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 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
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
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
From: "Ed Walker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
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" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: FC: Rep. Dick Armey on photo radar: It doesn't make driving safer
---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: Declan McCullagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 01 May 2002 23:03:25 -0400
>---
>
>From: "Diamond, Richard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>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" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-UIDL: a28fc678388edcbad85b54047e451ea7
A minor correction to the information you posted :
>� 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: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Jim Warren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
