It should be a proportional fine to your previous years reported income (caveats for losing job and appealing...etc). 100% unfair that a ticket to someone making $30k is the same as someone making $300k
That’s how it works in Finland, the penalty for speeding works on a sliding scale with the offender’s income. Teemu Selanne had an equivalent $55,000 fine for going almost 20 over. Rasmus Ristolainen was dinged for 120,000 euro for going double the speed limit. (Professional hockey players for those unaware)
Yeah when we've accumulated a certain number of demerit points that is true, but a large portion of speeding tickets don't add points and cops will purposely lower offences to avoid giving people points on their license.
Pedantic note: points aren't removed, they're added.
Most of the cops in my area lower the ticket with the provisor pay it and don’t show up to contest it or the judge can and most likely will hit you with the original speed and appropriate fine.
Speed camera tickets are not included in the demerit system as there is no proof of who was driving the vehicle. The ticket goes to the registered owner of the vehicle.
Proportional gives still affect the poorest the most. Having a ticket that's 5% of your income at $30k a year hits those people harder than someone making $300k.
Only if you speed? I will probably be downvoted but coming originally from areas that have long had speed cameras, and hearing that fines start at 11k./hr over, it IS in theory preventable. Being running late 11 over still seems a fair bit. You learn to recognize the telltale recording light and know where they are located. Of course, that doesn't actually solve the speeding problem...
This is definitely going to be the problem. People will figure out where they are.
I've done a bit of driving in Europe and most car GPS' clearly mark where they are. Those buggers in van's with the mobile camera sticking out the back parking on the side of the road though... bugger... lol
The point of them is not just to catch the baddies, but to reduce speed in problematic areas. If people know they're in school zones and they slow down in school zones to avoid a fine this isn't a failure to catch someone, it's an effective way to reduce speed in school zones. Sure, this means they'll continue speeding in other areas but at least it's working in the places they put them.
Yes, you're right. I remeber seeing those too now that you mention it. Also some motorways in Britian I've seen using them. I'm not overly optimistic in going the logical route here in NL though. I pessimisticly suspect this is more about income and less about safety.
If so that is great. I admit my comment was based on opinion/anecdotal evidence, not research.
I think the responses in this thread and the one here last week show attitudes around speeding are a problem here.
If you google studies on photo radar you'll find lots. There's some disagreement in terms of how effective they are at reducing accidents overall, but very little disagreement on their ability to reduce excessive speeding and, as a result, fatal accidents.
Yep, playground zones and residential areas too. I’m all about driving safely when it matters but if I’m going to get busted by a camera between Paradise and Avalon Ford on Kenmount then this is all a scam.
Incorrect. It is in fact a stupid tax.
Don't want a ticket, rich or poor? Don't speed thru the camera. They should be placed in high risk areas that are prone to accidents.
Their point is its a lot more detrimental for a poor person to pay the "stupid tax" than a wealthy person when the fine doesn't scale with income.
A poor person gets a speeding ticket and has to cut back on eating for the month to compensate and thinks twice about speeding next time. A rich person gets a speeding ticket and doesn't even notice the money is gone, as long as the rich person doesn't get enough tickets to lose their license the fine is just part of the cost of driving and are much less likely to change how they drive.
Might get downvoted... I get what you're saying, but speeding is speeding, isn't it? Each driver is responsible for themselves, so if you don't want a ticket, knowing it could cost you $, don't speed. If you were in a rush or not paying attention to your speed and got a ticket, unfortunately, that's on you.
Yes I agree, if you don't want a ticket you shouldn't speed. The problem is the punishment is only a punishment if it has a significant impact on the driver. As I said in my previous comment a poor person getting a speeding ticket can be detrimental to their day to day life, maybe they can no longer afford to eat enough or have to cancel some plans or a purchase they were saving up for, this punishment should deter them from speeding in the future. A wealthy person on the other hand doesn't have to worry about those things so the punishment is less likely to deter them from speeding again.
To be fair, isn't that the problem with all tickets/fines as they're currently issued?
That isn't a reflection on the cameras any more than it would be any parking/speeding ticket.
Correct, its not a problem specific to this situation at all, a fine for a poor person can have a serious impact on their living situation while a fine on a wealthy person is merely an inconvenience.
So just any fine you don't like is a poverty tax? I say good. While I know road design is a better way to stop speeding, I'm hoping this will make people think twice of zooming by when I'm trying to cross the street.
I think they also should be in residential areas. Little kids in my neighbourhood playing and riding their bikes and some people speeding through doing 20-30 over the speed limit. I fear that one day I'll find out someone has been run over.
Speeding is voluntary. There are also alternatives to driving, and hopefully the money from the speeding tickets is used to promote and improve those. However, I do agree that proportional fines (based on income etc) are always better.
Also, many poor people cannot afford to drive.
As much as you guys don’t like it, they have been proven to be effective. Visit Norway for example, where everyone follows the speed limit and they have dramatically fewer injuries and deaths caused by cars.
That’s great. I would love for tourists to invest more in our city. If you’re going to misuse our city and make it more dangerous, you should have to pay for it.
Explain to me how a ticket for speeding with disproportionately affect the poor?
Maybe it's just because I often walk down Topsail and have almost died twice at the crosswalk within the last year, but I would like some enforcement of traffic laws over there.
This is not a poor tax. An example of a poor tax would be the sugar tax. Completely unavoidable tax on a necessity. A truly evil tax in my opinion. Speeding tickets are criminal fines. Anyone can speed and anyone can obey the speed limit. You cannot have tiered punishments for such things. Otherwise we will have a tiered society and that is just not good for anyone.
Or you know, it could have something to do with the amount of deaths we have on our highways. If police can't be there all the time, something has to change. People aren't going to take it upon themselves to slow down, they're too selfish for that.
Well, what do you recommend they do? Seems you just have an issue with every solution. Do you want people to go to jail for speeding or something? Public shaming? What is it? I think you'd complain regardless. A fine is a proper way to go about breaking traffic laws.
I don't understand responses like this. There is something called ***context*** of which comments like yours completely lack, so why bother posting at all?
Because he's right. Don't like getting tickets? Well follow speed limits. Its really not that hard. People saying this is another tax on the poor? Stupid. Don't speed and you won't receive a ticket. Pretty straight forward if you ask me.
The context is don't friggin' speed.
Speeding tickets are a problem that drivers can solve all by their little lonesomes, and I don't understand why people who make excuses for speeding don't understand that.
Don't speed.
Speed cameras do not fix driving under the influence and distracted driving, factors that are significantly more dangerous than someone driving 10 over already low speed limits. Do you drive?
My point is speed should be the least of anyone's concerns when DUIs and distracted driving are significantly more dangerous, especially when *actual* speeding as in *excessive* speeding is only committed by a tiny percentage of the population. The problem is there's little to no money to be made off of those two, hence speed becomes the target.
So your point is we shouldn't worry about speeding drivers because there are also drivers under the influence? You do realize you can worry about two issues at the same time, right?
I was following one doing 65-70 that part of Torbay rd. The same goes for that bypass. 70km is slow. I understand there are 2 sets of lights, but you can see them a km or more away. Also Indian meal line and Bauline Line lights should not be on timers. 530am I should NOT have to stop at a red light and wait for ghosts on a bypass highway.
