Colorado’s New Speed Camera System Makes Waze Nearly Useless

[-]

Uptons_BJs@reddit

You know, one major theory why sports cars died in Japan (only the 86 sells four digits per year now) is that their speed enforcement got a lot better. They have mobile speed cameras that change location every night, and speed cameras give you points on your license.

Let’s be honest here, driving is a lot more boring if you can only do the speed limit.

[-]

Yotsubato@reddit

Japanese speed cameras are not bad.

They only flash 40 kph above the limit on expressways. So that’s going 140 in a 100 kph zone.

Outside of expressways they are very rare.

Yeah, look at the Orbis tracker and you'll see the mobile ones are basically only on smaller local roads. There are only a handful of fixed laser traps around the Tokyo expressways anyway and Aqua Line and most of Wangan have none of course. Otherwise you just have to watch out for unmarked police cars.

Plus everyone who likes speeding has a radar/laser detector anyway and they're not illegal.

[-]

The safest is matching the flow of traffic and if the flow of traffic is like 30-40 over the limit (highway 400 in Ontario for example), then it's safer than going 30-40 under everyone else.

[-]

strongmanass@reddit

driving is a lot more boring if you can only do the speed limit

The solution is cars that are enjoyable at the speed limit or a casual cruise. For me that's convertibles with great interiors - aka grand tourers. I love how striking something like a Lamborghini is, but every time I think about a supercar I just think it would be wasted on public roads and a worse experience than a car designed for both cruising and performance driving when you want a change.

[-]

-----seven-----@reddit

Let’s be honest here, driving is a lot more boring if you can only do the speed limit.

As they currently stand, no, I don’t think tollways alone should allow you to drive faster.

But let’s we had tollways where, in order to enter them, you had to pass an advanced driver’s course or be using a sufficiently-good self-driving system. The tollway itself would have higher road safety standards (like F1-style crash barriers), more similar to the Autobahn in Germany. That infrastructure would be more expensive to build and maintain, hence the tolls.

If we had those, then yes, I think they should allow higher speeds, like 120 mph.

[-]

FantomDrive@reddit

I used to run a city's budget shop. These are cheaper than hiring the equivalent number of officers for the same effects on speeding and safety. In reality, this means a savings on your property taxes in most places.

That said, you have to have transparency and accountability from an independent 3rd party to help everyone feel the system is fair. Full audit logs etc.

Adjusting your speed to conditions works both ways, though. People slow down when they don't feel as safe, and speed up when they do. There are lots of very straight, well paved highways here that have a nominal limit of 100 km/h but nearly all non-truck traffic is travelling in excess of 120 km/h (and in some places even more). Because everyone feels safe doing it, and have consistently demonstrated that it is safe to do so. But we don't have a separate truck speed limit. We don't have limits adjusted based conditions. It is perfectly legal for me to drive 100 km/h on a highway at night in the fog if the limit is 100 km/h. But 101 on a bright summer afternoon? Nooooo, limits are limits.

[-]

Mental_Medium3988@reddit

also they were generally set many years ago when cars were less safe and took longer to stop. people naturally slow down as conditions worsen.

That's a slippery slope that I don't like.

[-]

ThisGuyLovesSunshine@reddit

Yup.

[-]

FluidPart4918@reddit

Agrees the guy with a Ferrari California, Aston Martin Vantage and who knows what else. Lol!

Not hating, just pointing it out 😂

[-]

HURCANADA@reddit

How is this relevant at all

[-]

LazyAd7151@reddit

Police state is for the rich.

[-]

FluidPart4918@reddit

Asks the guy with a Ferrari and Porsche 😂

Again, not hating. More power to you. I’m sure you’ve earned it.

I just think it’s funny.

[-]

Go4TLI_03@reddit

Because thanks to how the US (and many other countries, most even) is built, people with money like that often can buy their way out of stuff like that (if you can afford the fine the law doesn't quite count for you like it does for people less well off)

"If the penalty for a crime is a fine, then that law only exists for the lower class."

-~~Final Fantasy Tactics~~ LGM

[-]

BillyJohnsFinds@reddit

True even with the drivers license point system. I paid to have 16 points (12 points revokes your license) worth of tickets down to 2.

[-]

Separate_Teacher1526@reddit

I'd be fine with this if it came with an increase in the base speed limits to more realistically match what people drive.

