Anybody else notice increased photo radar in Calgary??

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

If I'm going 68 in a 50, fine, I messed up. Either I didn't see the sign or wasn't paying attention to my speed. Ticket completely warranted.

When I get a ticket for going 41 in a 30, I'm pretty annoyed.

Both instances you are going 36% over the speed limit. I could understand being annoyed at 33 in a 30; or a a 30 zone enforced at 8:50 pm. But a full 10 km over the limit in a playground zone warrants a ticket.

[Northendzone]

^ help me see the difference between your two examples.

to me the second example is worse because if it is a 30 zone then the speed is reduced for a reason - like it is a playground or school or residential area where someone could pop out between parked cars

i am fine with photo radar, it is a tax that can be avioded, and i'd rather get that that be stopped by an officer and given a ticket

[HockeyIlliterate]

Originally Posted by Huntingwhale

My favourite argument against photo radar has got to be ''Photo radar doesn't make the roads safer. At least if they pull me over, then they can tell me what I did wrong and I learn from it!''. LOL such BS. I got a photo radar earlier this year and it was 100% my own fault. I don't need someone to pull me over to teach me a lesson.

It isn't BS, at least in the sense that getting pulled over allows for education and consequences to be given immediately.

Educating and/or punishing someone days or weeks after the event doesn't quite have the same effect---it is like getting told in your annual review in December that you did something wrong in February. It isn't particularly helpful and is clearly more of a "check the box" method of enforcement.

But, hey, if photo radar reduces the need to have actual police officers and thus reduces overall salary and pension obligations, then maybe the populace should be for it and it is the police (and their union) that should be against the program.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by HockeyIlliterate

It isn't BS, at least in the sense that getting pulled over allows for education and consequences to be given immediately.

Educating and/or punishing someone days or weeks after the event doesn't quite have the same effect---it is like getting told in your annual review in December that you did something wrong in February. It isn't particularly helpful and is clearly more of a "check the box" method of enforcement.

But, hey, if photo radar reduces the need to have actual police officers and thus reduces overall salary and pension obligations, then maybe the populace should be for it and it is the police (and their union) that should be against the program.

I think it allows for them to be out doing more important things in the community (like educating), instead of sitting in their car pointing a stick out the window making $80K a year.

[monkeyman]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

If I'm going 68 in a 50, fine, I messed up. Either I didn't see the sign or wasn't paying attention to my speed. Ticket completely warranted.

When I get a ticket for going 41 in a 30, I'm pretty annoyed. That doesn't have anything to do with public safety. It's just a cynical money grab, and that harms the relationship between the police and the public.

There's a reason the speed limit is 30 k/h in Playground/school zones. There are studies that show the seriousness of injuries are greatly reduced at those speeds. The same can't be said for 41 k/h. So yes, you should be fined for going 41 in a playground/school zone.

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by monkeyman

There's a reason the speed limit is 30 k/h in Playground/school zones. There are studies that show the seriousness of injuries are greatly reduced at those speeds. The same can't be said for 41 k/h. So yes, you should be fined for going 41 in a playground/school zone.

Unless the sun has been down for over an hour yet the playground zone is still in effect for some reason. 8:45pm on a -30 day in January... I think 41 is okay.

[monkeyman]

Originally Posted by btimbit

Unless the sun has been down for over an hour yet the playground zone is still in effect for some reason. 8:45pm on a -30 day in January... I think 41 is okay

If you're speaking statistically, that you're less likely to hit a child who might be playing outside, sure of course you're probably correct. Legally, it makes no difference and you should be prepared to pay a fine if you're caught doing so.

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by monkeyman

If you're speaking statistically, that you're less likely to hit a child who might be playing outside, sure of course you're probably correct. Legally, it makes no difference and you should be prepared to pay a fine if you're caught doing so.

Well yeah, that's the problem, the law in that case is silly. Simply saying 'Well, that's the law!" is a horrible arguement

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by ken0042

Both instances you are going 36% over the speed limit. I could understand being annoyed at 33 in a 30; or a a 30 zone enforced at 8:50 pm. But a full 10 km over the limit in a playground zone warrants a ticket.

This is a totally ridiculous meausre. As if percentage over the speed limit had anything to do with driving safety. Because reaction time is fixed and braking effectiveness is much higher at lower speeds, the actual speed of a collision where the car is going ~70kph before hitting the brakes is far, far higher than 40kph. The energy transmitted to, say, a pedestrian hit by the first speeding car is more or less absolutely death. At 41, given normal human reaction times and modern car safety equipment and brakes, far less chance of an accident at all - and if there is one, far less severity. It's just physics. Energy increases exponentially with speed; a car traveling at 40 miles an hour, for example, has four times the kinetic energy as a car traveling 20 miles an hour, not double. There are calculators you can find online if you want to see the difference.

