The Department of Public Safety has announced that it will not renew its contract for the photo enforcement cameras, and they will be turned off in July. What do you think about this decision?
AAA Cares About...
| AZLegislation.com is sponsored by AAA Arizona. |  |
| View AAA's perspective on vital transportation bills. | |
Comments
Bad idea. Lower speeds saves lives. Due to budget constraints, we can't adequately patrol our highways to ticket those drivers who are endangering innocent people. I find it interesting that the same legislators who want to make it a state crime for people to be in our state illegally, want to give a pass to those who break state laws on our highways.
When taking my son to the Sky Harbor Airport to return to his US Army base in South Korea (his fourth overseas assignment-deployment), I was driving South on I-17. I had cruise control set at 65, thinking that was the speed. It was approx 3:00 AM in early morning and no traffic that Thursday, July 8, 2010. As a former member of the Arizona National Guard (I am a retired Staff Sergeant), I have driven that I-17 to Guard drills for 37 years and always drove it at that speed, even having DPS and Phoenix Police pass me at 65 MPH. I have been out of the National Guard for 5 years, and this was my second time on the I17 in the last five years. The 1st time was Sunday, April 11, 2010 when I traveled to ASU to perform in a recital. As I had done for 37 years going to Guard drills down the I-17, I set cruise on 65 and was NOT flashed. As a matter of fact, a DPS cruiser passed me. So when taking my son to Sky Harbor, we were buckled in and I was driving 65, not realizing I was speeding and I got "flashed" twice! I have never been in a traffic accident that was my fault, and have not had a traffic ticket in about 30 years. I don't deliberately speed. I didn't slow down after the 1st flash because I wasn't aware I was speeding. I have never been "flashed" before and it didn't even dawn on me that I had triggered the camera! (I thought it was a truck with high beams going North on I-17). It was not my intent to break any law, but travel at a speed that was what I remembered, and what I considered safe, wise, and prudent (there was no traffic at all at 3:00 AM). Now I have two citations to pay at $201.50 each and points on my formerly excellent driving record.
Cameras. Good..Bad or indifferent. There are two undeniable facts present. 1) Big Brother.. regardless of what they tell you about not recording unless triggered. 2) Police presence prevents crime. cameras only report crime. there would be less gang activity, less mahem, rapes and other crimes if the police were visible, in uniform and in marked vehicles.
Keep the Radar!!
My wife and I just completed an 8000 mile trip through 20 states from Tucson to New York and all inbetween. We found an appalling disregard for traffic saftey almost universally and especially at intersections. Cutting off right of way. Left turns in front of oncoming traffic, jumping the light,and others too numerous to mention, but all generated with a "I can get away with this attitude". I don't think we want this for Arizona where at present courtesey somewhat rules.
A little speed between lights will always be there, but the most dangerous place on the street is at intersections, where if we stop montoring will become battle zones.
I thought we had the right to face our acusers in court. How do we face a computer? It's not like when someone commits a theft or some other crime caught on video that we can see with our own two eyes. A computer is telling the police we commited a crime. With out that computer they would not know. How do we face that computer in court? We have that right. I think it is all about making money for the state not about making the roads safer. Putting more police on the roads would make them safer in many ways. In short I dont like them they are also unconstitutional. Ban them all across the state not just on the highways.
I fell victim to the photo radar system last week. It is not right that some of the cameras are set up in places like mile post 205 on I17 where the speed limit quickly drops from 65 to 55 and a motorist unfamiliar with the territory (and, by-the-way unable to even see the speed limit signs due to dense traffic and driving with the flow of traffic in the HOV lane).
Yes, I was driving and Yes, I was traveling at 65 mph because the last observed speed limit was 65 mph. If we are going to penalize drivers for not observing fluctuations in the speed limit at least develop signage on BOTH sides of the road or some form of notification system to alert you to your violation.
My guess is that the revenue produced at this location alone has netted some sizeable $. It almost feels like entrapment when your intentions are to observe the law --if you could only know or guess what the limits were to do that.
Glad these things are going away until the inconsistencies/inequities can be ironed out.
