Previous Politech message: "Rep. Dick Armey on photo radar: It doesn't make driving safer" http://www.politechbot.com/p-03475.html --- Subject: Re: FC: Rep. Dick Armey on photo radar: It doesn't make driving safer From: Steve Withers <swithersat_private> To: declanat_private On Thu, 2002-05-02 at 15:03, Declan McCullagh wrote: > Previous Politech message: > > "Rep. Armey questions Interior Department photo radar system" > http://www.politechbot.com/p-01998.html New Zealand has had photo radar for years and it DOES slow drivers down...and that does save lives. In slowing them down, it gives them more time to respond to risk situations (other drivers falling asleep at the wheel, etc...) In slowing them down it means if they DO hit each other, injuries are less severe and fatalities fewer in number. In slowing them down it means they are exposed to less risk from their own driving in marginal weather conditions. The law says if you go over the speed limit, you're up for a fine. No one who obeys the law can have any fear from speed cameras. -- Regards, Steve Withers swithersat_private --- From: "Ed Walker" <ed_walkerat_private> To: declanat_private, politechat_private Subject: Re: FW: Rep. Dick Armey on photo radar: It doesn't make driving safer Date: Thu, 02 May 2002 07:35:19 -0700 Declan, I sent you a pointer to Armey's anti-red light camera site about a year ago. At the time, I pointed out that his argument that insurance companies were colluding with law enforcement and transportation engineers (obdisclaimer: I am one) to force drivers to run red lights - with the side effect of *causing* accidents - was ludicrous at best. Remember: always wear your skeptic hat when reading political arguments of any sort. Anyone who can do algebra can follow the AASHTO standards cited for yellow light timing and reveal the self-serving misrepresentation on his site. His definition of a dilemmazone is right out wrong: a dilemmazone is the area where two drivers' decisions about whether a yellow light can be safely passed might conflict. I applaud his efforts to outlaw red-light cameras, but if he wants to be taken seriously, he'll need to come up with arguments that pass the giggle test. You would think he could at least check his facts, I mean, the Texas Transportation Institute is right there! Ed Walker --- Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 11:38:30 -0400 From: "Dave Coyle" <daveat_private> Reply-To: <daveat_private> To: <declanat_private> Subject: Re: FC: Rep. Dick Armey on photo radar: It doesn't make driving safer ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: Declan McCullagh <declanat_private> Date: Wed, 01 May 2002 23:03:25 -0400 >--- > >From: "Diamond, Richard" <Richard.Diamondat_private> >Subject: Forthcoming IIHS Photo Radar "Status Report" >Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 16:03:06 -0400 > >The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety is going to release a "Status >Report" on photo enforcement. The news items they are highlighting tomorrow >is a claim that people are driving more slowly past speed cameras in the >District of Columbia. And this claim is absolutely true, based on my observations. Almost every weekday, between approx. 3-5pm, an unmarked Metropolitan PD vehicle with dashboard-mounted photo radar parks on the right northbound shoulder of I-295 through D.C. And every day, people hit their brakes 100 yards before the speed trap, and once they're out of sight of the vehicle (about 300 yards), everyone hits their accelerator and resumes travelling at 60-70+ mph (speed limit is 50). So how is this making driving safer? Photo radar does nothing but slow people down for a quarter mile and line the coffers of District government. Cheers, -Dave Coyle --- Subject: RE: Rep. Dick Armey on photo radar: It doesn't make driving safer Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 11:49:10 -0700 From: "Chris Brand" <Chris_Brandat_private> To: <declanat_private> X-UIDL: a28fc678388edcbad85b54047e451ea7 A minor correction to the information you posted : >Ø On June 27, 2001, British Columbia ended its five-year photo radar >program: "Speed cameras have no effect on road safety. They are nothing >more than a cash cow." -British Columbia's newly elected (Labour Party) >Premier, Gordon Campbell. "The Insurance Corporation of British Columbia >(ICBC) funded the camera vans. Despite numerous studies, it could not prove >that the photo-radar program had any direct effect on road safety." Gordon Campbell and the *Liberal* Party form the BC government. See http://www.gov.bc.ca/prem/ Chris Brand --- Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 13:19:04 -0700 To: declanat_private From: Jim Warren <jwarrenat_private> Subject: Re: FC: Rep. Dick Armey on photo radar: It doesn't make driving safer Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-UIDL: aaf3b062dcef18c087b11e335c2dc900 >Previous Politech message: > >"Rep. Armey questions Interior Department photo radar system" >http://www.politechbot.com/p-01998.html A few years ago, while waiting for a Californica <sic> legislative committee to get to a public-records bill in their agenda, I stumbled into their hearing of a bill to continue permitting photo-radar ... which was "accidentally" about to be killed due to a sunset clause in the original authorization. A major PARADE of city and county chief cops and high-ups from city and county governments whined and moaned their way through the testimony. I recall that almost ALL of them focused EXCLUSIVELY on how terrible and awful it would be for them to loose the extra traffic-citation loot that had suddenly begun flowing into their departmental, city and county coffers from cop-less, automated photo-radar tickets. Almost to a person, EVERY one of them was focused on the potential loss or revenue! I don't recall a single one of them, even mentioning anything about improved traffic safety ... much less offering any statistics to support such a claim. Their EXCLUSIVE focus was on their fear of loosing that newfound revenue stream from this high-tech automated surveillance-and-extortion system. --jim [Yeah, you can recirculate it if you wish. :-) ] --- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sign this pro-therapeutic cloning petition: http://www.franklinsociety.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu May 02 2002 - 23:23:46 PDT