 
You can release these in the states, only when you increase the speed-limit by 20mph. 10 to put the speed limit back to within reason and another 10 so we have a reasonable hardline to avoid since these camera's will probably be hitting right at the limit.

I've actually seen speed limits reduced in the various areas I've traveled lately despite a lack of construction or road changes of any sort. I guess its an easy way to generate revenue and prolong the time it takes to move about.

A 55mph speed limit on a 4-5 lane highway (8-10 across the barrier/median) that is flat and devoid of heavy traffic or road construction is ridiculous.
 
I think it is a great idea, as long as it is implemented properly.

Any measure to keep people from harming themselves or others is most welcome in my book.
 
AceGoober said:
I think it is a great idea, as long as it is implemented properly.

Any measure to keep people from harming themselves or others is most welcome in my book.
Click to expand...

You're all about the nanny state then I take it?
 
Uninsured drivers are the worst scum of the road... So,... I guess I approve of this.
 
Marlfox said:
You can release these in the states, only when you increase the speed-limit by 20mph. 10 to put the speed limit back to within reason and another 10 so we have a reasonable hardline to avoid since these camera's will probably be hitting right at the limit.

I've actually seen speed limits reduced in the various areas I've traveled lately despite a lack of construction or road changes of any sort. I guess its an easy way to generate revenue and prolong the time it takes to move about.

A 55mph speed limit on a 4-5 lane highway (8-10 across the barrier/median) that is flat and devoid of heavy traffic or road construction is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

This ^

I also remain opposed to devices like this until they start ticketing the real dangers on the road. You know who I am talking about, the jerks who sit in the left and hov lanes doing 20mph slower then everyone else causing everyone to slam on their brakes and swerve around.
 
weuntouchable said:
I support the useless spending on devices that take people's hard earned money and that have shown no scientific evidence for actually increasing safety.
Click to expand...
If you say so. City next to us saw a steady (as in not just the first month) double digit % drop in accidents at all the intersections that had red light cameras installed a few years ago. They are going to turn a bunch of them back on after being off/uninstalled. Sounds pretty scientific enough to me.
 
You know what I'm reading in that article? The police and associations are scared that they'll be replaced by machines.
 
ir0nw0lf said:
If you say so. City next to us saw a steady (as in not just the first month) double digit % drop in accidents at all the intersections that had red light cameras installed a few years ago. They are going to turn a bunch of them back on after being off/uninstalled. Sounds pretty scientific enough to me.
Click to expand...

Out here, there has been an INCREASE in accidents at most intersections where red light camera's where installed. Mainly due to people slamming on thier brakes as soon as the light turns yellow.

Also, about 80-90% of the tickets given out by red light camera's, are to peopel wh don't come to a complete stop before turning right on a red light. If they limited the tickets to people who actually ran a red light (blowing through a light after it's turned red, or yellow for a few seconds), they wouldn't raise enough money to pay for the camera.

It's all about revenue, these camera's are seen as a profit center.
 
'But it needs to be a safety measure, not a money-making machine.’

that quote says it all right there.
 
Speed camera's, meet sniper cat. The answer to getting ride of those pesky cameras.

sniper_cat.jpg
 
Approximately 15% of motorists are uninsured (one out of seven), according to my research at multiple sites. THIS is the core problem that needs to be addressed. Articles also say that states don't have a reliable unified autmated system to track registration/insurance/license information.

1. So...the core colution would be a system that would accurately track this info on a timely basis.

Not a perfect solution, if you consider the number of people without licenses and/or driving unregistered vehicles, but it WOULD cut down on problems with the real issue: many accidents are unavoidable, so everybody driving needs a license and adequate coverage, as the first step.

A record of a car and a license, but no record of insurance gets you a visit, and then a boot on your car until it's cleared up.

2. Next, as licenses expire, public safety contacts these people to find out if they've moved or have stopped driving...especially IF there's still a car registered in their name. No contact with reasonable proof gets a visit from an official and a boot on the car until it's cleared up.

3. Same with expiration of tags w/ no record of sales/salvage/transfer/move. Need to follow up with contact. Otherwise...you guessed it...a visit and a boot on your car.


Basically, the only way to address real safety issues is to physically keep the people who don't meet the mandatory requirements for driving OFF the road BEFORE something happens.

...and I'm all for ticketing people with no seatbelts, but only if it's noticed when they're pulled over for a moving violation...and then the fine is a financially-heavy one.

Where to put the money? Clean, safe, relaible, and frequent public transportation. (I WISH that I could take public transportation to and from work. I did in college, and it was a great way to catch up on my reading/homeowrk, and sometimes...a nap.)
 
I'm all for freeing up cops from nonsense administrivia on the road.

And much as I hate mandatory insurance, I'll be damned if I'm the only one paying it!
 
Funny thing about seat belts - they are an essential safety device, that we're all taught we should have to wear to the point they punish us with fines for not doing so. YET, our school buses don't have them. A recent study was even done in my area where the school system thought about seat belts on school buses, then determined the cost would be too high (somehow they think it'd cost $35k per bus to add them).

