Photo radar may return
03-13-2016, 07:40 PM
#11
03-13-2016, 07:42 PM
#12
I don't speak for the Ontario radar system, but in Hong Kong they use a percentage tolerance (5%-10% ish I believe) since tire size and wheels can affect your speedometer
So let's say if the speed limit is 60km/h, and you have about 10% wiggle room means that you can't go beyond 66km/h
I'm not entirely against it even though I drive like a maniac myself, but I would like to know the tolerance level (and possibly the locations of these radar cameras)
So let's say if the speed limit is 60km/h, and you have about 10% wiggle room means that you can't go beyond 66km/h
I'm not entirely against it even though I drive like a maniac myself, but I would like to know the tolerance level (and possibly the locations of these radar cameras)
03-13-2016, 08:01 PM
#14
Apparently it was Conservative Jon Tory who asked for it that started this up.
https://www.thestar.com/news/queensp...-speeders.html
https://www.thestar.com/news/queensp...-speeders.html
03-14-2016, 07:38 AM
#15
Registered User
Wynne introducing a Carbon Tax on Fuel.. adding about 5% I believe.
Fuel prices will go up as expected (about 5 cents)
In other words, the 30% that govenment takes on Fuel isn't enough since the price of fuel went from 1.25 average to, .90 cents.
The real problem is what happens when price of oil goes up again (it will eventually). Carbon tax flies under the radar and the government will get 35% taxes on fuel and more ways to waste the $$.
Fuel prices will go up as expected (about 5 cents)
In other words, the 30% that govenment takes on Fuel isn't enough since the price of fuel went from 1.25 average to, .90 cents.
The real problem is what happens when price of oil goes up again (it will eventually). Carbon tax flies under the radar and the government will get 35% taxes on fuel and more ways to waste the $$.
03-14-2016, 09:58 AM
#16
Wynne introducing a Carbon Tax on Fuel.. adding about 5% I believe.
Fuel prices will go up as expected (about 5 cents)
In other words, the 30% that govenment takes on Fuel isn't enough since the price of fuel went from 1.25 average to, .90 cents.
The real problem is what happens when price of oil goes up again (it will eventually). Carbon tax flies under the radar and the government will get 35% taxes on fuel and more ways to waste the $$.
Fuel prices will go up as expected (about 5 cents)
In other words, the 30% that govenment takes on Fuel isn't enough since the price of fuel went from 1.25 average to, .90 cents.
The real problem is what happens when price of oil goes up again (it will eventually). Carbon tax flies under the radar and the government will get 35% taxes on fuel and more ways to waste the $$.
03-14-2016, 10:46 AM
#17
Registered User
Emailed:
I would like to inform all contacts on this list that I am against Photo Radar. It will not curb speeding nor will it save lives (There is no clear evidence that photo radar is an effective deterrent of speed).
I’d rather our government invest that money into more effective solutions to accomplish the goal of safer roads.
Thank you,
I would like to inform all contacts on this list that I am against Photo Radar. It will not curb speeding nor will it save lives (There is no clear evidence that photo radar is an effective deterrent of speed).
I’d rather our government invest that money into more effective solutions to accomplish the goal of safer roads.
Thank you,
03-14-2016, 11:34 AM
#18
Emailed:
I would like to inform all contacts on this list that I am against Photo Radar. It will not curb speeding nor will it save lives (There is no clear evidence that photo radar is an effective deterrent of speed).
I’d rather our government invest that money into more effective solutions to accomplish the goal of safer roads.
Thank you,
I would like to inform all contacts on this list that I am against Photo Radar. It will not curb speeding nor will it save lives (There is no clear evidence that photo radar is an effective deterrent of speed).
I’d rather our government invest that money into more effective solutions to accomplish the goal of safer roads.
Thank you,
They may take your recommendation and invest in self-driving automobile technology next, lol.
03-14-2016, 11:53 AM
#19
Registered User
Originally Posted by iDomN8U' timestamp='1457981160' post='23908168
Emailed:
I would like to inform all contacts on this list that I am against Photo Radar. It will not curb speeding nor will it save lives (There is no clear evidence that photo radar is an effective deterrent of speed).