It is a shame we need photo radar, but since there are so many people out there who believe that they are above the law, that the law doesn't apply to them, that their time is more important than others' safety, that are too stupid to read speed limit signs (yet are still driving, scary thought) - or whatever other excuse they use to "justify" speeding - I am 100% in favor of it! It has been proven to reduce accidents by reducing speeding (those who are informed know that cars are kept in better control at "lower" speeds, especially when there are hundreds of cars around them, also speeding and/or exhibiting poor driving skills!). So what if it is a money maker - that's an added benefit of improving safety. Or, give folks a choice, big fine or jail time (like a week - there's a week with one less speeder on the road!). You break the law, you pay the consequence. It's that simple. If everyone traveled the speed limit, the "congestion at the radar location" argument goes away, the "danger of everyone speeding suddenly slams on their brakes" argument goes away, the "cash cow" argument goes away - and maybe your life or the life of your parent or child will be saved in the process. Why can't we just all obey the law?
Yes, that includes drinking and driving too.
I am relieved. I am not a speeder by nature, but the cameras lead to slowing all lanes of traffic (including the passing lane) and I spend more time looking at my speedometer than at the road!
Now they should refund the money to the people who had thier rights violated by these Government surveillance cameras. Ask the monkey man how he feels about this.
Here is another argument for those who insist that photo radar is intended for safety reasons, rather than to bring in revenue. The city of Seattle just voted for a boycott of doing any business with Arizona companies over our immigration law. But they made an exception to their "civil rights" stance to keep doing business with the Scottsdale-based company that provides them with their photo radar cameras. Is that because of their deep concern for the safety of their citizens or because of their love for animals and not wanting to kill their cash COW? Moo. I smell something stinky.
It seems like those who rejoiced at the demise of the freeway speed cameras are the same people who think they have the privilege of driving as fast as they please, in spite of the Laws of the State of Arizona. The days of Arizona's "reasonable and prudent" speed limit are ancient history. I predict a sizable increase in highway fatalities in the ensuing months, thanks to the removal of these cameras. Once again the eastern most north-south portion of Loop 101will become a racetrack for pimply faced 16 year olds driving their mommies' Beemers at speeds in excess of 90mph. There won't be sufficient DPS officers to handle the volume.
This was a stupid move on the part of the head of DPS.
Terrible idea.......people know the law and if they do not want to obey they need to pay. Cruise control is in the vehicle to use and furthermore money is saved on fuel keeping within the speed limit and consistent. Keep in mind, speeding causes accidents, accidents cause lifetime injuries and deaths, accidents cause insurance rates to increase and tempers to rise. Use of cameras gives police time to take care of crimes, drugs, smugglers, etc.
Umm police get most of the drugs off the steets by pulling over cars on the highway for infractions like speeding. Also that is how they find many of the human smugglers as well. They do not often catch the smugglers when they raid houses. If there is less police on the roads they will become a haven for drug, human smugglers whom often use stolen cars and are not worried about getting a ticket in the mail. Common sense would tell you we need the police on the highways pulling people over for infractions and implimenting their instincts on the shady people they pull over.
I have been reading the posts here and people say "do the speed limit and you have nothing to worry about." Here is a situation that they can not answer , just come up with a bull $hit excuse. Redlight camera: A person talking on the phone or messin with the radio etc... runs a red light, the camera goes flash. He hits another car NOW you show me where that flash ACTUALLY REMOVED the physical threat??? They dont the fact is the threat still remains on the road unless a 50 cal pops outta the ground or a spike strip pops up the cameras do nothing in saving lives. They do not remove drunk drivers, do not catch people who tailgate, etc... yet you say they save lives. I have 15 to 20 links in my favs. to studies from Groups who do not have a vested financial interest in such systems. The only groups that support cameras are those who have money at stake, like ATS who is owned by you guessed it Goldman Sachs. Or Redflex who gets money from the insurance industry who by the way supports the cameras cause when you get one your premiums go up. Universties and State Transportation departments , City traffic engineers have released reports showing nothing BUT accident and property costs increase at any intersection where cameras are located. So all in all its always been about, will be about and continue to be driven by money. PRIME EXAMPLE- LAst year DPS got 100 million dollars to cover operational costs from ADOT. With ADOT being 100 mill. short they reduced the number of snowplows on the highways, closed MVD offices etc... NOW with the cameras coming down and DPS jumped on the Prop 100 band wagon saying they need money. Hmm makes you wonder where they spent that 100 million? How much of that went to redflex? If i remember correctly DPS said with out the money they would have to lay-off 350 people. 250 rank and file officers and 100 support personel. So why is it we have to pay for the DPS managements inability to manage like the rest of us do. With DPS loosing their contract they are now forced to operate like the rest of us. So the cameras dont save lives and its been proven by NOTEABLE Universities, Independent investigation groups and state DOT offices. Just thought i would put that out there to see who gets all heated about "they save lives" "do the speed limit" arguements.
