i think if you remove the cameras from intersections and place them in between intersections for speeding much like on the highway i think it can be safe. they seem to be anti-afety at intersections.
if they were looking for revenue they should not warn you a thousand times as you approach the camera. obviously the money will saturate if you never change the locations...
so IS THE PURPOSE TO INCREASE SAFETY OR REVENUE. i understand the need for both but it seems wrong to remove them due to cost...
I think you're right, the fact that they had warnings when you approach them, kindda made it look like they really were there for safety and not revenue, however, the fact that they had nothing to do with DMV record and nothing to do with the state as a whole (City based decisions) shows that their pupose was purely profit. Although they got the short end of the deal with that too. I think the (Australian) Company that installed em was taking a good chunck of the money from the tickets.
Either way, I'm glad they are coming down, I didn't like them at all!!
City of Scottsdale supposedly made a lot of money... Here's an article... http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/11/1114.asp
I'm happy. It is interesting that AZ does this different than the rest of the country. Everywhere else you don't get a warning when you approach a speed camera and they don't care if someone else is driving your car. If your car gets a ticket you have to pay it.
Now if we could just get rid of traffic police, they are a pain in the ass too.
awesome... i think...
ReplyDeleteisn't safer though?... as devil's advocate
i think if you remove the cameras from intersections and place them in between intersections for speeding much like on the highway i think it can be safe. they seem to be anti-afety at intersections.
if they were looking for revenue they should not warn you a thousand times as you approach the camera. obviously the money will saturate if you never change the locations...
so IS THE PURPOSE TO INCREASE SAFETY OR REVENUE. i understand the need for both but it seems wrong to remove them due to cost...
I think you're right, the fact that they had warnings when you approach them, kindda made it look like they really were there for safety and not revenue, however, the fact that they had nothing to do with DMV record and nothing to do with the state as a whole (City based decisions) shows that their pupose was purely profit. Although they got the short end of the deal with that too. I think the (Australian) Company that installed em was taking a good chunck of the money from the tickets.
ReplyDeleteEither way, I'm glad they are coming down, I didn't like them at all!!
City of Scottsdale supposedly made a lot of money... Here's an article...
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/11/1114.asp
I'm happy. It is interesting that AZ does this different than the rest of the country. Everywhere else you don't get a warning when you approach a speed camera and they don't care if someone else is driving your car. If your car gets a ticket you have to pay it.
ReplyDeleteNow if we could just get rid of traffic police, they are a pain in the ass too.