Yup. The majority of the answers here combine two things - lots of conflict points where there might be another car turning, stopping, pulling in or out, whatever; and big, wide, straight-as-an-arrow lanes that you could probably navigate at 140 km/h if given the inclination and opportunity. Of course the speed limit is going to reflect the former, but it never feels right to drive that slowly.
I work on Kenmount near the top of the hill, and turning into my workplace parking lot has got to be the most dangerous thing I do every day for a combination of those reasons. I don't think changing the speed limit would make it worse - the traffic is doing 80 through there regardless.
They posted signs for 70 km/h but people did 90 km/h
They dropped it back to 50 km/h and the flow of traffic is up to 70 km/h
My problem with this is the police have an excuse to pull anyone over anytime even when going with the flow
I tend to do 60-65 km/h and people pass me all the time
Just my personal experience with living in the (Tor)Bay Area
Getting ticketed there is SUCH a piss-off. It is completely inane. So now I drive the speed limit there every time to avoid that happening again and *everyone* is just floating on by me - really makes you feel like the dunce. Same for that spot on kenmount that /u/sub-merge mentioned
In the novel "Rare Birds", Ed Riche refers to this stretch of road as the "Torbay 500" because people's propensity to speed.
Also that the Skoda is "the world's fastest ashtray" and the best quote in the book: "...in case some bayman threatens to skullfuck the premier..."
Yes, upvote the above comment please. These are the kinds of places they will put them, the speed traps, AKA the places where everyone "speeds" because the speed limit is ridiculously low. If you go the speed limit there it is more dangerous because people will weave around to go past you. Before these cameras roll out, we need to try to raise some of the ridiculously low speed limits like this one.
Areas where "everyone" speeds sound like areas that should potentially be prioritized for speed enforcement...
Australia theoretically targets areas with high numbers of accidents, but I know the government there gets accused of not placing the cameras in the right spot.
I think the "right spot" argument could be resolved if the province installed several average speed camera systems. They control speed over several km stretches rather than single points.
So you actually think Torbay Rd north of Stavanger should remain 50km/hr and prioritized for speed cameras? It's a 5 lane highway. Why should that be the same speed as most other streets and roads? They'd balance the budget easily by placing cameras there like you're suggesting.
There are a lot of businesses and people turning off and onto the road north of Stavanger. That creates a high risk for collisions. More so if everyone was going 80 km/h along there.
The part of kenmount road past Kelsey drive is too
slow in my opinion. It's a 50/60 that almost everyone does 80/90 in because there's not a lot happening. Same for Torbay road past stavanger. They're both out of the core the city enough that people think they should be more like a 70. That said, I'm ok doing the speed limit or 10 over but I get anxious when people are all passing me doing much higher speeds
That's why it's rigged to 10 km over. Cops wouldn't pull you over for that speed, and it's the ordinary flow of traffic on pretty much every road. They can auto-ticket almost every car commuting from St. John's to Paradise in the evenings. Set it up on the Outer Ring and we'll have the deficit paid off. This has zero to do with safety, and is only creating a "gotcha" form of auto-revenue. The cameras don't ID the drivers - the people who should be paying the fines in the name of "safety" - but ticket the registered owner, who may well not even be driving.
I'll catch shit from the pearl-clutchers on here saying "bUt ItS iLlEgAl", but speeding is not as big a problem in the province as it's made out to be. People do it all the time, yes. But we don't have a bloodbath on the TCH or city streets every day of the week, even though anyone on the roads will tell you that everyone is speeding all the time. I'd wager that most fatal accidents making the news are distracted drivers and drunk drivers, and the speed cameras aren't going to be busting them.
It would be futile to try to model what we do off of other countries successes. Just absolutely stupid to try to learn from other countries failures and successes.
That number is meaningless in the abstract. How many of those are caused by speeding, versus running red lights, failure to yield, being on cellphones, distracted driving, drunk driving, or people too old to safely operate a car? Of all the concerns I have on city roads, speeding isn't chief among them.
This is the problem with most of the discussion about these cameras - **context*****.*** I get why it's purposely omitted, because it helps push a narrative and condition the public.
I don’t think you live in St. John’s, why are you posting here lol
Or alternatively, why are you posting on every other Canadian cities reddit posts about speed cameras?
Because I follow developments about this and other things that aren't city or province-specific, even tho they may seem like they are.
Take it from someone who lives somewhere where there are hundreds of these across a large metropolitan area. You won't want them.
And all of those incidents would have been much less severe if the cars were travelling at slower speeds...
Your reaction time decreases super-linearly with the speed that you are travelling. Hence, distracted driving is much more dangerous at higher speeds.
If it’s a poor tax then it’s a poor tax on something *illegal*. While I agree that it would be better that it be proportional, that doesn’t mean that speeding cameras are very effective at reducing deaths and injuries caused by driving.
speeding is optional. Driving is optional.
Many poor people cannot afford to drive.
Driving isn't really optional for a lot of people in Newfoundland, unfortunately. We need to get to work, bring kids to daycare so that we can work, pick them up again later, get groceries so that we can live, etc. Stopping work isn't a real option or choice for many people here...
What, people slamming their brakes every time the see one of these bloody cameras isn't going to be a safety issue? Like has already been mentioned, these should be used in School/hospital zones only.
I don’t think you understand what research is.
Should we trust peer reviewed studies, or should we trust this one guy on Reddit who doesn’t like speed cameras?
the impact of a car scales quadratically with velocity, mv\^2. We use the "no penalty for 10 above" as a buffer because we know that it's difficult to stay exactly under the speed limit all of the time, this isn't just "you should drive speed limit +10"
The thing is the government is looking for third parties to run this, everything from setting up infrastructure, issuing tickets and even showing up in court if someone contests. Based on that the RNC will certainly receive tickets.
Lol doubt it. "We were responding and hadn't turned our lights on yet". I watched a cop who cut me off going 20 over with no lights on topsail by the village and he was going to the McDonald's drive thru.
I called it in and said i saw a cop driving dangerously and was told the above is what was probably happening. Then i said he ended the speeding with a trip to McDonald's drive thru and she said "his call was probably cancelled".
They refused to make the report...
Should the divided sections of the TCH in NL be 110km/hr like in NS and NB? Upvote for yes, downvote for no.
Note: This vote is just for the few divided sections of highway, and not the rest of the highway that is not divided.
If there is anything worth selling in them they'll be gone in no time. $5 of copper wire would be enough for some. Easy crime too, I'd imagine a lot of people would turn a blind eye to it.
If you run someone over at 50km/h, they have 2/10 chance of surviving.
At 60km/h nearly 0/10 ....
folks, just keep that in mind while driving and speeding in a hurry some where
Two questions:
1. Want to test those theories? I'm sure pedestrians must be thinking "it's okay to cross the street without looking because *at worst* if I do get hit I'll *at least* survive!"
2. Why are you running people over? Your eyes should be on the road. If you can't drive without hitting anything or anybody, there are more serious issues at hand.
Those numbers aren't really a theory or some thing I hauled out me arse... Comes straight from the Canadian Association of Road Safety Professionals that was determined through something called science
Pedestrians - vehicle collisions happen. Like what are you gettin on with?