[-]

noSSD4me@reddit

Preach! Speed limits haven’t been updated in like 25-30 years! Car tech and safety has gone a long way to maintain higher speeds. I’m not saying “let’s put 90 mph speed limits” but a lot of roads with 65 can easily safely support like 75-80.

[-]

johnsciarrino@reddit

Everything will always be done in the name of safety. Raising the speed limits doesn’t sound safe so they’ll always say lower is better, making it easier to justify money-grab traffic surveillance.

Thing is, statistically, they’re 100% right. Lower speed limits equate to fewer pedestrian deaths and that’s a good thing. There’s really no way to argue it otherwise.

Statistically though, higher speeds do not result in more deaths or accidents. It’s the disparity of speed that causes that. The person doing 20 under in the left lane is always going to do 20 under in the left lane. Nothing a speed limit change is going to do about that. Gotta do better driver education.

[-]

nondescriptzombie@reddit

Thing is, statistically, they’re 100% right. Lower speed limits equate to fewer pedestrian deaths and that’s a good thing. There’s really no way to argue it otherwise.

Except they're not. In Arizona they went to 55 MPH rates and the rates of car accidents went up on the highway, and were more fatal, because they were between cars doing 90+ and cars doing ~50.

What are pedestrians even doing on the highway?

[-]

SnuffleBull@reddit

Raising speed limits doesn’t sound safe because it isn’t. Even with all the new safety equipment on cars, going slower will always be safer when you get into an accident.

[-]

DamianWayne413@reddit

Yes because HIGHWAYS are known for having pedestrians

[-]

GlobalistCabal@reddit

Pedestrian safety isn’t relevant to an interstate or other divided highway with no intersections.

Few argue that urban or suburban speed limits are too low. It’s th interstates/highways where they should be higher. And at least in my state they practically are as the police won’t bother you at upto 10mph above the limit on the interstate.

[-]

ChiggaOG@reddit

The other option is public transportation, but politicians don't care about such projects.

[-]

That’s why you pass them as fast as possible

[-]

hannahranga@reddit

And when a slow moving vehicle pulls out from side road in front of you?

[-]

noSSD4me@reddit

We sit here and debate till end of times about what ifs, what dies that do?

[-]

LeeStrange@reddit

Wrong. Human reaction time and braking distances are the two most critical car safety features that have NOT improved since the 1950s, and for lots of vehicles classes they've worsened.

Tires have been the biggest technological improvement in braking, but that technology is usually only seen in motorsports or high performance vehicles.

Manufacturers now are usually releasing cars with low rolling resistance tires, which further worsens braking distance.

You can have a Volvo with all the smart safety features in the world, but that won't stop some cheapskate from putting cheapo rubber on it.

Cars are massive now and people are more distracted than ever.

I'm a car guy but it's scientifically proven that lowering speed limits lowers all risks associated with commuting. Fatal injuries and accidents, etc.

[-]

noSSD4me@reddit

Everything you just said is absolute rubbish…

[-]

LeeStrange@reddit

How is what I said rubbish? I said that people are more distracted driving now than ever.

[-]

Adventurous_Mix_1792@reddit

Incorrect. They might feel safer, but speed limits set based on determining factors such as road characteristics (width, surface type, banking of curves), surrounding land use (residential, commercial, school zones), and prevailing traffic conditions (volume, vehicle types, crash history). Other key factors include the 85th percentile speed, intersection spacing, and pedestrian activity etc

[-]

cilantno@reddit

Cars are much more fuel efficient now and are also much better at braking.

[-]

Weak-Specific-6599@reddit

How does a car being more fuel efficient have anything to do with the fact that cars are more fuel efficient at lower speeds? They are two separate metrics. The goal is to minimize fleet consumption. Better braking does not reduce the average driver’s reaction time.

[-]

cilantno@reddit

The standards to which the existing limits were written for are much lower than what current cars are capable of, that should be clear.

The modern American can't. You have a 10mph cushion, that's plenty.

[-]

AmNoSuperSand52@reddit

A 10 mph cushion is fine assuming the base speed limit is properly assigned for the given road

That’s a lofty assumption

[-]

Witherino@reddit

Any modern car can handle far faster speeds

It's not about the cars, it's about the drivers and what the road infrastructure can handle. There's a terribly designed stretch of highway near me that sees fatal accidents regularly. The drivers are not good enough to handle those roads at the current speeds they travel

[-]

DudeWhereIsMyDuduk@reddit

Any modern car can handle far faster speeds

[-]

tycoon282@reddit

You haven't had average speed cameras before? Lol

[-]

Cool-Bunch6645@reddit

Where have you?