I suspect that most of the people who support the speed cameras are Democrats and that most of the ones opposed to them are Republicans. Obviously the speed cameras were not very popular with the people who have to frequent the Freeways, especially the cameras that are used for sections of the freeway posted at 55. The so called "Double Nickle" was a product of Jimmy Carter's administration. In the off peak hours, Arizona 51 has 4 lanes where the 55 mph speed limit starts at Glendale heading south. This speed limit should probably be 60 or perhaps even 65, and then you would have no speeders at that point. If we all drove at 45, then the freeways would be ever safer yet!!!! Don't think that anyone wants to go down to that speed limit. All freeway speed limits should be 65 mph unless there is a definite reason that any section should be rated lower and there should be plans put in action to be able to raise the speed limit to 65 after it is redesigned. It would be interesting to see a report that showed the amount of tickets issued at each camera and exactly where they are.
Can't wait to see these cameras turned off!!! I've received three photo radar tickets since last July - all of them for just 1 mile over the 10 mile set speed limit. I was driving with my kids, not in any way reckless, not weaving in and out of traffic, just cruising along the freeway and not paying close enough attention to my speed (apparently). People cannot say that these aren't cash cows, well, intended cash cows anyway. One of my tickets was on the I-17. I was going 66mph, thinking the speed limit was 65 and being prepared for photo radar. Imagine my surprise when a camera flashed at me, oops!-speed limit was 55. This was on a straight part of the freeway! Just around the corner, heading into downtown, the speed limit goes back up to 65. Can we say speed trap? How does a camera determine that 65 is a reasonable and prudent speed, but 66 is not? Nope, I am not a fan of cameras and big brother. Good riddance, photo radar! On the freeways, anyway.
Yes, you do have to slam them on when you approach them, even
if you are going the speed limit. Because, every law abiding
citizen in front of you, that wouldn't dream of getting a ticket
has just slammed them on and are now doing 40 mph.
Good riddence. You don't need your mama around to tell
you to clean your room. You don't need these cash cows.
Given the thinking of all these folks that say keep'em, or add more, or increase the fines... What if cameras were installed in other parts of your life to keep you from doing illegal acts?
Tell me you never jaywalk....
How about if they used cameras on the roads to give you a ticket for obstructing traffic when you are clueless about blocking the regular flow of traffic because you are going the same speed as the cars next to you?
You don't think that there are things you do on the road that can contribute to accidents?
Speed cameras are a huge technical jump forward in enforcing laws that were designed for 'old school' compliance.
I am a retired highway designer. There is an obligation for all of us to obey laws, to ensure the safety of all our citizens. And when a person does not obey these laws they should be held accountable. Jail or fine.
Semi-good news. The legislatures would outlaw all photo radar in the state if they were truly interested in the well being of the citizens. The original speed laws stated that we must drive a safe and prudent speed because there was no speed that could be posted that would be safe in all conditions. The only legislatures that support photo radar are those that are interested in revenue generation to fund the pork projects that have almost bankrupted the state.
Sorry, I disagree. I am sure there are some communities that look at the cameras as cash cows, however, I think the majority have the safety and welfare of citizens in mind. Maybe I am dreamin.....
I don't think they should be removed even thou my husband has been snapped twice. We are not suppose to speed. This is a deterrent. I try by best to stay within the speed limit by not going more than 5 miles more on the freeway only. On the streets I do the speed limit. I totally disagree with them stopping the Speed Cameras.
Sorry to see them go! AZ can't afford to police the highways with manpower so once again the complainers win. What's wrong with just slowing down??