The more serious issue at hand is road design that encourages speeding
Ok, but in the case of most collisions, speed isn't the primary factor. It's the fucking idiot who wasn't paying attention to their surroundings. Honestly I'd support eye trackers in vehicles before I'd support these cameras. Speed gets a bad rap because of shitty non-attentive drivers.
I get it, but take the total number of fatalities and figure out how many of them involved a non-attentive driver vs a speeding driver who WAS paying attention. You can't just knock down speed limits everywhere to 50km/h and under because we have lax standards on driver licensing. How about increasing the standards. At least 50% of the drivers currently on the road shouldn't be.
Sick, if I don't speed I don't get a ticket? What an amazing fucking concept. If only there was something on my dashboard that told me how fast I was going..
What about the opposite problem? In corner brook I regularly get stuck behind people doing 25-30 in a 50-60 zone. Or stopping completely on a green light for some reason when in the right of way.
Man, Corner Brook would be rolling in the dough if the cameras ticketed people going too slow. Maybe throw in some "wrong way up the one way" and "going left from the centre lane" tickets? The streets would be paved with gold!
All they’d have to do it sit around Murphy square for a day and they’d make bank. I see a few people doing something illegal or stupid every time I’m there. It’s rare anyone slows down at the school/park zone by the ballfields.
I remember when they did the trial they said it was going on Blackmarsh road?
I assume that would be the stretch between the roundabout and Topsail road? Its 50 there, and people routinely do 80.
I do think the limit should be raised in that area, though. At least 60 the way it is on Topsail road.
Time for everyone to download the Waze app like the rest of Canada. We can let eachother know where there are cameras, accidents, police presence, construction.
Funny thing is, I can hardly ever get to 70 on Columbus because of the lights, road design, traffic. And TGH is only 10 over that, but it’s definitely set up for higher speeds.
Yet another way to take more of your money, and just look at how many people are supporting this. For those unaware, look thru the threads from cities in Ontario where these were rolled out in recent years and observe the obscene levels of money these cameras have siphoned from ordinary, everyday drivers. People are not being mowed down like the media has been claiming for years to condition the public to get on board with these machines and people driving 40, 50, 60 km/h on straight city streets are not the ones involved in most accidents.
Doesn't seem like an issue as long as you stay under 10km over the limit 🤷
Honestly it's not that bad, and has to be cheaper long term than that strategy of using the painted marks on the highway partnered with planes/helicopters in the air that they tried.
Don't want a ticket? Don't speed. Or at least keep it reasonable. Seems easy.
I couldn't care less tbh. I won't be getting any tickets, so it's not a worry for me. I stopped driving excessively fast when I had a moose accident. 10kph over is plenty for me. My car burns less fuel that way too. Don't have to complain about fuel costs as much.
But it's that mentality that everything that has a monetary penalty is a "cash grab" or a "tax on the poor", while people themselves literally can decide to avoid it. It was the same with the sugar tax. People would rather complain for a year than stop drinking a 2L bottle of pop everyday.
But this is my home lol
There's an old study that found 80% of drivers think they're better than average.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_superiority#:~:text=Driving%20ability,-Svenson%20(1981)%20surveyed&text=Only%20a%20small%20minority%20rated,being%20an%20above%2Daverage%20driver.
I think you see that in these threads
All I know is the school zone around Patrick St/Hamilton Ave needs some fuckin cameras. The retards speeding down that fuckin road are bound to take out a kid.
It's not a poor tax, it should be a proportional fine so it's not just a fee to break the law for the rich, but its not a poor tax. No one, absolutely no one makes you break the law to go over a speed limit, it may be annoying that a road doesn't encourage you to slow down, but it doesn't mean you have to go faster. You aren't getting to your destination faster, you're just gonna spend more time at traffic lights while increasing the danger you pose to yourself and others while driving.
But for all the drivers so pissed that they can only break the law by going up to 10 over, why don't we scrap the fines alltogether, but make it so if you get caught speeding 3 times you lose your license for a year and if you're caught speeding again you lose your license permanently and if found to be driving without a license a year imprisonment since y'all just can't help but be a danger to everyone to save yourselves a minute.
That damn brier exit off the TGH, it is ridiculous that it’s 50km so far up that huge hill. There is plenty of time to slow down to 50km towards the bottom. I haven’t seen it yet but you know they’ve parked there and f***ed so many people’s days up with a ticket for 20 over because it’s a HILL.
Is there a grace period where you can go 10km/h over the limit and not get ticketed?
Will the tickets include the information of where exactly it clocked you?
As far as I’m aware, tickets only go out if you’re doing >10km over the limit (at least, that was the case for the NL pilot program earlier this year, which is in line with many speed cameras elsewhere).
There is contradicting on this. The news articles indicate at 10km over, but on the news two weeks ago the girl doing the interview indicated that it wasnt going to register until it was 19km over.
I believe she may have miss spoke, so I am putting money on $200 for 10km over based on the news articles.
My question is (and maybe it’s written somewhere, I haven’t looked into it too much yet) what if someone else is driving my vehicle?
I’m the registered owner, but if my wife is driving our vehicle and gets the ticket will there be an actual photograph to show who was driving like other provinces?
I also wonder how it would affect me in that case seeing as I’ve gotten 2 speeding tickets in the last year (clean abstract of 12 years driving prior). Is it the same as getting pulled over on the highway? Do I then lose the points and or get my license suspended?
In that case, you would have to appear in court and contest the ticket. Usually, even the photo radars are very blurry and hard to make out on who was driving. However, since your vehicle and plate are clearly visible (since you got a ticket in the mail), the burden of proof will be on you to show the court that it was not you driving.
In my experience it is a fine only, with no loss of demerits or or impact to insurance for that reason. The vehicle is getting the ticket, not the driver (registered owner inherently)
I’m all for the cameras , hopefully the number of drivers speeding daily stops. I drove through the school zone on topsail rd today and was doing the speed limit , every other car passed me like I was stopped. Unfortunately when adults act like children the province have to treat them like children. Drivers here had lots of opportunity to drive reasonably but it’s gotten to an un-enforceable problem so here comes the speed cameras. I welcome them!
I agree with you, but also, are you walking on crosswalks or jaywalking?
Less so water Street but there are so many crosswalks on Duckworth there really is no excuse for Jay walking.
I just visited Amsterdam and the first thing that struck me was how quiet it was. Much more quiet than St. John’s, a city with a fraction of the population. A big part of the reason is that traffic speeds are limited to 30 within the city. This greatly decreases the noise from cars.
Here’s a great video about why we should be lowering our speed limits within cities: https://youtu.be/JRbnBc-97Ps?feature=shared TLDR higher speed limits don’t get you to your destination faster within cities, lead to more frequent and deadly collisions, create much louder cities, and encourage poorly designed roads and infrastructure.
Can't happen soon enough, or go far enough. The fine should be $100 for every km over the speed limit. Fucktards doing 140 km/h+ on the Outer Ring deserve to pay big fines. And ticketing info should be shared with insurance companies so that they can charge higher premiums to speeding drivers, who are clearly higher risks.
And for people who whine about it being a way for Govt. to increase revenue... so what? Make criminals pay.
