AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: DC Police Chief Denounces 'cowardly' iPhone users avoiding speed cameras  (Read 18495 times)

agentsteel53

  • invisible hand
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15374
  • long live button copy!

  • Age: 38
  • Location: San Diego, CA
  • Last Login: November 21, 2016, 09:58:39 AM
    • AARoads Shield Gallery

The very defination of coward is traffic cop, IMHO.  While others in our society do serious useful work, they, at the point of a gun, extort money from people.  They are thieves.



correct.  there should not ever be a revenue aspect to traffic enforcement.  it should be just points on your system.  get enough points, lose your license for a while.  85 in a 70, get a point.  park in the same spot for over 24 hours, get 1/10th of a point or whatnot.  get 3 points in 12 months, lose your license for 6.

but take the cash element out of it, and you instantly get rid of corrupt sheriffs riding your tail from one end of the county to the other, just itching for you to go faster than two under the limit.
Logged

oscar

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6730
  • Age: 63
  • Location: Arlington, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 06:08:24 PM
    • my Hot Springs and Highways pages

Police chief denounces 'cowardly' iPhone users monitoring speed traps

As many comments on this article state, if what DC really wanted was for people to slow down, this app will still make people do this.  But, if they're mainly looking for revenue...
"Brave" people can use radar detectors to sniff out the traffic cameras, as I do most every time I visit camera-infested Montgomery County MD.  Of course, radar detectors are illegal in DC (as well as in Virginia, which fortunately has no speed cameras and seems not to have abusive red-light cameras).
Logged
my Hot Springs and Highways pages, with links to my roads sites:
http://www.alaskaroads.com/home.html

agentsteel53

  • invisible hand
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15374
  • long live button copy!

  • Age: 38
  • Location: San Diego, CA
  • Last Login: November 21, 2016, 09:58:39 AM
    • AARoads Shield Gallery


"Brave" people can use radar detectors to sniff out the traffic cameras, as I do most every time I visit camera-infested Montgomery County MD.  Of course, radar detectors are illegal in DC (as well as in Virginia, which fortunately has no speed cameras and seems not to have abusive red-light cameras).

I've always figured that by the time the radar detector lights up, you're toast.  a modern radar gun needs about 1/10th of a second to get a reading.  the radar detector will respond that quickly, but unless you're Michael Schumacher, there's no way you will.
Logged

oscar

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6730
  • Age: 63
  • Location: Arlington, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 06:08:24 PM
    • my Hot Springs and Highways pages


"Brave" people can use radar detectors to sniff out the traffic cameras, as I do most every time I visit camera-infested Montgomery County MD.  Of course, radar detectors are illegal in DC (as well as in Virginia, which fortunately has no speed cameras and seems not to have abusive red-light cameras).

I've always figured that by the time the radar detector lights up, you're toast.  a modern radar gun needs about 1/10th of a second to get a reading.  the radar detector will respond that quickly, but unless you're Michael Schumacher, there's no way you will.
For a speed camera to spot targets without human assistance (as is usually the case), it has to have its radar gun turned on all the time.  The radar gun might have a short range, so you don't necessarily get much advance warning from your detector, but you get enough to slow down before the camera can get a fix on your speed.
Logged
my Hot Springs and Highways pages, with links to my roads sites:
http://www.alaskaroads.com/home.html

dave19

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 116
  • Age: 61
  • Location: WV
  • Last Login: January 13, 2017, 09:46:06 PM

The very defination of coward is traffic cop, IMHO.  While others in our society do serious useful work, they, at the point of a gun, extort money from people.  They are thieves.


:clap: :clap: :clap:
Logged

Compulov

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 203
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Newtown, PA
  • Last Login: September 24, 2018, 04:59:10 PM

For a speed camera to spot targets without human assistance (as is usually the case), it has to have its radar gun turned on all the time.  The radar gun might have a short range, so you don't necessarily get much advance warning from your detector, but you get enough to slow down before the camera can get a fix on your speed.

I can't find the article this second, but I thought I read somewhere that some of the fixed speed cameras that Arizona DOT used on their freeways were using loops in the highway in some fashion (not sure if it was like vascar, measuring speed between loops or just using them to tell the radar gun to wake up or what). But even if they weren't there are technologies out there which don't require radar at all (or don't require radar to be on all the time) to catch speeders autonomously. Whether these states decide to use them is another story.
Logged

agentsteel53

  • invisible hand
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15374
  • long live button copy!

  • Age: 38
  • Location: San Diego, CA
  • Last Login: November 21, 2016, 09:58:39 AM
    • AARoads Shield Gallery

autonomously recognizing vehicles is a real challenge... how to correlate that the red '04 Corolla you saw around the bend back there is the same one passing the camera right now.  there's a colossal amount of visual processing necessary that a human can do instinctively, but is just out of reach of machine technology.

even if you did it by license plate number: assuming you can read a license plate number far enough away that you can do VASCAR-style speed calculations, you have to actually find the license plate in the field of view - a needle in a haystack.

this is the sort of thing that maybe the NSA could pull off in real time - maybe! - but not Arizona DOT.
Logged

Compulov

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 203
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Newtown, PA
  • Last Login: September 24, 2018, 04:59:10 PM

autonomously recognizing vehicles is a real challenge... how to correlate that the red '04 Corolla you saw around the bend back there is the same one passing the camera right now.  there's a colossal amount of visual processing necessary that a human can do instinctively, but is just out of reach of machine technology.

even if you did it by license plate number: assuming you can read a license plate number far enough away that you can do VASCAR-style speed calculations, you have to actually find the license plate in the field of view - a needle in a haystack.

this is the sort of thing that maybe the NSA could pull off in real time - maybe! - but not Arizona DOT.