I am amazed at the number of people complaining that drivers have to slam on their brakes when they approach a radar camera! There is no need to adjust your speed if you are not speeding!
Speed limits are set by trained engineers who calculate the safest maximum speed by studying the road condition, amount of traffic, number and spacing of on-off ramps, prevailing weather conditions, etc. Their objective is to obtain maximum safety without impeding travel.
The speed limit is set in order to control traffic in so as to maximize safety. Drivers who exceed the limit are automatically endangering themselves and others. If a driver cannot accept an official speed limit, he/she should never drive. Habitual speeders are a serious hazard and should have their drivers license revoked.
We jail people who threaten others with a weapon. A motor vehicle is a deadly weapon, and every driver should be aware of that and treat their vehicle as such.
I cannot summon one iota of sympathy for drivers who complain about radar cameras, and I cannot support any government official who supports those whiners.
Removing the radar cameras from Arizona highways is one of the stupidist decisions that the government of Arizona has made--and they have a long list of stupid acts in their history.
Paradise Valley pioneered the radar camera about 40 years ago. It enabled a small town with a few policemen to control the driving habits of thousands of motorists who crossed the town on their daily commutes.
Prescott Valley found their police force could not control the volume of speeders and redlight runners; radar cameras brought the situation under control and reduced the accident rate by 25 %.
The radar cameras on AZ Highway 101 brought under control the most flagrant and dangerous driving I've heard of: 120 miles per hour on a freeway across town.
We can never have enough police patrols to apprehend and punish enough speeders to make our highways safe, but radar cameras are on the job 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. And they seldom miss a lawbreaker.
When a patrolman stops and tickets a speeder, he takes his life in his hands. Sometimes the driver he stops is a dangerous criminal who will attack the officer; sometimes a careless driver will sideswipe the officer and injure or kill him. An officer can apprehend a speeder about once every 20 minutes; a camera can nab a speeder every 15 seconds.
Who complains about radar cameras? The very people who need to be controlled: speeders and redlight runners. Why would our governor remove the most successful policing equipment thus far invented, to satisfy habitual lawbreakers?
Our state has a gigantic problem, trying to train drivers to drive sensibly and safely, yet the state government is removing the best training device available.
Our state is also bankrupt, yet our state government is perfectly willing to end a revenue source that is a mere side effect of a safety program, amounting to millions of dollars annually.
Our state government needs to stop, and start over again.
I'm just curious... are you also for prohibition? Drunk driving kills how many people every day and there is certainly not enough law enforcement to control the situation. Therefore, the obvious answer based on your photo radar defense stated, is that we should make drinking illegal in order to control drunk driving. In fact, it would seem that most fatal accidents involving excessive speed or red-light running are caused when people's judgment is impaired somehow. I don't drink so it wouldn't bother me, per se, about making drinking illegal. However, I don't agree with taking away peoples' right to choose. Having cameras enforce the law is a slippery slope to nowhere good.
Oh, and they are ending it precisely because it is not generating revenue. People are not paying the tickets and it is costing too much to have people served and maintain the cameras. If they were making money off of them, you better believe they wouldn't be turning them off.
keep the speed cameras, but remove the warning signs and make it a full traffic violation with points against your license, lets get the unsafe drivers off the roads if you won't can't obey the traffic laws, you shoul not be allowed to drive.
This is good news. I don't mind the mobile cameras on the sides of the freeways, but every time I travel through Phoenix I see car accidents on the 101. Last time the family and I were driving to the Grand Canyon we just missed a fatal accident in the area of the cameras on the 101 again. :( This is a good thing. Put the cops back on the street.
Anyone who thinks that people who travel the same route daily will be caught speeding should think again. Everyone knows where the cameras are and they slow down for that interval only. The poor guy who doesn't travel that way often and gets caught speeding...is only keeping the speed that everyone else was doing before they got to the cameras. The sudden slowing does cause congestion and other problems. The flashing of the lights as the cameras do their work is enough to scare anyone half to death whether they were speeding or not. Good riddance!
Super!
The sooner the better - take them down!
They cause much more congestion than before they were put into service. As long as people blend and go with the flow, things are much safer than people hitting the brakes when they see a camera. This only causes chain reactions and impedes the efficient flow of traffic.