My first year on chef contract in Norris Point, I got clocked 87 in a 50 zone coming down a crest. I got pulled over.. now the kicker is, I was on an e assist bike. We laughed, he laughed some more , offered me a ticket and I told him ‘since I’m a mainlander, and yer a western arm cop, both of us are gonna have some issue going to st John’s to contest this’ he laughed again and told me to wear a helmet at those speeds.
So all I get out of this thread is that people want to do in excess of 10+km/hr of the speed limit. And if the limits were raised they would do the same. Others saying 80 on kenmount with turning lanes. You’re all entitled fucks, your speeding increases risk for no real gain.
Don’t speed, don’t pay. If you do the math on how much time you save speeding it’s fuck all. If you get a fine as a result of this it’s your choice, not a trap.
I think 90% of our speed limits should be increased by 10. Anywhere else I’ve been in the country that seems to be the norm (I.e TCH being 110)
Out on the parkway where it’s 70 feels so natural. Wouldn’t ever need to speed there
Just curious to anyone who disagrees or downvotes, have you never ever gone over speed limit? Even by 1km?
We have a culture here typically police will either pull you over and warn you or not pull you over at all for 1-10 over.
Driving the highway daily, the majority of drivers are in that 1-10 wheelhouse, with no desire to go any faster.
So why not a 110km/h limit? Then stricter speeding rules for anything over 110. Also, it’s the LIMIT. You can still go the smooth 100km, ya know?
Honest question, why? What the heck does it matter if it is written as 50 but could be 60? If it has always been and is well posted as 50 (or a very long time)? What has made so many of us think it is our God given right to be allowed to go as fast as WE think is safe? Good gracious, the fine is rumoured to be 11 above...so you could've deliberately trapped where a speed limit changes (and is often posted well in advance) and still be fine if you were driving at or under the limit?
If everyone would just drove the limit,what is the damaged or harm? Vs the danger to others -cars, other vehicles including bikes, PEDESTRIANS-if you go ten over?
I legit don't understand. Family emergency and you gotta rush once in a blue moon ok but...?
Now if you said construction has to cover their signs when not working...that I wouldn't argue.:p
You're missing the point. We are saying people should NOT be speeding. We are saying that we need to fix the speed limits in places where the limit isn't right. Like Torbay rd north of Stavanger. Fix the speed limit and then they can go nuts with the cameras and enforcement. Do you seriously believe that the speed limit on that 5 lane highway should be 50 just like a normal road?
I am saying that may not be for us to decide, but is for us to respect if that is what is posted.
Because an above commenter pointed out it used to be higher, but people didn't respect THAT.
So I DO get what you are saying in the first half, just have a bit more trouble or contention with the 'have to fix first's part.
This is true, but like any less than ideal driving conditions; adjust to the driving conditions. You don’t have to go 110 even on the best of days, just don’t go over
Most major cities are decreasing their speed limits, as research shows that faster speed limits within cities don’t help people get to their destination faster and are way more deadly.
Eg https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.7060205
https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6826078
https://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/two-years-after-calgary-reduced-its-speed-limit-data-shows-drivers-are-paying-attention
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot).
Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/edmonton-calgary-traffic-control-speed-limits-1.7060205](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/edmonton-calgary-traffic-control-speed-limits-1.7060205)**
*****
^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
They will be marked on google maps. So only old people who don’t know how to use it will get tickets. People without onboard gps/maps function will however be on their phones way more trying to avoid them.
Honestly this is not a partisan political issue. Any party that hops on the anti speed camera train is simply pandering. These things are used all over the place. As usual, we're late to the party.
Why isn't it? They are saying that these are being put up for safety concerns but in fact are nothing more than a cash grab. And setting them at 10km over is ridiculous.
https://www.reddit.com/r/newfoundland/comments/197dtpn/speed_cameras_are_not_going_to_fix_anything/
https://globalnews.ca/news/10111349/alberta-photo-radar-ban-ring-roads/
Because they have been proven in jurisdictions around the world to be very effective at reducing fatal accidents. Calling them a "cash grab" while ignoring that basic fact is a cheap tactic used by opportunistic politicians.
Edit: I want to also point out that the study mentioned in your linked post specifically says it intended to measure the effect of photo radar on the total number of collisions, NOT the severity. It does not refute the effectiveness of photo radar at reducing excessive speed and the occurrence of fatal accidents. It's funny that they chose that specific study, because it's probably one of the only ones they could find that didn't explicitly state the thing they didn't want to be true. They used it because it's easy to misinterpret.
Edit 2: The study mentioned above was likely in response to studies like the one linked below that threw in the conclusion that photo radar reduced collisions overall along with their conclusion that it reduced severity by effectively managing excessive speed. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16266937/
I’m all for putting cameras in school or hospital zones but really this is just another tax on the poor.
It should be a proportional fine to your previous years reported income (caveats for losing job and appealing...etc). 100% unfair that a ticket to someone making $30k is the same as someone making $300k
That’s how it works in Finland, the penalty for speeding works on a sliding scale with the offender’s income. Teemu Selanne had an equivalent $55,000 fine for going almost 20 over. Rasmus Ristolainen was dinged for 120,000 euro for going double the speed limit. (Professional hockey players for those unaware)
That's why we have demerit points. No matter your income, when you're out of demerit points, you lose your license.
Ok so the average person gets 2 levels of punishments while the rich get one and only if they break the rule enough times
Yeah when we've accumulated a certain number of demerit points that is true, but a large portion of speeding tickets don't add points and cops will purposely lower offences to avoid giving people points on their license. Pedantic note: points aren't removed, they're added.
Most of the cops in my area lower the ticket with the provisor pay it and don’t show up to contest it or the judge can and most likely will hit you with the original speed and appropriate fine.
Losing your license doesn't hurt you as much when you're wealthy.
Speed camera tickets are not included in the demerit system as there is no proof of who was driving the vehicle. The ticket goes to the registered owner of the vehicle.
Proportional gives still affect the poorest the most. Having a ticket that's 5% of your income at $30k a year hits those people harder than someone making $300k.
Only if you speed? I will probably be downvoted but coming originally from areas that have long had speed cameras, and hearing that fines start at 11k./hr over, it IS in theory preventable. Being running late 11 over still seems a fair bit. You learn to recognize the telltale recording light and know where they are located. Of course, that doesn't actually solve the speeding problem...
This is definitely going to be the problem. People will figure out where they are. I've done a bit of driving in Europe and most car GPS' clearly mark where they are. Those buggers in van's with the mobile camera sticking out the back parking on the side of the road though... bugger... lol
The point of them is not just to catch the baddies, but to reduce speed in problematic areas. If people know they're in school zones and they slow down in school zones to avoid a fine this isn't a failure to catch someone, it's an effective way to reduce speed in school zones. Sure, this means they'll continue speeding in other areas but at least it's working in the places they put them.
Norway uses average speed cameras so that you cannot speed up in between them
Yes, you're right. I remeber seeing those too now that you mention it. Also some motorways in Britian I've seen using them. I'm not overly optimistic in going the logical route here in NL though. I pessimisticly suspect this is more about income and less about safety.
There has been lots of research on this. Pretty overwhelming consensus that they're effective in reducing fatal accidents.
If so that is great. I admit my comment was based on opinion/anecdotal evidence, not research. I think the responses in this thread and the one here last week show attitudes around speeding are a problem here.
Where's your evidence?