[-]

There are speed cameras in CA now within cities. I could see average speed cameras being a problem though.

That is stupid. I imagine this is something a competent attorney can handle. How do they prove who was driving?

Yup

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/shorter-yellow-lights-in-chicago-increase-chances-of-tickets/

[-]

InsertBluescreenHere@reddit

Good ol IL/chicago corruption

[-]

nekmatu@reddit

They got caught doing this in Florida too. It’s a giant scam. The company pays politicians to put the cameras in. The local government gets a cut, the company gets a cut, nothing is any safer, the only losers are the people.

[-]

Reduxalicious@reddit

I remember when they had Red light camera's for a brief period in Texas whenI lived there.

A few towns were caught shortening yellows (Tomball Texas for example) also did things such as allow the cameras to flash when turning right on red, even thought right on red was allowed, but you can't fight said ticket.

Driving a multiton vehicle is dangerous. You can’t possibly be saying that the government has no right to regulate driving just because it’s a “daily activity”.

Does arresting people for mean tweets also make Brits safer?

[-]

Alert_Breakfast5538@reddit

Mean tweets? You mean that idiot who disclosed the location of migrant accommodation and tried to incite violence against them.

Germany is the only place in the world where I can agree with them.

The US also drives an average twice as far per annum per capita

What % increase would you expect given the average is about twice as high?

100%? 200%? You probably wouldn't be expecting a 450% increase based on 2x miles.

Per capita is a way more meaningful metric than miles driven if you're trying to measure road safety as a social outcome. If the question is "how safe is it to live here as a road user", per capita answers that, per-km doesn't.

A Belgian doing 6-7k miles a year is less likely to die on the road than an American doing 13k. The real lived risk to the average person is what actually matters when judging whether a country's road system is safe for the people living in it.

The main issue is not highway related deaths where speed cameras work,

Before you read ahead, I imagine you probably already agree that there are more deaths on US highways when compared to Germany, UK, etc.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_safety_in_the_United_States#United_States_compared_to_other_nations

The numbers also back it up.

Per billion KM on motorways only, Denmark is at .72 deaths, the Autobahn at 1.74 (with a note that the unrestricted areas have 30% more deaths). In the US is 3.38.

A 370% increase, a 100% increase.

Just trying to argue that your road safety fucking sucks compared to the rest of the western world. It doesn't just need reform in the way of more enforcement, but it absolutely needs more enforcement.

[-]

Fozzymandius@reddit

Per capita is as important as per distance when you consider that road deaths consequently go up in a culture that uses cars more. Imagine saying that a country 1 million pop with 1 car and 1 road that kills 1 person per year is the safest country when it means that one person driving barely 1000 miles per year kills a person every year? Your per capita numbers would be nonexistent. Your deaths per 100,000 number would 0.1, the lowest in the world but you'd have a serial killer on the loose.

I'm not saying that these things excuse Americas bad numbers, I'm saying that put them in context.

Let me be clear, America is the worst at this. But there is more to the story than your initial comment lets on, and mine wasn't even meant to showcase all of it. Road deaths are multivariate in cause and there's a lot to look at as to why countries have high road deaths and speed cameras aren't a panacea or even in my opinion a good fix for the issue.

[-]

tujuggernaut@reddit

Belgium and Slovenia are slightly higher than the US in terms of deaths / distance.

[-]

BigRigs63@reddit

Belgium and Slovenia are slightly higher than the US in terms of deaths / distance.

Happy someone picked up on that, included those for a reason.

Per capita is a much more meaningful measure for evaluating overall road safety as a social outcome. If we want to ask ourselves "How safe is this country to live in as a road user", then per capita is better and not per-km.

A Belgian chap who only does 6-7k miles a year has a lower chance of death than the american who does 13k. The actual lived risk to the average person is whats important for finding out if a countries road system is safe for its population.

Also using deaths in a global context is somewhat difficult as it is also partially a comparison of emergency care systems.

Fantastic point. A big accident in the UK, there's absolutely a hospital nearby. There's nearby police, ambulance, fire service, air ambulance, etc. I'm speaking out of my arse here, but my vibes and my watching of american media tells me that is not the case at all like it is in much smaller eu countries where we're all closer together.

