Photo radar is garbage!!!

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Hakan

The last remaining wolf pack in the Canadian rockies was wiped out because of ass hole speeders in Banff National Park. Those people should have gone to jail.

But yeah Hemi, I understand your time is pretty frickin valuable. Jerk.

I agree with your sentiment, but there are wolves still in the Canadian rockies. I've seem them and heard them on the Clearwater River, and I hear there are signs of them from Kananaskis south to the Montana border. There may not be many in the Bow Valley right now, but I would be surprised if there were none. Wolves have very large ranges.

http://www.canids.org/SPPACCTS/greywolf.htm

Alberta: Subspecies: occidentalis, griseoalbus, irremotus, nubilus. Status: fully viable, numbering approximately 4,000. Range occupied: 80%. Main prey: moose, caribou, sheep, deer, beaver, goat, elk, bison. Legal status: furbearer.

http://jasperwildlife.com/Wolf-Jasper-Wildlife.html

http://www.parkscanada.ca/

Not sure if this up-to-date:

Wolves only recently returned to the park after a long absence. There are now 35-40 wolves residing in the park in four different packs, including one pack that uses the Bow Valley between Banff and Lake Louise and is occasionally seen along the Bow Valley Parkway. Since the late 1980s, an intensive wolf study has been ongoing in Banff, and in recent years has spread out to include Kootenay and Yoho National Park wolf populations as well.

http://www.ucalgary.ca/uofc/departme...238-072-6.html

Wolf Mountains
A History of Wolves along the Great Divide
Karen R. Jones

[Shazam]

I saw a wolf once while on a range road just north of Country Hills Blvd near the new Walmart.

Gawd that thing scared the hell out of me. And I was in a car. And it was HUGE.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Shazam

I saw a wolf once while on a range road just north of Country Hills Blvd near the new Walmart.

Gawd that thing scared the hell out of me. And I was in a car. And it was HUGE.

Are you sure? Most likely that was a coyote. Or a big dog.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by fotze

You are not allowed to go over the limit when passing as well. Pretty simple, don't do it.

Pretty hard to do if you want to pass someone who is doing 90 on a 100. You would need a lot of space.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

You, and I think most people, are completley missing the point.

The point of photo radar isn't that you'll slow down when you see are radar van parked in front of a school zone. What good does that do? None, you might as well just park a cop car there.

The point of photo radar is that you never know when or where it is going to be, so you if you don't want to get a ticket you don't speed. Will it work in all areas, no, but in some it will (I know there are a few spots I no longer speed through because of photo radar).

It's not a matter of slowing people down for the day, it's about getting people to change their overall driving habits.

Photo radar removes the police officer from the equation. This is not a good thing. Community policing is the what we should be focusing on...this is the exact opposite. Not to mention a lot of criminals are found when pulling over speeders or traffic violators. Does photo radar do that???

Does photo radar pull over the ding bat who is flying 40 km over the speed limit who is drunk and 5 km down the road smashes into a minivan full of kids? Nope..

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by troutman

Are you sure? Most likely that was a coyote. Or a big dog.

Nope, not a coyote. There's tons of coyotes here, and they aren't nearly as big as the thing I saw.

I initially thought it was a big dog. But it was mostly grey with a white underside, and it had a big round face with a long snout.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Kryzsky

I'm glad a couple people mentioned this.

I can't believe that someone would complain about that stretch in Banff. I remember a few years ago that people were plowing over bears like crazy.

But hey, we got home 20 mins early!

Does that stretch of highway have anymore of a concentration of animals on it than the non park areas?

Just a question.

Also aren't there large fences on each side of the highway?

[jolinar of malkshor]

If your going to have photo radar they should be hundreds of them all around the city...that will slow people down. Photo radar is a cash cow...especially in smaller towns where everyone in the town knows where they are at and what they look like. The police are hoping to get the out of towners who don't know where they are and what they look like.

Also...put the bloody things in school zones and playground zones instead of high flow areas.

[Kool Keef]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Pretty hard to do if you want to pass someone who is doing 90 on a 100. You would need a lot of space.

My driving instructor in high school told the class that if you have to speed to pass someone, then you probably don't need to do it. I think that's some pretty sound advice.

[Jayems]

Originally Posted by Kool Keef

My driving instructor in high school told the class that if you have to speed to pass someone, then you probably don't need to do it. I think that's some pretty sound advice.

It's not like he can tell you to do 130 in the wrong lane over taking someone on the highway...

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Kool Keef

My driving instructor in high school told the class that if you have to speed to pass someone, then you probably don't need to do it. I think that's some pretty sound advice.

Ok...you follow old gramps down the highway for 100 km because you don't want to go over the speed limit. Mean while you have a row of 16 cars behind you.

