Washington Post: How driverless cars could kill the speeding ticket – and rob your city (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2016/01/22/how-driverless-cars-could-kill-the-speeding-ticket-and-rob-your-city/)
QuoteOne of the big benefits of driverless cars is that they aim to promote safety on the roads while reducing congestion at the same time. If cars are largely run by computers, talking to each other, they can travel closer together in a more coordinated fashion without fear of causing a fender-bender.
QuoteThose machines could obviously malfunction. But on the whole, driverless cars are known to behave more cautiously than their human operators. And by virtue of their, well, virtues, autonomous vehicles won't know how to speed, run red lights, park illegally or make other traffic violations that would result in a ticket. And that could drive some city budgets into a deep hole.
QuoteTake the nation's capital, which operates the most speeding and red-light cameras of any city in the country. In 2014, the District issued an average of 773 tickets a day from its speeding cameras alone – adding up to roughly $37.5 million worth of fines, according to the latest figures from AAA Mid-Atlantic. Since 2007, speed cameras have been a cash cow for the city's police, resulting in nearly $357 million in revenue, AAA said.
Municipalities should not be relying on traffic infractions to balance their budgets.
Good.
Cities that rely on tickets to balance their budgets are predatory and need to be stopped.
I agree, the idea of paying for orderly civil society by depending on a certain amount of uncivility seems badly misplaced to me.
As for the driverless cars, their most obvious advantage is that they're able to all agree on the same set of rules, and all follow it equally. A lot of what slows down human-operated cars is the sorting out of what the rules are, and accommodating those who decide not to follow them.
The previous three posts are spot on, but let's not kid ourselves that anything will change. The allure of money is too great and that money generally goes into a self-perpetuating bureaucracy that provides, among other things, employment to judges, clerks, police officers, and every other kind of job associated with traffic enforcement. I wouldn't want to be the politician who has to tell these people that their jobs are eventually going away.
Would driverless cars also move themselves from metered parking spots when the meter runs out, finding another metered spot to park in?
Could a driverless car also stop and get a pizza for me too? And do my Christmas shopping?
Kinda naive thinking municipalities aren't going to figure out tapping other income streams.
:banghead:
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 25, 2016, 05:49:17 PM
Would driverless cars also move themselves from metered parking spots when the meter runs out, finding another metered spot to park in?
Why not? Even better, it should drive itself to the outskirts of town where the parking is free, and when you're ready you'd phone it to come get you.
Quote
Could a driverless car also stop and get a pizza for me too? And do my Christmas shopping?
There are delivery services that take care of that already.
Quote from: kkt on January 25, 2016, 06:38:50 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 25, 2016, 05:49:17 PM
Would driverless cars also move themselves from metered parking spots when the meter runs out, finding another metered spot to park in?
Why not? Even better, it should drive itself to the outskirts of town where the parking is free, and when you're ready you'd phone it to come get you.
Or even better - your garage back at the house.
Quote from: SidS1045 on January 25, 2016, 04:18:33 PM
The previous three posts are spot on, but let's not kid ourselves that anything will change. The allure of money is too great and that money generally goes into a self-perpetuating bureaucracy that provides, among other things, employment to judges, clerks, police officers, and every other kind of job associated with traffic enforcement. I wouldn't want to be the politician who has to tell these people that their jobs are eventually going away.
Those jobs won't go away because of less traffic infractions, it just makes room for said workers to concentrate on more important crimes that go on in those same municipalities: Cops can catch more robbers, courts have more time to shorten the current backlog of court cases, and the coffers can collect more court fees on these serious crimes. For example, with all of the dash cams now, the courts SHOULD charge people who run from the cops every individual traffic infraction they incur during the documented chase.
I cannot wait to hear the first stories of dumb criminals who try to make a getaway in a driverless car!!! It will happen and will happen often!
Bwa, ha, ha, ha !!!
Crack down on all those damn pedestrians !!!
:sombrero:
Quote from: thenetwork on January 26, 2016, 12:05:52 PM
Those jobs won't go away because of less traffic infractions, it just makes room for said workers to concentrate on more important crimes that go on in those same municipalities: Cops can catch more robbers, courts have more time to shorten the current backlog of court cases, and the coffers can collect more court fees on these serious crimes.
Court fees assessed for felonies and misdemeanors are a drop in the bucket compared to the steady revenue stream provided by traffic infractions. The really big crimes such as murder and armed robbery carry no fines, just jail time. Without the money coming in, jobs will be lost.
Good.
Remember that actual serious police work and traffic "work" are totally different things. Especially at the town level, most traffic cops have no ability to solve actual crimes, and most wide-spot-in-the-road towns have no need to police in the first place.
These bozos can find work in the beef jerkey retailing industry.