[-]

tujuggernaut@reddit

The actual lived risk to the average person is whats important for finding out if a countries road system is safe for its population.

heres a reminder of the parent comment this thread is on

No inspections, no red light cameras, no speed cameras, no average speed cameras, minimal toll roads, and near zero enforcement of any state or federal modification laws on the books in many areas of the US

Yup, it has different notifications for average speed cameras, cellphone usage cameras and regular speed cameras but weirdly enough they don’t have one for the red light cameras.

Jakeattack77@reddit

And people wonder why so many drive without plates or expired ones....

[-]

I'm not a lawyer but that is definitely not how the law works, lmfao

[-]

The_Owl_Man_1999@reddit

And if you think something was up with the camera, dispute it. That's what people do over here if they think the camera was wrong.

Having it so you're only allowed to be ticketed by a physical officer sounds wild to me considering how little I see highway patrol around, out of anyone who's been booked recently (like the last 10-15 years) in my family only one of them got caught by a cop, the rest were all various cameras. (Average speed, mobile speed camera, regular and red light cameras)

[-]

Logitech4873@reddit

A camera is a piece of technology that can malfunction

Speed cameras are reliable. They've been using them for ages.

[-]

JackTheBehemothKillr@reddit

And multiple states have outlawed them for a variety of reasons, most having to do with the reasons I mentioned above.

Argument can be made in one state, it can be made in another.

[-]

Logitech4873@reddit

We know that these work, and the US has a massive problem with road deaths. This is going to have a positive impact on accident and death statistics.

[-]

JackTheBehemothKillr@reddit

No. It wont.

It's a handout to a vendor.

They want to sell these bullshit cameras so they lobby to get the law changed. I guarantee you each and every contract has the vendor collecting 50% of the revenue.

Remember it's not about safety. It's about making a vendor rich.

[-]

m0viestar@reddit

I've heard they always could enforce it, I know some DAE folks had to pay if come registration time if they ignored it. Just stupid all around, that stretch of highway could be 85mph if they wanted

[-]

deleted_by_reddit@reddit

[removed]

[-]

AutoModerator@reddit

Political discussion is prohibited. However, if your post involves politics AND CARS, please consider submitting to /r/CarsOffTopic.

People who bring up that "the government could use this for privacy invasion" get accused of being conspiracy theorists... even though the government has been caught doing exactly that MULTIPLE TIMES.

[-]

theres 12,000 of em in the state with pritzker budgeting for thousands more. i literally cannot leave my neighborhood and get more than a block away without getting tracked every time. And i have 3 exit routes to take....

[-]

sponge_welder@reddit

SerialExperimentLean@reddit

I have never seen anyone do that in my life

[-]

masterventris@reddit

Literally nobody does that, what even is that claim?

There are multiple cameras every half mile, and if your average is higher in any section you get a ticket. You can't speed through it all and then stop before the last camera for 5 minutes.

[-]

hannahranga@reddit

Admittedly the single one I've driven through in Australia has a road house in the middle that I normally stop for a coffee and hot chips in. Does make it slightly silly in my boots but eh.

[-]

wtfomg01@reddit

Yeah, sounds like a comment straight from the bottom of a Daily Heil article.

[-]

LuukLucky@reddit

Lol, even when there aren't sections (like here in the Netherlands) people still don't do this. Idk what that other guy was smoking.

We aren't making opposite points.

Whether it's safer highly depends on where they put them.

You and everyone else is ignoring the business case being built on the fines which evaporate when people adjust, in state with a $1.5B budget hole.

You live in Oakland, not Denver, where I live and where this about.

I lived just south of Oakland for 6 years, OPD famously never shit either way so your bar is real fucking low. Only place an In & Out ever closed lol. Secondly Flock doesn't help if they're driving around with expired temp plates from 2023 which if you actually lived here would occur to you. Thirdly it's already getting yanked from various towns here for creating false accusations and data illegally being shared with ICE so if you support that get fucked.

[-]

0-27@reddit

Take a deep breath and settle down there fella. To your 2nd sentence- avg speed cameras are LITERALLY safer, full stop. They can cut serious or fatal accidents by as much as 50% in areas they are used. (And I lived in Denver but once again not relevant to this point because anecdotes are meaningless when data paints another story).

Taking pot shots at Oakland because of issues and the in-an-out closing is the go-to argument of the you know who these days so big yikes there, while the flock ARE working despite your really aggressive feelings that they don't (once again, look at the data > 11% higher clearance rate but you'll ignore that) and you'd be surprised how high a % are committed by people in their OWN cars...it's actually stunning. Then again... you know flock works just as good with stolen plates as well, right? Just think that comment you made over for a moment there....