I’d rather our government invest that money into more effective solutions to accomplish the goal of safer roads.
Thank you,
I would like to inform all contacts on this list that I am against Photo Radar. It will not curb speeding nor will it save lives (There is no clear evidence that photo radar is an effective deterrent of speed).
I’d rather our government invest that money into more effective solutions to accomplish the goal of safer roads.
Thank you,
They may take your recommendation and invest in self-driving automobile technology next, lol.
Either that or share the money with their "contract services" buddies
03-14-2016, 02:05 PM
#20
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,692
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Photo Radar is simply a fear tactic, it is not based on anything remotely educational and therefore will not change people's understanding. If people do not understand then it makes it very difficult for them to change their behaviour. It is also a hidden and nondirect tactic that is not obvious and most people won't even know that it is going on, again having minimal impact on the majority.
Now speaking of camera's to monitor and provide evidence for traffic infractions, and if you really want to score big on paying for that monthly budget I have one strong suggestion for you. Build a roundabout in a busy location in any city, you can even use the excuse that you are trying to improve traffic flow (which is true). Install cameras to monitor every angle of the roundabout and sit back and watch.
My city recently built a roundabout and personally I thought it was a wonderful and useful tool...that is until I began using it everyday. Every time I go into that thing I either witness or are involved with poor driving from others that nearly (and has) caused accidents. You could easily bank a couple grand every DAY on people making infractions to traffic flow on that thing, and you wouldn't even have to have cops attending it. They could focus more on important things that protect us like property theft and drug control.
Traffic infractions I see on a weekly basis include: inproper lane change (not staying in the lane you entered in or following it to the intended exit), crossing the line in the lane your driving in (long vehicles don't account for their rear end cutting into other lanes as they take the turn to sharp), failure to yield (just driving right into the rounabout with cars already in it), impeding the flow of traffic (either not entering when clear or coming to complete stop when you don't know how to proceed upon entry), failure to signal, driving into oncoming traffic (meaning going around the roundabout in the wrong direction, I'v actually witnessed this several times despite about 20 arrows pointing the way you should be driving), and if this counts, offroading? (as in driving on the center barrier), and I'm sure I haven't witnessed everything.
If tickets should be given to bad drivers then this should be a jackpot, and yet I see no cameras and no cops that ever travel near this hazard zone. A roundabout is very easy to comprehend and is designed for pure efficiency, and yet it seems to be the most complicated traffic situation for people to handle.
Now speaking of camera's to monitor and provide evidence for traffic infractions, and if you really want to score big on paying for that monthly budget I have one strong suggestion for you. Build a roundabout in a busy location in any city, you can even use the excuse that you are trying to improve traffic flow (which is true). Install cameras to monitor every angle of the roundabout and sit back and watch.
My city recently built a roundabout and personally I thought it was a wonderful and useful tool...that is until I began using it everyday. Every time I go into that thing I either witness or are involved with poor driving from others that nearly (and has) caused accidents. You could easily bank a couple grand every DAY on people making infractions to traffic flow on that thing, and you wouldn't even have to have cops attending it. They could focus more on important things that protect us like property theft and drug control.
Traffic infractions I see on a weekly basis include: inproper lane change (not staying in the lane you entered in or following it to the intended exit), crossing the line in the lane your driving in (long vehicles don't account for their rear end cutting into other lanes as they take the turn to sharp), failure to yield (just driving right into the rounabout with cars already in it), impeding the flow of traffic (either not entering when clear or coming to complete stop when you don't know how to proceed upon entry), failure to signal, driving into oncoming traffic (meaning going around the roundabout in the wrong direction, I'v actually witnessed this several times despite about 20 arrows pointing the way you should be driving), and if this counts, offroading? (as in driving on the center barrier), and I'm sure I haven't witnessed everything.
If tickets should be given to bad drivers then this should be a jackpot, and yet I see no cameras and no cops that ever travel near this hazard zone. A roundabout is very easy to comprehend and is designed for pure efficiency, and yet it seems to be the most complicated traffic situation for people to handle.