[Hakan]

trout, I my bad. The Banff National Park pack is practically wiped out but not all the packs in the Canadian Rockies you are right. I was living in Canmore 3 years ago when the alpha female was hit by a speeder. That was the last straw and the pack is no more.

Larger point, don't speed in Banff National Park. It's a beautiful drive why would you want to rush right through it?

[Hakan]

Shawnski, grey wolves in this area aren't that big actually. They are more tall and lean. I would that you saw a malamute or a Mackenzie. Those are huge dogs. Way bigger than the wolves we have in the area.

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by Hakan

Shawnski, grey wolves in this area aren't that big actually. They are more tall and lean. I would that you saw a malamute or a Mackenzie. Those are huge dogs. Way bigger than the wolves we have in the area.

Did you mean me?

A dog would make more sense for sure. Man, if that was a wolf, I'm only going outside with my shotgun!

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Photo radar removes the police officer from the equation. This is not a good thing. Community policing is the what we should be focusing on...this is the exact opposite. Not to mention a lot of criminals are found when pulling over speeders or traffic violators. Does photo radar do that???

Does photo radar pull over the ding bat who is flying 40 km over the speed limit who is drunk and 5 km down the road smashes into a minivan full of kids? Nope..

Well... Its probably a lot cheaper to have the photo-radar out there than an actual officer. Plus it frees that officer up to go do important police work, rather than sit on the side of a highway for 8 hours.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

Well... Its probably a lot cheaper to have the photo-radar out there than an actual officer. Plus it frees that officer up to go do important police work, rather than sit on the side of a highway for 8 hours.

Just because it is cheaper...doesn't mean it is the right thing to do.

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Just because it is cheaper...doesn't mean it is the right thing to do.

Well... just because you want a cop on the side of the highway doesn't mean its the right thing to do. The reality is that police departments don't have the budget to do everything, so it makes sense to out-source this relatively low priority item (traffic monitoring) to the photo-radar. If it means more cops available to work on domestic abuse, murder, assault, theft, and other crimes, then I think that is the right thing to do.

Would it be best to have a real cop there issuing tickets? Sure. But sometimes reality and budgetary issues have to be taken into context. If they can use these to boost their existing manpower then it seems like the right thing to do.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

Well... just because you want a cop on the side of the highway doesn't mean its the right thing to do. The reality is that police departments don't have the budget to do everything, so it makes sense to out-source this relatively low priority item (traffic monitoring) to the photo-radar. If it means more cops available to work on domestic abuse, murder, assault, theft, and other crimes, then I think that is the right thing to do.

Would it be best to have a real cop there issuing tickets? Sure. But sometimes reality and budgetary issues have to be taken into context. If they can use these to boost their existing manpower then it seems like the right thing to do.

Look...I know all about the reasons why politicians want photo radar. If they took ALL the money collect from these things...they would be able to have more police officers on traffic patrol.

If you think having officers on traffic patrol is a low priority....then think again. Like I said before...a lot of criminals are caught over traffic stops. This is not a minor thing...nor is a minor thing to not want to take drunk drivers and speed bats off the highways....the ones that end up crashing into others.

Right now....they are using photo radar to suplement the traffic department as far as I am concerned.

All I am saying is they preach that they put photo radar up for public safety..yet they put it in a high flow area where it isn't in the best interest of the public...just the best interest of the city budget.

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Look...I know all about the reasons why politicians want photo radar. If they took ALL the money collect from these things...they would be able to have more police officers on traffic patrol.

If you think having officers on traffic patrol is a low priority....then think again. Like I said before...a lot of criminals are caught over traffic stops. This is not a minor thing...nor is a minor thing to not want to take drunk drivers and speed bats off the highways....the ones that end up crashing into others.

Well... I don't know if I said having them on patrol was low priority, I listed off many things I thought had higher priority. Should we have one less detective working on gang activity so we can have one more officer hiding behind a sign on Memorial? I'm sure there's a balance somewhere, and I think photo-radar probably helps put a few more cops in high-priority places.

Right now....they are using photo radar to suplement the traffic department as far as I am concerned.

All I am saying is they preach that they put photo radar up for public safety..yet they put it in a high flow area where it isn't in the best interest of the public...just the best interest of the city budget.

Thats a perfectly valid point. I'm not exactly sure what the breakdown is as to where all that money goes... hopefully the cops see a slice somewhere. Certainly they shouldn't be used purely for money generating machines.

At the same time though... you should probably just stick to going around the speed limit anyway... right? Its hard to argue that they're catching 'too many of us and putting the money into the city's pocket' when, really, we're the ones who are driving too fast. Some responsibility has to go to the speeders, if not all of it.

[Shazam]

I haven't been able to speed in a "high flow" area (whatever that is) in quite a while. I'm lucky to go 40 on Memorial these days near Kensington.

In fact, photo radar revenue has been falling for a while now, due to... Increased traffic.