The ICE part is awful, full stop. But dude, be logical, learn to think, understand the world is not mutually exclusive and that there is nuance.

[-]

0-27@reddit

Take a deep breath and settle down there fella. To your 2nd sentence- avg speed cameras are LITERALLY safer, full stop. They can cut serious or fatal accidents by as much as 50% in areas they are used. And your comment about fines is entirely irrelevant to what I said. (I also lived in Denver but once again not relevant to this point because anecdotes are meaningless when data paints another story).

Taking pot shots at Oakland because of crime and the in-an-out closing is the go-to argument of the right these days so big yikes there, while the flock ARE working despite your really aggressive feelings that they don't (once again, look at the data > 11% higher clearance rate but you'll ignore that) and you'd be surprised how many of those are committed by people in their OWN cars...it's actually stunning.

The ICE part is awful, full stop. But dude, be logical, learn to think, understand the world is not mutually exclusive and that there is nuance.

[-]

Why?

[-]

xDarknal@reddit

Literally just more revenue for the state on top of the excess surveillance, ready to just pack up in a few years once I can

[-]

Vague_Disclosure@reddit

I’m sure all that extra state revenue will be put to good use /s

[-]

deadly_shroom@reddit

Yeah maybe they’ll fix all the fucking roads or properly fund DPD so that they’re actually not useless (if you get hit by another car for example, you’re lucky if DPD shows up within 2 hrs lol) because otherwise they’ll never get fixed thanks to fucking TABOR laws.

[-]

AutoModerator@reddit

Political discussion is prohibited. However, if your post involves politics AND CARS, please consider submitting to /r/CarsOffTopic.

-----seven-----@reddit

maybe you didn't have the cop that happens to catch you while you were slowly coasting to the correct speed.

except ive had exactly this happen to me. it was fucking aids, but i paid the fine. i was speeding. the nuance here is you ought to pay some attention when youre driving and repeatedly speeding is a problem. and be fucking real, most people aren't going "oopsy the speed limit just dropped 20 mph all of a sudden!" theyre just speeding.

You've also made minor mistakes that you don't judge yourself you

-----seven-----@reddit

talk to your therapist about not speeding and how to hold yourself, a grown adult, accountable for your actions. emotional intelligence has nothing to do with using your eyes to view road signs as you drive your roughly 2000lb minimum car that has surging pedestrian deaths and vehicle accidents in the us. just be honest if you want to speed and stop making crappy excuses. accidents happen. we both acknowledge that. make an effort to prevent those accidents and accept responsibility when you make those mistakes. these are basic concepts any adult should understand.

[-]

nekmatu@reddit

Except municipalities have a history of setting these traps purely to bring in revenue. This has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with paid off politicians.

If the camera company only charged for the camera and never got a dime of speeding fines I’d believe it. But that’s not what happens. They lobby and pay off politicians to put these in and then they rake in people’s money for profit.

This is purely a for profit venture.

[-]

nope, i gave you a solution which was to not fund them by giving yourself a ticket, but you just really want to speed apparently

[-]

nekmatu@reddit

Pick a lane, man. You’re all over the place. Just not the left one so we can pass you.

[-]

-----seven-----@reddit

youre really not that smart huh. i mean i guessed as much, with your strong desire to break laws unpunished and all.

The issue here is in south Denver, the average speed on i25 is 85 in a 65. The literal flow of traffic is that fast on my morning commute.

LeopardHalit@reddit

Wait til bro finds out about the German autobahn

[-]

BuriedMystic@reddit

Oh that thing that only exists in one part of Germany? Germany, which also uses average speed cameras? 😂

[-]

PassPanda@reddit

One part? The autobahn is the interstate system. It goes all over Germany. There are limited parts of it when going throw cities, but for the most part it’s unrestricted.

Vaporave@reddit

Thought you guys were all about enforcing the law, at least allegedly

[-]

Original-Sandwich-95@reddit

They are until it may be an inconvience to them.

[-]

airfryerfuntime@reddit

Something like this wouldn't even make it to SCOTA.

[-]

TreesACrowd@reddit

If you think the conservatives on the Supreme Court are anti-authoritarian, you haven't been paying attention for at least 30 years.