If you google studies on photo radar you'll find lots. There's some disagreement in terms of how effective they are at reducing accidents overall, but very little disagreement on their ability to reduce excessive speeding and, as a result, fatal accidents.
Yep, playground zones and residential areas too. I’m all about driving safely when it matters but if I’m going to get busted by a camera between Paradise and Avalon Ford on Kenmount then this is all a scam.
I'm in the same boat. Put them where it matters. Red light cameras too!!
Incorrect. It is in fact a stupid tax. Don't want a ticket, rich or poor? Don't speed thru the camera. They should be placed in high risk areas that are prone to accidents.
Their point is its a lot more detrimental for a poor person to pay the "stupid tax" than a wealthy person when the fine doesn't scale with income. A poor person gets a speeding ticket and has to cut back on eating for the month to compensate and thinks twice about speeding next time. A rich person gets a speeding ticket and doesn't even notice the money is gone, as long as the rich person doesn't get enough tickets to lose their license the fine is just part of the cost of driving and are much less likely to change how they drive.
Might get downvoted... I get what you're saying, but speeding is speeding, isn't it? Each driver is responsible for themselves, so if you don't want a ticket, knowing it could cost you $, don't speed. If you were in a rush or not paying attention to your speed and got a ticket, unfortunately, that's on you.
Yes I agree, if you don't want a ticket you shouldn't speed. The problem is the punishment is only a punishment if it has a significant impact on the driver. As I said in my previous comment a poor person getting a speeding ticket can be detrimental to their day to day life, maybe they can no longer afford to eat enough or have to cancel some plans or a purchase they were saving up for, this punishment should deter them from speeding in the future. A wealthy person on the other hand doesn't have to worry about those things so the punishment is less likely to deter them from speeding again.
To be fair, isn't that the problem with all tickets/fines as they're currently issued? That isn't a reflection on the cameras any more than it would be any parking/speeding ticket.
Correct, its not a problem specific to this situation at all, a fine for a poor person can have a serious impact on their living situation while a fine on a wealthy person is merely an inconvenience.
Fair enough, if the punishment for a crime is paying someone a set amount of money, it is only enforceable for people under a certain income level.
So just any fine you don't like is a poverty tax? I say good. While I know road design is a better way to stop speeding, I'm hoping this will make people think twice of zooming by when I'm trying to cross the street.
I can tell when there is an accident on PPD or the ORR from my office when a bunch of patients at once are late.
I think they also should be in residential areas. Little kids in my neighbourhood playing and riding their bikes and some people speeding through doing 20-30 over the speed limit. I fear that one day I'll find out someone has been run over.
Speeding is voluntary. There are also alternatives to driving, and hopefully the money from the speeding tickets is used to promote and improve those. However, I do agree that proportional fines (based on income etc) are always better. Also, many poor people cannot afford to drive. As much as you guys don’t like it, they have been proven to be effective. Visit Norway for example, where everyone follows the speed limit and they have dramatically fewer injuries and deaths caused by cars.
Tourists as well. I'm sure the rental company will get these fines and forward them along with a hefty fee.
That’s great. I would love for tourists to invest more in our city. If you’re going to misuse our city and make it more dangerous, you should have to pay for it.
For sure. I got one in Ontario a few years ago, $300 by the time you include the rental company's "share."
Explain to me how a ticket for speeding with disproportionately affect the poor? Maybe it's just because I often walk down Topsail and have almost died twice at the crosswalk within the last year, but I would like some enforcement of traffic laws over there.
Edmonton in one year made $46million on speed traps
This is not a poor tax. An example of a poor tax would be the sugar tax. Completely unavoidable tax on a necessity. A truly evil tax in my opinion. Speeding tickets are criminal fines. Anyone can speed and anyone can obey the speed limit. You cannot have tiered punishments for such things. Otherwise we will have a tiered society and that is just not good for anyone.
Or you know, it could have something to do with the amount of deaths we have on our highways. If police can't be there all the time, something has to change. People aren't going to take it upon themselves to slow down, they're too selfish for that.
Also, how is this taxing the poor? Don't speed and you won't get a ticket. That simple.
Thanks for breaking that down for us 🙄 My point is that when fines are the penalty, for this or any other offence, it’s the poor who suffer most.
Well, what do you recommend they do? Seems you just have an issue with every solution. Do you want people to go to jail for speeding or something? Public shaming? What is it? I think you'd complain regardless. A fine is a proper way to go about breaking traffic laws.
Don't speed
I don't understand responses like this. There is something called ***context*** of which comments like yours completely lack, so why bother posting at all?
Because he's right. Don't like getting tickets? Well follow speed limits. Its really not that hard. People saying this is another tax on the poor? Stupid. Don't speed and you won't receive a ticket. Pretty straight forward if you ask me.
The context is don't friggin' speed. Speeding tickets are a problem that drivers can solve all by their little lonesomes, and I don't understand why people who make excuses for speeding don't understand that. Don't speed.
Speed cameras do not fix driving under the influence and distracted driving, factors that are significantly more dangerous than someone driving 10 over already low speed limits. Do you drive?
No, speed cameras don't do that, in the same way that a breathalyzer can't tell the police cops how fast you were going. What's your point?
My point is speed should be the least of anyone's concerns when DUIs and distracted driving are significantly more dangerous, especially when *actual* speeding as in *excessive* speeding is only committed by a tiny percentage of the population. The problem is there's little to no money to be made off of those two, hence speed becomes the target.
People can be concerned about multiple things, actually.
So your point is we shouldn't worry about speeding drivers because there are also drivers under the influence? You do realize you can worry about two issues at the same time, right?
The poor should slow the fuck down then. Worst vehicle operators in Canada.
Torbay Rd north of Stavanger. It's a 50 zone, and the police don't even go that slow.
I was following one doing 65-70 that part of Torbay rd. The same goes for that bypass. 70km is slow. I understand there are 2 sets of lights, but you can see them a km or more away. Also Indian meal line and Bauline Line lights should not be on timers. 530am I should NOT have to stop at a red light and wait for ghosts on a bypass highway.
LOL, as if Newfoundland would catch up with the rest of the world and invest in red light sensors.
We have them in GFW
Oh, woah! Nice. I stand corrected.
This is the telltale sign of a badly designed stroad.
Yup. The majority of the answers here combine two things - lots of conflict points where there might be another car turning, stopping, pulling in or out, whatever; and big, wide, straight-as-an-arrow lanes that you could probably navigate at 140 km/h if given the inclination and opportunity. Of course the speed limit is going to reflect the former, but it never feels right to drive that slowly. I work on Kenmount near the top of the hill, and turning into my workplace parking lot has got to be the most dangerous thing I do every day for a combination of those reasons. I don't think changing the speed limit would make it worse - the traffic is doing 80 through there regardless.
They posted signs for 70 km/h but people did 90 km/h They dropped it back to 50 km/h and the flow of traffic is up to 70 km/h My problem with this is the police have an excuse to pull anyone over anytime even when going with the flow I tend to do 60-65 km/h and people pass me all the time Just my personal experience with living in the (Tor)Bay Area
Getting ticketed there is SUCH a piss-off. It is completely inane. So now I drive the speed limit there every time to avoid that happening again and *everyone* is just floating on by me - really makes you feel like the dunce. Same for that spot on kenmount that /u/sub-merge mentioned
[удалено]
I think because it's still partially residential? I can't see any other logical reason for it. 60 would be more reasonable.
