11-01-2016, 10:40 AM
|
#81
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acey
Except it doesn't. Best way in practice is to pull people over and give them demerits, not send them tickets in the mail 3 weeks after the fact. That does nothing.
|
If getting tickets in the mail means nothing, why do people who get them complain so much about photo radar?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
|
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to CliffFletcher For This Useful Post:
|
|
11-01-2016, 10:44 AM
|
#82
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CliffFletcher
If getting tickets in the mail means nothing, why do people who get them complain so much about photo radar?
|
It does nothing to change behaviour or increase safety. Surprisingly, the main group isn't just a bunch of speed demons - they're advocating for more real police enforcement with demerits as opposed to mobile radar. That's how you change behaviour. The complaint is how and where radar is done, not the fact that they're doing it.
|
|
|
11-01-2016, 10:47 AM
|
#83
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Income Tax Central
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CliffFletcher
If getting tickets in the mail means nothing, why do people who get them complain so much about photo radar?
|
They complain and then they pay them and vow to pay more attention next time.
Thats all that happens. No changes in behaviour other than committing more resources to watching out for Photo-Radar than paying attention to the road.
__________________
The Beatings Shall Continue Until Morale Improves!
This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.
If you are flammable and have legs, you are never blocking a Fire Exit. - Mitch Hedberg
|
|
|
11-01-2016, 11:03 AM
|
#84
|
Lifetime Suspension
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Locke
That argument is hilariously naive.
|
And extremely insulting. The police service actually wants us to believe photo radar is there to improve safety.
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to zamler For This Useful Post:
|
|
11-01-2016, 11:15 AM
|
#85
|
First Line Centre
|
I'm guilty of looking for the camera boxes as I approach an interection, which probably isn't the safest thing in the world. And its not that I plan to run a light, but I want to know if I need to be ready to jam on the brakes or slow down in case its a radar light as well.
|
|
|
11-01-2016, 11:24 AM
|
#86
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Locke
They complain and then they pay them and vow to pay more attention next time.
Thats all that happens. No changes in behaviour other than committing more resources to watching out for Photo-Radar than paying attention to the road.
|
So you'd be in favour of the approach used in the UK, where devices like dummy photo boxes and average speed sensors mean you could be caught speeding pretty much any time? They make it pointless to be watching out for radar, since it could be anywhere. They've proven very effective at reducing collisions and traffic fatalities.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
|
Last edited by CliffFletcher; 11-01-2016 at 11:28 AM.
|
|
|
11-01-2016, 11:32 AM
|
#87
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Income Tax Central
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CliffFletcher
So you'd be in favour of the approach used in the UK, where devices like dummy photo boxes and average speed sensors mean you could be caught speeding pretty much any time? They make it pointless to be watching out for radar, since it could be anywhere. They've proven very effective at reducing collisions and traffic fatalities.
|
Its better than the current system and probably cheaper.
So if it were one or the other then I'd probably choose the camera boxes, but in a huge place like Canada that presents its own practical challenges.
__________________
The Beatings Shall Continue Until Morale Improves!
This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.
If you are flammable and have legs, you are never blocking a Fire Exit. - Mitch Hedberg
|
|
|
11-01-2016, 11:51 AM
|
#88
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Locke
If the purpose is behaviour modification then why be sneaky about it? There should be a 10 foot tall camera with a big sign that says: "SPEED BY HERE AND YOU'LL GET A TICKET!"
|
Isn't that what the speed limit sign is for? If they posted a sign the same effect would happen, everyone would just slow down at that sign.
|
|
|
11-01-2016, 12:01 PM
|
#89
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Income Tax Central
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by iggy_oi
Isn't that what the speed limit sign is for? If they posted a sign the same effect would happen, everyone would just slow down at that sign.
|
Thats the desired effect.
You want people to go a certain speed in this certain area, with just the limit sign theres no stick so people will not always vigilantly adhere to the desired behaviour.
What you dont want is having people's head on a swivel looking out for photo radar rather than paying attention to where they're going and what they're doing because this location is presumably more dangerous than most.
So if you're into Safety and Behviour modification then a static camera will do the trick but it wont make you much money because everyone would know its always there.
__________________
The Beatings Shall Continue Until Morale Improves!
This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.
If you are flammable and have legs, you are never blocking a Fire Exit. - Mitch Hedberg
|
|
|
11-01-2016, 12:10 PM
|
#90
|
Retired
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CliffFletcher
So you'd be in favour of the approach used in the UK, where devices like dummy photo boxes and average speed sensors mean you could be caught speeding pretty much any time? They make it pointless to be watching out for radar, since it could be anywhere. They've proven very effective at reducing collisions and traffic fatalities.
|
Perhaps if we start adjusting roads to the speeds they are calculated for, then yes, that is something we can start discussing.
There is no excuse for Stoney Trail to slow down to 80kms per hour in sections or parts of crowchild dropping to 50 in the "construction zone", aside from the cops putting photoradar at those locations. Those speed limits do nothing to improve road safety.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to CaramonLS For This Useful Post:
|
|
11-01-2016, 12:51 PM
|
#91
|
Franchise Player
|
The way it's currently enforced is cash grabby.
I'm much more of a fan of the red light enforcement. They looked at statistics of high collision areas, posted very obvious camera structures, and reviewed the results showing decreased speed and collisions through these intersections.