[-]

Hiei2k7@reddit

Casual reminder:

You can rent a coring cutter from Home Depot, which can cut through your average steel lightpole in about 30 seconds.

Speed cameras aren't a new thing, Waze will compensate and create new software to help drivers navigate this.

sioux612@reddit

Huh, germany has stricter privacy laws than the US?

Cause thats the reason we never got average speed cameras, its illegal for the state to take a picture of somebody who hasnt broken a law

These arent places with excessive accidents, its literally just a revenue stream ontop of the high taxes they charge us. If you want speed enforcement actually incorporate that in proper road designs.

lordtema@reddit

The only non tunnel place i`ve encountered is a stretch that i can only imagine was very accident prone due to it being very tempting to make a high speed takeover and the road does not have super great visibility on all stretches of it.

[-]

xDarknal@reddit

Tunnel which make sense because they are entirely accident prone, this is open road with 3 lanes each way. It's entirely absurd because the CO high way speeds were not designed for flow.

[-]

-----seven-----@reddit

its literally just a revenue stream ontop of the high taxes they charge us

This Redditor gets it.

[-]

nekmatu@reddit

Thank you!

[-]

M3Core@reddit

Well, anyone who thinks 10 over is "driving recklessly and unaware" is entirely unplugged from reality and probably hasn't ever driven a car, so I wouldn't sweat it too much.

[-]

CurlyJeff@reddit

You can drive over the speed limit without driving recklessly and unaware, but if you're so unaware as to get caught by a marked fixed point to point speed camera that's likely going to involve a reckless lack of awareness.

[-]

CurlyJeff@reddit

Explain how preventing road deaths could result in the oppression of regular law abiding citizens?

CurlyJeff@reddit

Ah yes because having two sets of cameras set up either side of high risk locations on a highway amounts to tracking people everywhere they go.

J_NonServiam@reddit

Right now they are only in the interstate construction zone where multiple people have already died. You have to be going 10+ over (limit is 65 in this 5 mile zone) and the fine is $75.

I'd svear it used to have this feature in the past and they removed it.

[-]

CommanderArcher@reddit

If speepd limits are the law, we should enforce them the best possible way, average speed cameras are extremely effective for this.

[-]

r00000000@reddit

IMO it depends on how it's being used, I agree with speed cameras in places like city centers, school zones, or construction zones, especially places were known hotspots for accidents already to protect pedestrians but having them on highways like this article mentions seems odd to me.

I really feel like the most risky times for highway driving are during high traffic times with a lot of chaotic lane changes where it's not easy to go over the limit consistently anyways, I'm hearing feedback from some of the British comments and if their stories are true, the abrupt slowing to dodge this type of camera could actually create more traffic and be more of a risk for accidents.

Just anecdotally, driving in off-hours, I notice most traffic caused by one idiot holding up all the cars behind them, but if anyone ever speeds to undertake them, then a lot of people will also follow, so I think most people on the roads have the appetite for higher limits on highways in a lot of areas, a separate discussion from automated enforcement. IMO, this is harder to gauge as the driver but a safer theoretical limit would be a passing speed limit where you can't pass cars at a certain speed delta.

Also, I don't have the data but I can't imagine speeding on highways being a significant contributor to traffic fatalities compared to distracted/impaired driving, but I know most traffic deaths are from rural roads, not highways, and it's very easy for me to see why due to the poor visibility, animal hazards, non-divided roads with blinding oncoming lights. I remember hearing a shocking stat that a lot of traffic deaths were because of not wearing seatbelts which was insane to me if it's still true, who tf doesn't wear seatbelts?

[-]

Crftd@reddit

Likely will be challenged and stricken. Total violation of due process, particularly in that tickets are supposedly issued to the owner of the vehicle regardless of the driver.

[-]

TheNorthernMunky@reddit

We have these in the UK, they’re labeled ‘Average speed check’ zones. Waze is still useful, in that it tells you when the zone starts and ends, and where the cameras are along the way.

[-]

They've had average speed cameras for a long time in Europe, this ain't nothing new.

[-]

dchap1@reddit

I love how Reddit collectively flips out by a camera system issuing tickets replacing a cop issuing tickets.

It’s simple, if you don’t want a ticket, don’t speed. Simple as. It’s not like a law is changing, it’s simply a passive camera doing the work of an active police officer.

🤷‍♂️

[-]

Just comply bro. Dont wanna be fined? just comply with the law.

Wanna go fast? rent a track. ez pz

[-]