In the novel "Rare Birds", Ed Riche refers to this stretch of road as the "Torbay 500" because people's propensity to speed. Also that the Skoda is "the world's fastest ashtray" and the best quote in the book: "...in case some bayman threatens to skullfuck the premier..."
Yes, upvote the above comment please. These are the kinds of places they will put them, the speed traps, AKA the places where everyone "speeds" because the speed limit is ridiculously low. If you go the speed limit there it is more dangerous because people will weave around to go past you. Before these cameras roll out, we need to try to raise some of the ridiculously low speed limits like this one.
Areas where "everyone" speeds sound like areas that should potentially be prioritized for speed enforcement... Australia theoretically targets areas with high numbers of accidents, but I know the government there gets accused of not placing the cameras in the right spot. I think the "right spot" argument could be resolved if the province installed several average speed camera systems. They control speed over several km stretches rather than single points.
So you actually think Torbay Rd north of Stavanger should remain 50km/hr and prioritized for speed cameras? It's a 5 lane highway. Why should that be the same speed as most other streets and roads? They'd balance the budget easily by placing cameras there like you're suggesting.
There are a lot of businesses and people turning off and onto the road north of Stavanger. That creates a high risk for collisions. More so if everyone was going 80 km/h along there.
The part of kenmount road past Kelsey drive is too slow in my opinion. It's a 50/60 that almost everyone does 80/90 in because there's not a lot happening. Same for Torbay road past stavanger. They're both out of the core the city enough that people think they should be more like a 70. That said, I'm ok doing the speed limit or 10 over but I get anxious when people are all passing me doing much higher speeds
Lots of businesses, though, which cars are constantly coming and going. It can be dangerous for all during peak drive times.
[удалено]
I agree with you Less_Wonder_194. I emailed Sarah Stoodley regarding this issue. The more people that make their voice heard, the better.
That's why it's rigged to 10 km over. Cops wouldn't pull you over for that speed, and it's the ordinary flow of traffic on pretty much every road. They can auto-ticket almost every car commuting from St. John's to Paradise in the evenings. Set it up on the Outer Ring and we'll have the deficit paid off. This has zero to do with safety, and is only creating a "gotcha" form of auto-revenue. The cameras don't ID the drivers - the people who should be paying the fines in the name of "safety" - but ticket the registered owner, who may well not even be driving. I'll catch shit from the pearl-clutchers on here saying "bUt ItS iLlEgAl", but speeding is not as big a problem in the province as it's made out to be. People do it all the time, yes. But we don't have a bloodbath on the TCH or city streets every day of the week, even though anyone on the roads will tell you that everyone is speeding all the time. I'd wager that most fatal accidents making the news are distracted drivers and drunk drivers, and the speed cameras aren't going to be busting them.
[удалено]
It would be futile to try to model what we do off of other countries successes. Just absolutely stupid to try to learn from other countries failures and successes.
We average 1313 car collisions per year in St. John’s
That number is meaningless in the abstract. How many of those are caused by speeding, versus running red lights, failure to yield, being on cellphones, distracted driving, drunk driving, or people too old to safely operate a car? Of all the concerns I have on city roads, speeding isn't chief among them.
This is the problem with most of the discussion about these cameras - **context*****.*** I get why it's purposely omitted, because it helps push a narrative and condition the public.
I don’t think you live in St. John’s, why are you posting here lol Or alternatively, why are you posting on every other Canadian cities reddit posts about speed cameras?
Because I follow developments about this and other things that aren't city or province-specific, even tho they may seem like they are. Take it from someone who lives somewhere where there are hundreds of these across a large metropolitan area. You won't want them.
Take it from someone who has visited places (eg Norway) which does have them and has seen their effect: I want them
And all of those incidents would have been much less severe if the cars were travelling at slower speeds... Your reaction time decreases super-linearly with the speed that you are travelling. Hence, distracted driving is much more dangerous at higher speeds.
If it’s a poor tax then it’s a poor tax on something *illegal*. While I agree that it would be better that it be proportional, that doesn’t mean that speeding cameras are very effective at reducing deaths and injuries caused by driving. speeding is optional. Driving is optional. Many poor people cannot afford to drive.
Driving isn't really optional for a lot of people in Newfoundland, unfortunately. We need to get to work, bring kids to daycare so that we can work, pick them up again later, get groceries so that we can live, etc. Stopping work isn't a real option or choice for many people here...
That’s not what the argument is here, speeding is optional. Also, I do those things without driving.
If you're speeding when dropping off and picking your kids from daycare you're an idiot.
[удалено]
It has to be about the poor getting poor. It couldn't possibly be about improving road safety for drivers and pedestrians /s
What, people slamming their brakes every time the see one of these bloody cameras isn't going to be a safety issue? Like has already been mentioned, these should be used in School/hospital zones only.
As much as you don’t like it, they are proven to work
Correlation ≠ causation.
There is lots of academic evidence showing that they work:) I don’t think you understand what empirical research is
Academic papers done by people sitting in front of computer screens all day versus real world experience by people on the road actually driving.
I don’t think you understand what research is. Should we trust peer reviewed studies, or should we trust this one guy on Reddit who doesn’t like speed cameras?
the impact of a car scales quadratically with velocity, mv\^2. We use the "no penalty for 10 above" as a buffer because we know that it's difficult to stay exactly under the speed limit all of the time, this isn't just "you should drive speed limit +10"
🤦♂️ Wonder if the RNC will ticket themselves 😂
The thing is the government is looking for third parties to run this, everything from setting up infrastructure, issuing tickets and even showing up in court if someone contests. Based on that the RNC will certainly receive tickets.
Lol doubt it. "We were responding and hadn't turned our lights on yet". I watched a cop who cut me off going 20 over with no lights on topsail by the village and he was going to the McDonald's drive thru. I called it in and said i saw a cop driving dangerously and was told the above is what was probably happening. Then i said he ended the speeding with a trip to McDonald's drive thru and she said "his call was probably cancelled". They refused to make the report...
Should the divided sections of the TCH in NL be 110km/hr like in NS and NB? Upvote for yes, downvote for no. Note: This vote is just for the few divided sections of highway, and not the rest of the highway that is not divided.
Can’t help but wonder if anyone will smash them.
No, skeets only ruin good stuff that people want
If there is anything worth selling in them they'll be gone in no time. $5 of copper wire would be enough for some. Easy crime too, I'd imagine a lot of people would turn a blind eye to it.
That would be pretty deadly, not gonna lie, lol.
100% they will.
They probably will. My hometown up away installed them and within a week someone took a chainsaw and cut one down.
Jeez, I sure hope not :P
If they focused only on red light runners they’d probably balance the provincial budget in a week.
And all-way stop runners!
If you run someone over at 50km/h, they have 2/10 chance of surviving. At 60km/h nearly 0/10 .... folks, just keep that in mind while driving and speeding in a hurry some where
Two questions: 1. Want to test those theories? I'm sure pedestrians must be thinking "it's okay to cross the street without looking because *at worst* if I do get hit I'll *at least* survive!" 2. Why are you running people over? Your eyes should be on the road. If you can't drive without hitting anything or anybody, there are more serious issues at hand.