Quote from: SidS1045 on January 25, 2016, 04:18:33 PM
The previous three posts are spot on, but let's not kid ourselves that anything will change. The allure of money is too great and that money generally goes into a self-perpetuating bureaucracy that provides, among other things, employment to judges, clerks, police officers, and every other kind of job associated with traffic enforcement. I wouldn't want to be the politician who has to tell these people that their jobs are eventually going away.
It's only a problem because the alternative is raising taxes elsewhere, and a good chunk of the voting population won't approve new taxes unless they think the person who it's imposed upon "deserves" it.
Quote from: SidS1045 on January 27, 2016, 02:01:57 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on January 26, 2016, 12:05:52 PM
Those jobs won't go away because of less traffic infractions, it just makes room for said workers to concentrate on more important crimes that go on in those same municipalities: Cops can catch more robbers, courts have more time to shorten the current backlog of court cases, and the coffers can collect more court fees on these serious crimes.
Court fees assessed for felonies and misdemeanors are a drop in the bucket compared to the steady revenue stream provided by traffic infractions. The really big crimes such as murder and armed robbery carry no fines, just jail time. Without the money coming in, jobs will be lost.
Perhaps more to the point, persons charged with (and convicted of) such serious crimes do not usually have any money with which to pay such fines. Now admittedly, there are some exceptions, but generally speaking, felons tend to be poor people.
This is so easy. You make up the loss in revenue by reducing stupid police forces where half the cops are just collecting revenue through traffic fines. Fire the Barney Fife's and keep the Andy Griffiths.
In the "tickets for revenue" municipalities, while the cops may not be able to catch speeders in driverless cars anymore in theory, those cars will still have a percentage of them with burnt out taillights, expired plates, and unpaid parking tickets just like driver-necessitated cars.
And do you think the bad boys with the street rods, low riders, bass blasters and loud tailpipes are going to buy driverless cars? Let the cops concentrate on those drivers and the crotch rockets. There will still be plenty of them to keep an eye on.
Quote from: thenetwork on January 30, 2016, 02:12:48 AM
And do you think the bad boys with the street rods, low riders, bass blasters and loud tailpipes are going to buy driverless cars?
Yes, if they want to use them on the streets they will. At some point I expect driving one's own car will be limited to private facilities.
Quote from: thenetwork on January 30, 2016, 02:12:48 AM
In the "tickets for revenue" municipalities, while the cops may not be able to catch speeders in driverless cars anymore in theory, those cars will still have a percentage of them with burnt out taillights, expired plates, and unpaid parking tickets just like driver-necessitated cars.
And do you think the bad boys with the street rods, low riders, bass blasters and loud tailpipes are going to buy driverless cars? Let the cops concentrate on those drivers and the crotch rockets. There will still be plenty of them to keep an eye on.
Emphasis added above.
At least in Maryland, the crotch rockets are a huge problem, and there has been no systematic effort by law enforcement to chase them down and arrest them.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on February 01, 2016, 02:58:19 AM
Quote from: thenetwork on January 30, 2016, 02:12:48 AM
In the "tickets for revenue" municipalities, while the cops may not be able to catch speeders in driverless cars anymore in theory, those cars will still have a percentage of them with burnt out taillights, expired plates, and unpaid parking tickets just like driver-necessitated cars.
And do you think the bad boys with the street rods, low riders, bass blasters and loud tailpipes are going to buy driverless cars? Let the cops concentrate on those drivers and the crotch rockets. There will still be plenty of them to keep an eye on.
Emphasis added above.
At least in Maryland, the crotch rockets are a huge problem, and there has been no systematic effort by law enforcement to chase them down and arrest them.
They certainly can't keep up with them - the rockets can split traffic, cop cars can't. Glorified safety risk, yes - but cops who chase make traffic even more dangerous.
Quote from: SSOWorld on February 01, 2016, 06:07:52 AM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on February 01, 2016, 02:58:19 AM
Quote from: thenetwork on January 30, 2016, 02:12:48 AM
In the "tickets for revenue" municipalities, while the cops may not be able to catch speeders in driverless cars anymore in theory, those cars will still have a percentage of them with burnt out taillights, expired plates, and unpaid parking tickets just like driver-necessitated cars.
And do you think the bad boys with the street rods, low riders, bass blasters and loud tailpipes are going to buy driverless cars? Let the cops concentrate on those drivers and the crotch rockets. There will still be plenty of them to keep an eye on.
Emphasis added above.
At least in Maryland, the crotch rockets are a huge problem, and there has been no systematic effort by law enforcement to chase them down and arrest them.
They certainly can't keep up with them - the rockets can split traffic, cop cars can't. Glorified safety risk, yes - but cops who chase make traffic even more dangerous.
I take it the rockets don't have license plates.
