• then_three_more@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Except they do make it safer and because there’s always tonnes of signs around them you don’t get the brake slamming. They act as a deterrent. Plus accidents at lower speeds are inherently less dangerous.

    Mobile speed traps, however, are a definite revenue boost.

      • then_three_more@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        2 months ago

        Maybe you guys ought to campaign to get the law changed. They used to be grey over here, but pressure was put on the government and how they’re all high vis yellow with loads of warnings before them.

        • thermal_shock@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          2 months ago

          how about just not ripping off people for doing 37 in a 35?

          If the penalty for a crime is a fine, then that law only exists for the lower class. if it were a percentage of your annual income, completely different story.

          • then_three_more@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            2 months ago

            Over here if you’re just a bit over they’ll normally put you on a speed awareness course for the first time getting caught.

            And I 100% agree on fines being income based. I think some of the Scandinavian countries have done that. I also think there needs to be some kind of catch for the super rich who work the system so they don’t really declare an income. Maybe if your net worth is x times the national average the fine is the greater of either a percentage of your net worth or income.

              • then_three_more@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                “hi boss I need to take a half day holiday on X date, I have to attend a speed awareness course”

                "Hey bob, can I swap a shift with you on X date, I’ll work your X Saturday. I’ve got to attend a speed awareness course "

                Or if you’re to chicken to tell the truth replace with dentist. Or just throw a sickie.

                It’s hardly rocket science.

                • MutilationWave@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  My work is not like that. Not all jobs do sick days. If I miss a day I delay a project and have to kill myself getting it back on track.

                  • then_three_more@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    2 months ago

                    Riiighhtt because you’re sooo busy and soooo important to your job that you can’t take a morning off. Speed awareness course is like 4 hours and you can do over video call. Get a fucking grip.

                    Or, if you are genuinely so important and busy you must be paid a bomb, so just pay the fine, take the points, pay the bit extra on insurance. Job done.

                    Or, here’s an idea. Don’t break the mother fucking law in the first place.

        • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          2 months ago

          I don’t want the law changed where I live, because these cameras are prohibited!

          Several states in the USA prohibit speed cameras and traffic light cameras, because a citizen must be able to face their accuser when accused of a crime. This is a great example of freedom in the USA, where we do not let machines automatically issue fines against human beings.

          • yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 months ago

            The government would be the accuser?? Just because a camera is used for evidence doesn’t make the camera THE accuser. Civilized nations have a way to fight the camera-issued fine, for example if the photo doesn’t show your face.

        • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          American driver entitlement is the purest, most potent form of entitlement.

          I don’t know if you knew this, but with regard to US Interstates, there’s a common saying that goes “nine you’re fine, ten you’re mine.” It’s essentially saying “under 15 kph you’re fine, but over 15 you’re busted for speeding”. That is, if you want to exceed the already quite high speed limit, you should feel safe doing up to 9 additional mph over that. And they’re actually not wrong; many police literally don’t enforce traffic law up to that point, or they only do so if they really have a bee in their bonnet. In large part this is because nearly every driver’s doing it, which is one of the main reasons why cameras are useful: it doesn’t have to stop your car, ask if you know why it pulled you over, listen to you try talking your way out of a ticket, be subject to human biases such as ethnicity, gender, and personality in determining whether to let you go with just a warning or not, and generate enough paperwork to disincentivize the enforcement of traffic law as written.

          Except in a school zone, if you get pulled over doing within 5 mph (8 kph) of the speed limit, it’s seen by drivers as a huge power trip and something you should gaslight the court into believing you didn’t do, and from 5–10 mph, it’s basically seen as getting unlucky. The state of speeding in the US is so dire that even asserting that speed limits should be enforced as marked is something that will get you shouted down.