But in any event, practically speaking, the speed limit itself is notional. Basically everyone drives 10km over the limit everwhere. No one gets a ticket for doing 40 in a 30 or 60 in a 50. I can immediately detect the difference in speed between 68 and 60 km/h. I cannot detect a difference between 41 and 40. An additional KM over for a moment or two is actually undetectable on a speedometer. Frankly, I'm not sure even the instruments they're using to justify their tickets can do so reliably. Even if it was something I could reasonably detect by looking down (if I had a digital speedometer in my car, for example), if I wanted to make sure I was never 11km over the speed limit, based on normal driving practices used by everyone everywhere, I would be taking my eyes off the road far too frequently and staring at my dashboard.

[EVERLAST]

I love seeing two photo radar traps a block from each other here in Falconridge on 68th.

People gun it in the 50 zone 2 blocks from the 60 sign and then get 2 tickets back to back.

Ha ha ha. Love watching the double flash and they haven’t slowed or noticed.

[monkeyman]

Originally Posted by btimbit

Well yeah, that's the problem, the law in that case is silly. Simply saying 'Well, that's the law!" is a horrible arguement

So you want them to amend the law to exclude winter days at 8:45 in -30 degree weather?

[fundmark19]

Originally Posted by btimbit

Unless the sun has been down for over an hour yet the playground zone is still in effect for some reason. 8:45pm on a -30 day in January... I think 41 is okay.

But does getting to your destination 30 seconds earlier really matter if it means you can reduce the risk of fatality by 40% percent vs going 50 km?

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by monkeyman

So you want them to amend the law to exclude winter days at 8:45 in -30 degree weather?

Just go back to normal playground zones

That's my only issue with photo radar. If I get busted speeding (and I haven't in years), that's on me and nobody else. But use them in safety sensitive areas, not construction zones that are wide open with nothing happening, or playground zones hours after any child has been anywhere near it. I have zero issues with photo radar, Just the way it's sometimes used.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by monkeyman

So you want them to amend the law to exclude winter days at 8:45 in -30 degree weather?

They should use digital signs that adjust to time of year and time of day. Even a simpler "school zone when lights flashing" sign like many other places use would make a lot more sense. They basically defaulted to the simplest way possible, covering the most time possible rather than using a common sense approach.

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by fundmark19

But does getting to your destination 30 seconds earlier really matter if it means you can reduce the risk of fatality by 40% percent vs going 50 km?

The risk of fatality is pretty low when nobody is around.

You're missing my point. I like photo radar. I like playground zones. I just don't like enforcement for the sake of enforcement

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by monkeyman

So you want them to amend the law to exclude winter days at 8:45 in -30 degree weather?

The previous rule up until a couple of years ago of "one hour after sunset" took care of this pretty well. However it was changed to satisfy the need for simplicity, as opposed to driver education. I have heard people say "how am I supposed to keep track of when sunset is?" When really the spirit of the law was simply- if it's pitch dark out, zone is over. Daylight or twilight- zone is in effect.

I also have an issue with playground zones being setup as traffic calming measures. Especially in new communities- the playgrounds could be designed to be off the main residential streets. Instead they prefer to use kids as "meat shields."

[Lubicon]

I have not noticed an increase but there is always a shift in locations. Wherever large road construction projects are you can be sure to find photo radar so as projects finish and new ones start so will photo radar locations. Newest ones the have popped up recently at NB Sarcee at the bottom of the hill where the new interchange is and the speed limit drops from 80 to 50 (stupid BTW). Also Crowchild where they are doing the construction.

NB Crowchild they have found a very effective sport to hide by the ski store as they can hide behind the fence where you cannot see them. Google street view below, they park near where the fire hydrant is.

https://www.google.ca/maps/@51.05556...7i13312!8i6656

[monkeyman]

Originally Posted by btimbit

Just go back to normal playground zones

That's my only issue with photo radar. If I get busted speeding (and I haven't in years), that's on me and nobody else. But use them in safety sensitive areas, not construction zones that are wide open with nothing happening, or playground zones hours after any child has been anywhere near it. I have zero issues with photo radar, Just the way it's sometimes used.

I understand. I prefer the old system too.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by Mass_nerder

I would love to see more of it on Glenmore right now around the Blackfoot/deerfoot area. I'm tired if trying to drive close to the 50km/hr construction speed limit and having every person behind me riding my ass and speeding past me and giving me the finger like I'm the jerk. Let these dummies start getting some double tickets.

So much this. I am not a fan of photo radar but in that area I'd love to see people get dinged.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Huntingwhale

My favourite argument against photo radar has got to be ''Photo radar doesn't make the roads safer. At least if they pull me over, then they can tell me what I did wrong and I learn from it!''. LOL such BS. I got a photo radar earlier this year and it was 100% my own fault. I don't need someone to pull me over to teach me a lesson.

Yeah, gotta chuckle at: "Photo radar is not a deterrent at all. I HATE IT SO MUCH!"