On the speed side they should follow the same methodology. Identify locations with high speed related collisions, put in cameras and announce it, review accident statistics. There also should be a radius at speed changes where they cannot place cameras.
|
|
|
11-01-2016, 01:22 PM
|
#92
|
First Line Centre
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Deep South
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaramonLS
Perhaps if we start adjusting roads to the speeds they are calculated for, then yes, that is something we can start discussing.
There is no excuse for Stoney Trail to slow down to 80kms per hour in sections or parts of crowchild dropping to 50 in the "construction zone", aside from the cops putting photoradar at those locations. Those speed limits do nothing to improve road safety.
|
Speaking of which - why is the limit down to 50 there still? The overpass is now complete and people are using it, and I don't see any more workers there either.
__________________
Much like a sports ticker, you may feel obligated to read this
|
|
|
11-01-2016, 02:04 PM
|
#93
|
Lifetime Suspension
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The Void between Darkness and Light
|
Police Forces also need to justify their budgets which is a big reason for deploying manpower into these situations.
They know they won't get the dollars they want without taxing the population with tickets and citations so they go about it in other means.
I wonder if the average Albertan puts 2 and 2 together on these sorts of things when reflecting on the effectiveness of the flat tax.
These kind of things get clawed back in all sorts of different ways that aren't explicitly labelled a 'tax'. The BC government does this with MSP premiums, which are paid into general revenue and account for roughly the same amount of income for the province as corporate taxes. They get to crow about lowering taxes without having to mention increasing MSP premiums year on year.
|
|
|
11-01-2016, 06:28 PM
|
#94
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Locke
Thats the desired effect.
You want people to go a certain speed in this certain area, with just the limit sign theres no stick so people will not always vigilantly adhere to the desired behaviour.
What you dont want is having people's head on a swivel looking out for photo radar rather than paying attention to where they're going and what they're doing because this location is presumably more dangerous than most.
So if you're into Safety and Behviour modification then a static camera will do the trick but it wont make you much money because everyone would know its always there.
|
To be honest, the best approach would be to simply have hidden speed trap cameras, if no one knew where they were they would just drive the limit instead of keeping their head on a swivel.
Edit: I'm pretty sure there is some law against them being hidden but I'm not sure what it is exactly
|
|
|
11-01-2016, 06:45 PM
|
#95
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by iggy_oi
I'm pretty sure there is some law against them being hidden but I'm not sure what it is exactly
|
In Edmonton and Lethbridge... no chill.
A few years back a dude in Lethbridge shot at one with a shotgun as he drove by.
Quote:
CALGARY – A Lethbridge man charged with shooting a gun at a portable photo radar box has pleaded guilty.
In mid-February, police say 42-year-old Adolph Reimer fired several shots, one of which hit the box while another hit a passing truck, barely missing a 12-year-old boy riding inside. The bullets caused approximately $50,000 in damages.
|
http://globalnews.ca/news/150376/let...oto-radar-box/
|
|
|
11-01-2016, 08:01 PM
|
#96
|
Celebrated Square Root Day
|
I guess not so much a thread about the Calgary Police Service anymore.
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to jayswin For This Useful Post:
|
|
11-01-2016, 08:06 PM
|
#97
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash Walken
Police Forces also need to justify their budgets which is a big reason for deploying manpower into these situations.
They know they won't get the dollars they want without taxing the population with tickets and citations so they go about it in other means.
I wonder if the average Albertan puts 2 and 2 together on these sorts of things when reflecting on the effectiveness of the flat tax.
These kind of things get clawed back in all sorts of different ways that aren't explicitly labelled a 'tax'. The BC government does this with MSP premiums, which are paid into general revenue and account for roughly the same amount of income for the province as corporate taxes. They get to crow about lowering taxes without having to mention increasing MSP premiums year on year.
|
The Police service does not get the money from tickets. It goes into general city revenues. The police budget is determined independant of the amount of ticket revenue brought in.
|
|
|
11-01-2016, 08:08 PM
|
#98
|
Franchise Player
|
A long time ago, but one of the things I remember about a TV show called Seaquest was how the future would have automated popup turrets that would catch people speeding. Would immediately message the dashboard of the driver of the car that they were speeding and that $200 had been deducted out of their bank account (and demerits too perhaps?)
Honestly, I don't see why we can't do this today.
|
|
|
11-02-2016, 09:09 AM
|
#99
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Sylvan Lake
|
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...ence-1.3831238
Quote:
"You're talking about a culture of policing that is decades and decades old, and we're redirecting the ship but it doesn't happen overnight," Chief Roger Chaffin said during a news conference Tuesday.
"There's work to be done, but these things are happening."
|
...
__________________
Captain James P. DeCOSTE, CD, 18 Sep 1993
Corporal Jean-Marc H. BECHARD, 6 Aug 1993
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sliver
Just ignore me...I'm in a mood today.
|
|
|
|
11-02-2016, 09:16 AM
|
#100
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Weitz
|
Best part of this article.
Quote:
Brand, who was charged in 2012, has been relieved of duty, but with pay.
|
Wow. He's been getting paid for the last 4 years to not work while being 'investigated'.
4 years.
He also had a firearm stolen from his vehicle back in 2006.
Quote:
n January 2006, police charged Brand with two Criminal Code offences dealing with unsafe storage, handling and transportation of a firearm. The officer’s loaded service pistol was stolen from his car while he attended the Calgary Folk Music Festival the summer before.
He admitted to failing to comply with regulations and received an absolute discharge. He does not have a criminal record.
|
http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/ca...954/story.html
Last edited by Huntingwhale; 11-02-2016 at 09:20 AM.
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:38 AM.
|
|