Now, if they are really so important that we should all wear them all the time or be punished (and now they want traffic cameras to see us not wearing them) how is it that they can determine they are too expensive for an entire bus full of kids to wear them? Even stronger than that the school system actually tried to defend NOT having seat belts by bringing out results of studies that say seat belts can cause internal, neck, and back injuries as reasons to not have them on school buses.

The same government tells you your kids are fine without seat belts on buses (and then talks about safety studies showing seat belts are unsafe), and then tells you if they want you to pay up if your kid doesn't have a seat belt in your vehicle (and then points to studies saying the benefits far outweigh any risks of seat belts).
 
I would say the large size of the bus would change the dynamics of a seat belt vs a normal passenger vehicle, but that's just pulling an idea out of my...posterior.

And as for this camera, it's all about making money. A few years back I read an article that because red light cameras reduced the # of people running red lights, and thus reducing revenue, cities were considering removing them. Yes, thats right. Because people were driving more safely and not running red lights, they were going to remove the cameras so they could make more money. Sick.
 
You can release these in the states, only when you increase the speed-limit by 20mph. 10 to put the speed limit back to within reason and another 10 so we have a reasonable hardline to avoid since these camera's will probably be hitting right at the limit.

I've actually seen speed limits reduced in the various areas I've traveled lately despite a lack of construction or road changes of any sort. I guess its an easy way to generate revenue and prolong the time it takes to move about.

A 55mph speed limit on a 4-5 lane highway (8-10 across the barrier/median) that is flat and devoid of heavy traffic or road construction is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Here in Vegas they have 6 lane (3 each way) roads that get as low as 35 mph. The entire road is usually 45 mph, except for one stretch (not a school zone) of about a mile it drops to 35 mph. You'll see about 4 motorcycle cops sitting there at night right at the first 35mph sign. Obviously done as a speed trap. 45 in a 35 for the win!
 
Uninsured drivers are the worst scum of the road... So,... I guess I approve of this.
Click to expand...

I dunno. The fact insurance is required would make one think it would be cheaper (see Obama's healthcare plan), but in actuality, it's not. I have a clean driving record, I'm 26 and I've been quoted as much as $4000 per year to insure a '99 Mustang GT. I have insurance, but I can see why some people would go without.
 
Here in Missouri, within the recent year the cameras at intersections were made illegal in some verdict on the basis of "facing your accuser", and so all the cameras here got turned off as a result of the verdict. :p
 
Spending money on surveillance to catch people without insurance. The only real need for insurance is to pay for damages caused from an accident. How about we stop wasting money on both and use it for better driver education and accident safety? People need to start paying more attention to driving and less on everything else while behind the wheel. Insurance is a crutch for those that should not be driving.
 
Spidey329 said:
I've been quoted as much as $4000 per year to insure a '99 Mustang GT. I have insurance, but I can see why some people would go without.
Click to expand...

Buy a car that teenagers, speeders, thieves or bad drivers like, and your insurance is going to be high.

Buy a car that soccer moms or commuters drive, and your insurance will be cheap. Boring, but cheap.
 
The ultimate Revenue-Generation Machine for states.
 
This looks like another prime candidate for a tire/gasoline BBQ like they do to the road cameras in the UK. :D I wonder how well a £50,000 setup like that will last when lit up with a tire filled with gas?
 
Sorry to say this but this is why the UK is a shit country and why it is a declining power and the reason why the US is number one.

I live in UK unfortunately, but went to Philly last month for a few weeks. My cousin did not even know what a speed camera is!

You guys think Obama is bad but he is a saint compared to Europe and their Govts telling you what to do!

Seriously God Bless the USA and fuck the UK. Anyone want my useless British passport?

My apologies in advance to any Americans of British ancestry.
 
tejas said:
My apologies in advance to any Americans of British ancestry.
Click to expand...

Why do you think we left? :D

That's a lot of what has made this country. People who got fed up at home and wanted to try for something better.

The problem is where do we go once we get fed up?
 
Decibel said:
Why do you think we left? :D

That's a lot of what has made this country. People who got fed up at home and wanted to try for something better.

The problem is where do we go once we get fed up?
Click to expand...

All that's left at this point is Antarctica
 
The first time an illegal immigrant gets pulled over and fined, the ACLU will step in and find some excuse to sue the pants off any police department that uses those cameras.

I live in Austin Texas. 16 years ago I was smashed into by an illegal immigrant who then recieved his 3rd DWI in 4 years. He had no insurance, no drivers license and no papers. I'm sure he spent a bit of time in jail, but because Austin is a sancuary city, I'm sure he's still here because Austin won't turn anyone into the immigration services for deportation. Sooner or later he'll drink, drive and kill or maim someone and somehow it won't be "the city's" fault.

I can think of a lot of good uses for a camera system like this if they actually implemented and enforced the rule in a 'responsible' manor. Using it as just a revenue source isn't a 'responsible' use.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top