Actually, here's a company which installs them:

http://www.lochwynd.com/services-inductiveloop.html

From that page (and several others if you google speed camera inductive loop) seems to indicate that they measure your speed using two loops in a row. If you place the two loops close enough to the camera that you don't have time to change lanes between the measurement and the picture, I can see that working. Not sure how it handles tractor trailers or multi-trailers (ie, there's a break in the field between the two trailers, how does that reconcile that as not being two cars?), but there you go.
Logged

agentsteel53

  • invisible hand
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15374
  • long live button copy!

  • Age: 38
  • Location: San Diego, CA
  • Last Login: November 21, 2016, 09:58:39 AM
    • AARoads Shield Gallery

that does not sound like a camera.  it does not depend on visual identification, but rather measuring the time that the magnetic signature of a vehicle takes to go between one loop and the next.  far easier problem to solve!
Logged

mightyace

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3235
  • Age: 54
  • Last Login: October 04, 2012, 01:36:29 PM
    • My Flickr Photos

Quote
Who's to assume that the person the car is registered to was the person driving it at the time? Don't let anyone else ever drive your car!

Former PennDOT employee here. The following comments are true in PA. I would guess that most other states are probably similar; some may be wildly different.

In PA the registered owner of a vehicle is responsible for the use of that vehicle, no matter who they allow to drive it. It is incumbent upon the registered owner to only allow individuals they believe to be of sound judgment and character to operate their vehicle.

Of course, that excludes most of my family on my wife's side. (insert rim shot here)

So yes, the registered owner is at least partly on the hook for whatever happens with their vehicle when someone else drives it. The owner must be very judicious in who they allow to drive their vehicle.

This is also why, in the event of auto theft, the registered owner must report the vehicle stolen as soon as possible.

I think you're talking about liability and it's generally true that the owner is always liable for a vehicle they own.  I don't think too many of us have a problem with that.

What the author of the first quote is talking about is that speed and traffic light camera fine the owner of the vehicle not the driver.  That is NOT how it is done with live cops.

If my brother is driving my car and gets pulled over for speeding, he gets the ticket, not I.  However, if my registration or insurance has lapsed, I still get the citation for that.
Logged
My Flickr Photos: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mightyace

I'm out of this F***KING PLACE!

Tarkus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 350
  • Age: 33
  • Location: Oregon
  • Last Login: June 25, 2019, 07:57:05 AM
    • SimCity 4 Devotion

As far as I know, most of the automated enforcement nowadays is carried out by loops--both speed cameras and red light cameras.  The only real exceptions are the mobile photo radar systems, where it's obviously not practical to lay down loops.

Some of the red light camera systems (including some here in Oregon) have rather nasty little loop systems that also measure one's speed approaching a signal, and they can actually go off if they merely think you're not going to be able to stop in time for the light, as happened in this prominent case.  A little extract:

Quote
In an interview with The Oregonian Wednesday, Sgt. Todd Davis agreed that it's possible for the red-light camera to snap a photo of a driver who doesn't end up running a red light. If a driver approaches a red light fast, a sensor under the pavement alerts the camera that the driver won't likely be able to stop before the signal turns green. The camera takes a photo before the car enters the intersection, then takes a photo of the car in the intersection.

All the more reason to ban the damn things.
Logged

oscar

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6730
  • Age: 63
  • Location: Arlington, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 06:08:24 PM
    • my Hot Springs and Highways pages

As far as I know, most of the automated enforcement nowadays is carried out by loops--both speed cameras and red light cameras.  The only real exceptions are the mobile photo radar systems, where it's obviously not practical to lay down loops.

Maybe where you are, but Montgomery County MD's numerous speed cameras -- including the stationary ones -- use radar rather than loops.
Logged
my Hot Springs and Highways pages, with links to my roads sites:
http://www.alaskaroads.com/home.html

Compulov

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 203
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Newtown, PA
  • Last Login: September 24, 2018, 04:59:10 PM

I think you're talking about liability and it's generally true that the owner is always liable for a vehicle they own.  I don't think too many of us have a problem with that.

What the author of the first quote is talking about is that speed and traffic light camera fine the owner of the vehicle not the driver.  That is NOT how it is done with live cops.

If my brother is driving my car and gets pulled over for speeding, he gets the ticket, not I.  However, if my registration or insurance has lapsed, I still get the citation for that.

Take the following with a grain of salt as I am not a lawyer (just a citizen who likes to know his rights):

I was under the impression the reason why red light cameras (until recently) and speed cameras (still, I think) aren't/weren't legal in NJ was because of that exact reason. I'll see if I can find it in the codified law (Title 39 if you have nothing better to do), but NJ explicitly (or maybe implicitly through case law) required that moving violations be issued to the driver of the vehicle, not the owner. I think the only exception to this was running a school bus with its red lights on. I think the new red light camera statute doesn't assign points for those tickets to sort of get around that.
Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.