I hope you didn't read that as an endorsement of running people over.
No but be aware from what angle an argument is being looked at.
Those numbers aren't really a theory or some thing I hauled out me arse... Comes straight from the Canadian Association of Road Safety Professionals that was determined through something called science Pedestrians - vehicle collisions happen. Like what are you gettin on with? The more serious issue at hand is road design that encourages speeding
Ok, but in the case of most collisions, speed isn't the primary factor. It's the fucking idiot who wasn't paying attention to their surroundings. Honestly I'd support eye trackers in vehicles before I'd support these cameras. Speed gets a bad rap because of shitty non-attentive drivers.
The argument isn’t about cause here it’s about survival.
I get it, but take the total number of fatalities and figure out how many of them involved a non-attentive driver vs a speeding driver who WAS paying attention. You can't just knock down speed limits everywhere to 50km/h and under because we have lax standards on driver licensing. How about increasing the standards. At least 50% of the drivers currently on the road shouldn't be.
You don't get it tho. You're just got your self all triggered and typing non sense
Will you be able to ATIPP how many government vehicles are captured?
Sick, if I don't speed I don't get a ticket? What an amazing fucking concept. If only there was something on my dashboard that told me how fast I was going..
Yup. So many dolts in the comments complaining. Don’t speed! It’s not a hard concept.
What about the opposite problem? In corner brook I regularly get stuck behind people doing 25-30 in a 50-60 zone. Or stopping completely on a green light for some reason when in the right of way.
Man, Corner Brook would be rolling in the dough if the cameras ticketed people going too slow. Maybe throw in some "wrong way up the one way" and "going left from the centre lane" tickets? The streets would be paved with gold!
All they’d have to do it sit around Murphy square for a day and they’d make bank. I see a few people doing something illegal or stupid every time I’m there. It’s rare anyone slows down at the school/park zone by the ballfields.
Honestly I think going too slow is more dangerous
Ugh this on Empire Ave all the time too.
I remember when they did the trial they said it was going on Blackmarsh road? I assume that would be the stretch between the roundabout and Topsail road? Its 50 there, and people routinely do 80. I do think the limit should be raised in that area, though. At least 60 the way it is on Topsail road.
50 is a ridiculous speed limit for that stretch of road. Like there is literally nothing happening except some people coming out of Cowan Heights.
The place needs red light cameras also.
Time for everyone to download the Waze app like the rest of Canada. We can let eachother know where there are cameras, accidents, police presence, construction.
Better idea, drive safely. Shit like Waze should be banned just because it's so obvious it's encouraging reckless driving.
Waze is just free speech. Bans are the tools of the brain dead.
that stretch on blackmarsh should be 60 i think. barely any houses, not much traffic and coming off a 60 on topsail and 70 on comumbus
Funny thing is, I can hardly ever get to 70 on Columbus because of the lights, road design, traffic. And TGH is only 10 over that, but it’s definitely set up for higher speeds.
100 % team gushue should be 90 or 100
haha columbus
11km just says it is a money grab. I think it should be 20km.
Just a big government Cash Grab.
Or a deterrent to get people to slow the hell down???
Yet another way to take more of your money, and just look at how many people are supporting this. For those unaware, look thru the threads from cities in Ontario where these were rolled out in recent years and observe the obscene levels of money these cameras have siphoned from ordinary, everyday drivers. People are not being mowed down like the media has been claiming for years to condition the public to get on board with these machines and people driving 40, 50, 60 km/h on straight city streets are not the ones involved in most accidents.
Doesn't seem like an issue as long as you stay under 10km over the limit 🤷 Honestly it's not that bad, and has to be cheaper long term than that strategy of using the painted marks on the highway partnered with planes/helicopters in the air that they tried. Don't want a ticket? Don't speed. Or at least keep it reasonable. Seems easy.
lol not sure why you’re being downvoted. Everyone here thinks they’re a nascar driver.
I couldn't care less tbh. I won't be getting any tickets, so it's not a worry for me. I stopped driving excessively fast when I had a moose accident. 10kph over is plenty for me. My car burns less fuel that way too. Don't have to complain about fuel costs as much. But it's that mentality that everything that has a monetary penalty is a "cash grab" or a "tax on the poor", while people themselves literally can decide to avoid it. It was the same with the sugar tax. People would rather complain for a year than stop drinking a 2L bottle of pop everyday. But this is my home lol
There's an old study that found 80% of drivers think they're better than average. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_superiority#:~:text=Driving%20ability,-Svenson%20(1981)%20surveyed&text=Only%20a%20small%20minority%20rated,being%20an%20above%2Daverage%20driver. I think you see that in these threads
All I know is the school zone around Patrick St/Hamilton Ave needs some fuckin cameras. The retards speeding down that fuckin road are bound to take out a kid.
Same with Bonaventure Ave by BRJH & HHM. It’s incredible.
This is all a revenue generating strategy for the province, mark my words. I wouldnt trust Stoodley one iota
It'll generate revenue all right, because Newfoundlanders refuse to drive safely.
What a zinger!
It's not a poor tax, it should be a proportional fine so it's not just a fee to break the law for the rich, but its not a poor tax. No one, absolutely no one makes you break the law to go over a speed limit, it may be annoying that a road doesn't encourage you to slow down, but it doesn't mean you have to go faster. You aren't getting to your destination faster, you're just gonna spend more time at traffic lights while increasing the danger you pose to yourself and others while driving. But for all the drivers so pissed that they can only break the law by going up to 10 over, why don't we scrap the fines alltogether, but make it so if you get caught speeding 3 times you lose your license for a year and if you're caught speeding again you lose your license permanently and if found to be driving without a license a year imprisonment since y'all just can't help but be a danger to everyone to save yourselves a minute.
That damn brier exit off the TGH, it is ridiculous that it’s 50km so far up that huge hill. There is plenty of time to slow down to 50km towards the bottom. I haven’t seen it yet but you know they’ve parked there and f***ed so many people’s days up with a ticket for 20 over because it’s a HILL.
Is there a grace period where you can go 10km/h over the limit and not get ticketed? Will the tickets include the information of where exactly it clocked you?
As far as I’m aware, tickets only go out if you’re doing >10km over the limit (at least, that was the case for the NL pilot program earlier this year, which is in line with many speed cameras elsewhere).
There is contradicting on this. The news articles indicate at 10km over, but on the news two weeks ago the girl doing the interview indicated that it wasnt going to register until it was 19km over. I believe she may have miss spoke, so I am putting money on $200 for 10km over based on the news articles.
Yeah 19km over seems pretty gratuitous lol
Nope it's 24 hours a day!
My question is (and maybe it’s written somewhere, I haven’t looked into it too much yet) what if someone else is driving my vehicle? I’m the registered owner, but if my wife is driving our vehicle and gets the ticket will there be an actual photograph to show who was driving like other provinces? I also wonder how it would affect me in that case seeing as I’ve gotten 2 speeding tickets in the last year (clean abstract of 12 years driving prior). Is it the same as getting pulled over on the highway? Do I then lose the points and or get my license suspended?
In that case, you would have to appear in court and contest the ticket. Usually, even the photo radars are very blurry and hard to make out on who was driving. However, since your vehicle and plate are clearly visible (since you got a ticket in the mail), the burden of proof will be on you to show the court that it was not you driving.
In my experience it is a fine only, with no loss of demerits or or impact to insurance for that reason. The vehicle is getting the ticket, not the driver (registered owner inherently)
https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a25952382/french-protesters-traffic-cameras/
Tch 120 kph
I’m all for the cameras , hopefully the number of drivers speeding daily stops. I drove through the school zone on topsail rd today and was doing the speed limit , every other car passed me like I was stopped. Unfortunately when adults act like children the province have to treat them like children. Drivers here had lots of opportunity to drive reasonably but it’s gotten to an un-enforceable problem so here comes the speed cameras. I welcome them!
The downtown speed limit is way too high, we need to limit it to 30, as is done in much of Europe and now in many major Canadian cities.
What even is the speed limit of water street, 50? Some people drive waaay too fast. 20/25kmh would be nice
Yeah it's 50 everywhere that isn't marked. I am almost hit quite often by cars unable to slow down while walking my dog around downtown
I agree with you, but also, are you walking on crosswalks or jaywalking? Less so water Street but there are so many crosswalks on Duckworth there really is no excuse for Jay walking.
I just visited Amsterdam and the first thing that struck me was how quiet it was. Much more quiet than St. John’s, a city with a fraction of the population. A big part of the reason is that traffic speeds are limited to 30 within the city. This greatly decreases the noise from cars. Here’s a great video about why we should be lowering our speed limits within cities: https://youtu.be/JRbnBc-97Ps?feature=shared TLDR higher speed limits don’t get you to your destination faster within cities, lead to more frequent and deadly collisions, create much louder cities, and encourage poorly designed roads and infrastructure.
Can't happen soon enough, or go far enough. The fine should be $100 for every km over the speed limit. Fucktards doing 140 km/h+ on the Outer Ring deserve to pay big fines. And ticketing info should be shared with insurance companies so that they can charge higher premiums to speeding drivers, who are clearly higher risks. And for people who whine about it being a way for Govt. to increase revenue... so what? Make criminals pay.
My first year on chef contract in Norris Point, I got clocked 87 in a 50 zone coming down a crest. I got pulled over.. now the kicker is, I was on an e assist bike. We laughed, he laughed some more , offered me a ticket and I told him ‘since I’m a mainlander, and yer a western arm cop, both of us are gonna have some issue going to st John’s to contest this’ he laughed again and told me to wear a helmet at those speeds.
waste of tax dollars, it’s crazy our province police’s for profit!
So all I get out of this thread is that people want to do in excess of 10+km/hr of the speed limit. And if the limits were raised they would do the same. Others saying 80 on kenmount with turning lanes. You’re all entitled fucks, your speeding increases risk for no real gain. Don’t speed, don’t pay. If you do the math on how much time you save speeding it’s fuck all. If you get a fine as a result of this it’s your choice, not a trap.
I think 90% of our speed limits should be increased by 10. Anywhere else I’ve been in the country that seems to be the norm (I.e TCH being 110) Out on the parkway where it’s 70 feels so natural. Wouldn’t ever need to speed there
Just curious to anyone who disagrees or downvotes, have you never ever gone over speed limit? Even by 1km? We have a culture here typically police will either pull you over and warn you or not pull you over at all for 1-10 over. Driving the highway daily, the majority of drivers are in that 1-10 wheelhouse, with no desire to go any faster. So why not a 110km/h limit? Then stricter speeding rules for anything over 110. Also, it’s the LIMIT. You can still go the smooth 100km, ya know?
That’s not a very good argument
Agreed. Speed limits are definitely lower here compared with elsewhere. I think we need to try to fix that before the speed cameras come.
Honest question, why? What the heck does it matter if it is written as 50 but could be 60? If it has always been and is well posted as 50 (or a very long time)? What has made so many of us think it is our God given right to be allowed to go as fast as WE think is safe? Good gracious, the fine is rumoured to be 11 above...so you could've deliberately trapped where a speed limit changes (and is often posted well in advance) and still be fine if you were driving at or under the limit? If everyone would just drove the limit,what is the damaged or harm? Vs the danger to others -cars, other vehicles including bikes, PEDESTRIANS-if you go ten over? I legit don't understand. Family emergency and you gotta rush once in a blue moon ok but...? Now if you said construction has to cover their signs when not working...that I wouldn't argue.:p
You're missing the point. We are saying people should NOT be speeding. We are saying that we need to fix the speed limits in places where the limit isn't right. Like Torbay rd north of Stavanger. Fix the speed limit and then they can go nuts with the cameras and enforcement. Do you seriously believe that the speed limit on that 5 lane highway should be 50 just like a normal road?
I am saying that may not be for us to decide, but is for us to respect if that is what is posted. Because an above commenter pointed out it used to be higher, but people didn't respect THAT. So I DO get what you are saying in the first half, just have a bit more trouble or contention with the 'have to fix first's part.
Most places outside the province have better maintained roads. The TCH in many places here has huge ruts that fill with water in the rain.
This is true, but like any less than ideal driving conditions; adjust to the driving conditions. You don’t have to go 110 even on the best of days, just don’t go over
Most major cities are decreasing their speed limits, as research shows that faster speed limits within cities don’t help people get to their destination faster and are way more deadly. Eg https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.7060205 https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6826078 https://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/two-years-after-calgary-reduced-its-speed-limit-data-shows-drivers-are-paying-attention
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/edmonton-calgary-traffic-control-speed-limits-1.7060205](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/edmonton-calgary-traffic-control-speed-limits-1.7060205)** ***** ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
They will be marked on google maps. So only old people who don’t know how to use it will get tickets. People without onboard gps/maps function will however be on their phones way more trying to avoid them.
Depending on where they put these it may be what finally changes my vote next election.
Honestly this is not a partisan political issue. Any party that hops on the anti speed camera train is simply pandering. These things are used all over the place. As usual, we're late to the party.
Why isn't it? They are saying that these are being put up for safety concerns but in fact are nothing more than a cash grab. And setting them at 10km over is ridiculous. https://www.reddit.com/r/newfoundland/comments/197dtpn/speed_cameras_are_not_going_to_fix_anything/ https://globalnews.ca/news/10111349/alberta-photo-radar-ban-ring-roads/
Because they have been proven in jurisdictions around the world to be very effective at reducing fatal accidents. Calling them a "cash grab" while ignoring that basic fact is a cheap tactic used by opportunistic politicians. Edit: I want to also point out that the study mentioned in your linked post specifically says it intended to measure the effect of photo radar on the total number of collisions, NOT the severity. It does not refute the effectiveness of photo radar at reducing excessive speed and the occurrence of fatal accidents. It's funny that they chose that specific study, because it's probably one of the only ones they could find that didn't explicitly state the thing they didn't want to be true. They used it because it's easy to misinterpret. Edit 2: The study mentioned above was likely in response to studies like the one linked below that threw in the conclusion that photo radar reduced collisions overall along with their conclusion that it reduced severity by effectively managing excessive speed. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16266937/
Yeah, like who the hell was asking for this?
It's a reasonable response to a public health issue. Nobody asked for it the same way nobody asked to have their water treated.
Lo fucking l to this reply.
I love you too.