Quote from: Rothman on February 01, 2016, 08:07:07 AM
I take it the rockets don't have license plates.
Many do not - or they have them installed in such a way as to be unreadable.
If chased, they will tend to head for sanctuary in the District of Columbia. D.C. cops will not chase anyone, and Maryland cops will not cross into D.C. unless the driver or vehicle are wanted for a felony.
You know what, these speed trap towns (Waldo and Starke, Florida, I'm looking at you) really deserve this karma. I think that once driverless cars really start kicking in, then all the speed trap towns will be in real trouble.
Until they find another way, which isn't likely, for some of them...
I've been driving for a long time and many miles and have never had a moving violation. I've never felt bad about "robbing" government of revenue by not paying traffic fines. In fact, I feel kinda good about doing what we all should be doing. We live in a perverse society when government depends on lawlessness to pay the bills. I've always thought that lawmaking and fine-collecting should be separated, so that fine money does not benefit those who make the laws.
Only a good guy with a crotch rocket can stop a bad guy with a crotch rocket.
Quote from: Road Hog on February 03, 2016, 02:31:53 PM
Only a good guy with a crotch rocket can stop a bad guy with a crotch rocket.
Or a good guy with a radio and support. Sorry to ruin your spiffy quote though.
I am a strong anti-crotch rocket person. Having to hear their loud pipes from a mile away all summer long is a nuisance, much like the loud mega-bass car drivers. (Note to high-school grads: Audiology is the career of the future because of these fools -- job security).
My proposed ideas for Crotch Rocket offenders:
Over 20 MPH on a non-controlled access highway within a populated area = reckless endangerment to other drivers &/or pedestrians.
- First Offense -- $500 fine and confiscation of motorcycle for 60 days.
- Second Offense -- $1000 fine, loss of drivers license for 6 months AND surrender of motorcycle (optional: owner should witness their cycle
getting crushed at junkyard). If they still owe money on their bike, too bad, you still owe your creditor!!!
If police have a video or photo proof of violator, they may have the right to ticket cycle owner or confiscate the owner's cycle at a later date at their place of residence or wherever it is found parked. Just because your vehicle can easily go over a certain speed doesn't mean you have the constitutional right to go that fast wherever you want to.
Not sure how I would draft a law regarding the open roads or interstates, but it would be similar. We have a lot of open roads in my neck of the woods, yet they want to show off and be seen on the main drags. Depending on where they are (high-traffic or pedestrian area), they can be more dangerous than a drunk driver.
Yes, they will complain that they are being singled out on the road, and/or claim someone else was riding their bike, but then if you obey the laws, or don't let others ride your ride, there is no problem, right? Fines too high? If they can afford a crotch rocket, they can afford the fine!
I don't think it is safe to use stop sticks on cycles, so the laws need to have more bite on them specifically.
One could argue that a car driver driving 20+ over is a much bigger threat to others' life and limb than a motorcycle driver.
You could argue that. Of course you would be wrong.
The SL used to be 55. Today, in some places it is up to 30 "over" that. Yet, because the junk science that "speed kills" has been disproven, esentually everyone drives 20 or 30 "over" that old rediculous limit. Safely.
Because speed does not kill. As the original point of the Post's article makes, SLs are 100% about $$.
Quote from: kkt on February 03, 2016, 04:01:19 PM
Quote from: Road Hog on February 03, 2016, 02:31:53 PM
Only a good guy with a crotch rocket can stop a bad guy with a crotch rocket.
Or a good guy with a radio and support.
How about a good guy and a rope strung up across a roadway at 1-2 feet higher than crotch-height?
Quote from: wxfree on February 01, 2016, 11:42:48 PM
We live in a perverse society when government depends on lawlessness to pay the bills. I've always thought that lawmaking and fine-collecting should be separated, so that fine money does not benefit those who make the laws.
This is a huge complaint of mine as well. There are people in jail just because they were too poor to pay a parking fine on time plus accrued interest and court costs. It's downright Dickensian. Because everyone is too cowardly to properly fund services the way they should (taxes), the problem is shifted to those with the least ability to advocate for themselves.
The kicker is, throwing people in jail for failure to pay fines & court costs winds up costing the taxpayers way, way more than what the court was trying to wring out of their empty pockets. That is no way to run things.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 05, 2016, 08:31:51 PM
This is a huge complaint of mine as well. There are people in jail just because they were too poor to pay a parking fine on time plus accrued interest and court costs. It's downright Dickensian. Because everyone is too cowardly to properly fund services the way they should (taxes), the problem is shifted to those with the least ability to advocate for themselves.
The kicker is, throwing people in jail for failure to pay fines & court costs winds up costing the taxpayers way, way more than what the court was trying to wring out of their empty pockets. That is no way to run things.
:clap: