Author Topic: New Mexico Trans. Comm. bans red light cameras  (Read 4469 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline CrAz3D

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10184
    • View Profile
New Mexico Trans. Comm. bans red light cameras
« on: March 18, 2010, 03:57:26 pm »
http://www.lcsun-news.com/las_cruces-news/ci_14701559

Quote
At least one of Las Cruces' red-light enforcement cameras will have to come down (1:15 p.m.)
Sun-News report
Posted: 03/18/2010 01:11:54 PM MDT

LAS CRUCES - Citing growing public concerns about a lack of convincing proof that red-light enforcement cameras make streets and highways safer for motorists, the New Mexico State Transportation Commission unanimously approved a policy today that will allow the state's Department of Transportation to restrict or completely prohibit the use of red-light cameras and mobile enforcement vans on any state roadway, highway or federal interstate under its jurisdiction.
That could mean that a red-light camera at the intersection of south Valley Drive and Avenida de Mesilla will have to be removed. It also might mean that the camera at north Main Street and Solano Drive could come down, since the commission has also prohibited the use of cameras on U.S. Highway 70 in Las Cruces.
Department of Transportation Cabinet Secretary Gary GĂ­ron said red-light cameras on roads under the state's jurisdiction must come down within 60 days.
The enforcement cameras are also used in Albuquerque and Santa Fe. Fines for running red lights or speeding through intersections equipped with the cameras are capped by state law at $100.
Check back later, or read Friday's edition of the Las Cruces Sun-News for more details.

Brilliant news!!!  Considering there is no definitive proof that these cameras do any more than act as a revenue source, I'm glad to see them come down!

Offline Joe

  • B&
  • x86
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10319
  • In Soviet Russia, text read you!
    • View Profile
    • Github
Re: New Mexico Trans. Comm. bans red light cameras
« Reply #1 on: March 18, 2010, 06:27:39 pm »
Meanwhile, missing revenue comes from elsewhere. More at 6:30!
I'd personally do as Joe suggests

You might be right about that, Joe.


Offline Sidoh

  • x86
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17634
  • MHNATY ~~~~~
    • View Profile
    • sidoh
Re: New Mexico Trans. Comm. bans red light cameras
« Reply #2 on: March 18, 2010, 07:26:16 pm »
if they need a revenue source, they shouldn't try to pass it off as something that is 'improving public safety.'

Offline CrAz3D

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10184
    • View Profile
Re: New Mexico Trans. Comm. bans red light cameras
« Reply #3 on: March 19, 2010, 01:49:15 pm »
if they need a revenue source, they shouldn't try to pass it off as something that is 'improving public safety.'

In the more detailed article (CLICKY!), our mayor says JACK about "oh shit, the public is now less safe!" but complains about the state using its authority to demand removal of the cameras.  They're not even trying to play it off as public safety anymore.  I'm half tempted to schedule a meeting, call or write that jackass about this.  Fuck him.

Offline Joe

  • B&
  • x86
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10319
  • In Soviet Russia, text read you!
    • View Profile
    • Github
Re: New Mexico Trans. Comm. bans red light cameras
« Reply #4 on: March 21, 2010, 08:38:30 pm »
Back in drivers ed, we were taught that it's more important for safety to match everyone elses speed, not to go the speed limit. Police cars parked along the highway cause everyone to slow down, and everyone knows that it's nothing but a source of revenue.

I drive an hour each way to school, five days a week. From my experience, and I know from yours as well, you slow down as soon as you see a cop (if you're speeding or not), and then when you're a quarter mile past them, you resume doing 10 over. The net effect is that people obey the speed limit for a quarter to a half mile, the state gets more money, drivers are pissed off, and everyone's rapid change in speed makes the roads less safe.
I'd personally do as Joe suggests

You might be right about that, Joe.


Offline iago

  • Leader
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17914
  • Fnord.
    • View Profile
    • SkullSecurity
Re: New Mexico Trans. Comm. bans red light cameras
« Reply #5 on: March 21, 2010, 08:43:58 pm »
Back in drivers ed, we were taught that it's more important for safety to match everyone elses speed, not to go the speed limit. Police cars parked along the highway cause everyone to slow down, and everyone knows that it's nothing but a source of revenue.

I drive an hour each way to school, five days a week. From my experience, and I know from yours as well, you slow down as soon as you see a cop (if you're speeding or not), and then when you're a quarter mile past them, you resume doing 10 over. The net effect is that people obey the speed limit for a quarter to a half mile, the state gets more money, drivers are pissed off, and everyone's rapid change in speed makes the roads less safe.
[citation needed]

Offline deadly7

  • 42
  • x86
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6496
    • View Profile
Re: New Mexico Trans. Comm. bans red light cameras
« Reply #6 on: March 22, 2010, 10:48:41 pm »
Back in drivers ed, we were taught that it's more important for safety to match everyone elses speed, not to go the speed limit. Police cars parked along the highway cause everyone to slow down, and everyone knows that it's nothing but a source of revenue.

I drive an hour each way to school, five days a week. From my experience, and I know from yours as well, you slow down as soon as you see a cop (if you're speeding or not), and then when you're a quarter mile past them, you resume doing 10 over. The net effect is that people obey the speed limit for a quarter to a half mile, the state gets more money, drivers are pissed off, and everyone's rapid change in speed makes the roads less safe.
Of course. The number "55" or "65" or whatever it may be wasn't picked based on traffic patterns in certain regions, human response time, the engineering of the road (you know, that weird physics-y stuff that says if you turn too fast on an inclined curve you'll roll), etc etc. It's all a government ploy.

Oh wait.
[17:42:21.609] <Ergot> Kutsuju you're girlfrieds pussy must be a 403 error for you
 [17:42:25.585] <Ergot> FORBIDDEN

on IRC playing T&T++
<iago> He is unarmed
<Hitmen> he has no arms?!

on AIM with a drunk mythix:
(00:50:05) Mythix: Deadly
(00:50:11) Mythix: I'm going to fuck that red dot out of your head.
(00:50:15) Mythix: with my nine

Offline Joe

  • B&
  • x86
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10319
  • In Soviet Russia, text read you!
    • View Profile
    • Github
Re: New Mexico Trans. Comm. bans red light cameras
« Reply #7 on: March 23, 2010, 02:40:04 am »
People roll all the time on the interstate.

Also, leaving Wisconsin on 90/94 heading into Winona MN, traveling along side the Mississippi river and some mountain faces makes it safe to go 70, whereas a straight road in the middle of nowhere near Tomah WI requires you to stay at 65. Whatever engineer decided that should be stripped of his degree.

The traffic pattern I described states that higher speeds are safer. Here's another pattern for you: If you take a cup of ocean water and analyze it, you'll realize there's no whales. If you do this with a million water samples, you'll continually notice that there are no whales. There are no whales in the ocean.
I'd personally do as Joe suggests

You might be right about that, Joe.


Offline Joe

  • B&
  • x86
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10319
  • In Soviet Russia, text read you!
    • View Profile
    • Github
Re: New Mexico Trans. Comm. bans red light cameras
« Reply #8 on: March 23, 2010, 02:41:49 am »
Back in drivers ed, we were taught that it's more important for safety to match everyone elses speed, not to go the speed limit. Police cars parked along the highway cause everyone to slow down [..].

I drive an hour each way to school, five days a week. From my experience, [.. I] slow down as soon as you see a cop (if you're speeding or not), and then when you're a quarter mile past them, you resume doing 10 over. The net effect is that people obey the speed limit for a quarter to a half mile, [and] the state gets more money [..].
[citation needed]


Modified for NPOV.
I'd personally do as Joe suggests

You might be right about that, Joe.


Offline dark_drake

  • Mufasa was 10x the lion Simba was.
  • x86
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2440
  • Dun dun dun
    • View Profile
Re: New Mexico Trans. Comm. bans red light cameras
« Reply #9 on: March 23, 2010, 01:01:22 pm »
We don't have those cameras in Wyoming, so whenever I go to Fort Collins, I tend to get my picture taken. No ticket yet! :)
errr... something like that...

Offline CrAz3D

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10184
    • View Profile
Re: New Mexico Trans. Comm. bans red light cameras
« Reply #10 on: March 23, 2010, 04:44:32 pm »
Back in drivers ed, we were taught that it's more important for safety to match everyone elses speed, not to go the speed limit. Police cars parked along the highway cause everyone to slow down, and everyone knows that it's nothing but a source of revenue.

I drive an hour each way to school, five days a week. From my experience, and I know from yours as well, you slow down as soon as you see a cop (if you're speeding or not), and then when you're a quarter mile past them, you resume doing 10 over. The net effect is that people obey the speed limit for a quarter to a half mile, the state gets more money, drivers are pissed off, and everyone's rapid change in speed makes the roads less safe.
Of course. The number "55" or "65" or whatever it may be wasn't picked based on traffic patterns in certain regions, human response time, the engineering of the road (you know, that weird physics-y stuff that says if you turn too fast on an inclined curve you'll roll), etc etc. It's all a government ploy.

Oh wait.

And the govt never drops the speed limit right before the speed cameras hoping to increase fees.

Oh wait.

Offline Furious

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1833
  • I hate rabbits
    • View Profile
Re: New Mexico Trans. Comm. bans red light cameras
« Reply #11 on: March 25, 2010, 01:29:40 pm »
Back in drivers ed, we were taught that it's more important for safety to match everyone elses speed, not to go the speed limit. Police cars parked along the highway cause everyone to slow down, and everyone knows that it's nothing but a source of revenue.

I drive an hour each way to school, five days a week. From my experience, and I know from yours as well, you slow down as soon as you see a cop (if you're speeding or not), and then when you're a quarter mile past them, you resume doing 10 over. The net effect is that people obey the speed limit for a quarter to a half mile, the state gets more money, drivers are pissed off, and everyone's rapid change in speed makes the roads less safe.

Yeah, I don't.  If you can see them, they've already seen you.  And if they want to pull you over, they will.  I don't feel the need to slam on my brakes when I see a pretty police car.
Quote
[23:04:34] <deadly7[x86]> Newby[x86]
[23:04:35] <deadly7[x86]> YOU ARE AN EMO
[23:04:39] <Newby[x86]> shush it woman

Quote
[17:53:31] InsaneJoey[e2] was banned by x86 (GO EAT A BAG OF FUCK ASSHOLE (randomban)).

Quote from: Ergot
Put it this way Joe... you're on my Buddy List... if there's no one else on an you're the only one, I'd rather talk to myself.

Offline Joe

  • B&
  • x86
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10319
  • In Soviet Russia, text read you!
    • View Profile
    • Github
Re: New Mexico Trans. Comm. bans red light cameras
« Reply #12 on: March 25, 2010, 02:07:29 pm »
My experience is that they'll pull out if they can see that you're speeding, then radar you. For example, I was going like 85, slowed to 79 by the time I passed the cop, and then was awarded a ticket for 79. Maybe this guy was just nice, but I think he has a bit of trouble radaring your one car out of the whole swarm coming at you.
I'd personally do as Joe suggests

You might be right about that, Joe.