Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
HomeAnnouncements
Discussion Groups
By Brand
BMWChevroletDodgeFordGMHondaLexusMercedes-BenzNissanPeugeotToyotaVolkswagenOther Brands
By Topic
4x4 CarsRVsDrivingMaintenance & RepairCar AudioCollectible Cars
Country Specific
Australian ForumsUK Forums
ArticlesAuto InsuranceBuyingCars & TechnologyMaintenanceMiscellaneousSafety
DMV Resources
Related Topics
MotorcyclesBoatsMore Topics ...

Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Driving / May 2008

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Speed cam tickets coming to Calif?  Legislature is voting tomorrow!

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Ed. - 28 Apr 2008 19:54 GMT
Tomorow, Senate Bill 1325 is coming to a vote before a State Senate
committee.  That's Tuesday April 29, at 1:30 p.m., in Sacramento. If it
passes, it will allow SPEED camera tickets - also known as photo radar
tickets - to be issued automatically and mailed to you.

To stop SB 1325, call the Senators who are on the Senate Transportation
Committee.  Now!  For info about the Committee, go to:
http://www.highwayrobbery.net/redlightcamsjoin.htm#Action5  Also, phone
the state legislators (assembly and senate) representing the districts
in which you live, work, vacation, or shop.  Their numbers are in your
phone book's government pages.

Once you're done phoning the legislators, call your auto club and ask
them to oppose SB 1325 (and any other speed cam bill that come along).
If the auto clubs strongly oppose these bills, they won't pass.  Phone
numbers for the clubs' main offices are available at the link, above.

Speak NOW or forever hold your peace.  Now (Today, and Tuesday until
about noon)  is the time to let your elected representatives know what
you think.

Ed
Alexander Rogge - 29 Apr 2008 08:08 GMT
> Senate Bill 1325 is coming to a vote before a State Senate
> committee.  That's Tuesday April 29, at 1:30 p.m., in Sacramento. If it
> passes, it will allow SPEED camera tickets - also known as photo radar
> tickets - to be issued automatically and mailed to you.

Isn't it easier to simply increase taxes on driving?  Almost nobody can
exceed the posted speed limit, when it is set appropriately.  But when
almost everybody is "speeding" because the posted limit is
inappropriate, the speeding-camera purchases will increase expenses,
decrease safety and increase traffic congestion because of drivers who
are going below the normal speed of traffic, and try to collect money
only from drivers who are "caught" by the cameras.  How about removing
the underposted speed limit signs and increasing taxes on drivers instead?
Daniel W. Rouse Jr. - 01 May 2008 16:58 GMT
> > Senate Bill 1325 is coming to a vote before a State Senate
> > committee.  That's Tuesday April 29, at 1:30 p.m., in Sacramento. If it
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> only from drivers who are "caught" by the cameras.  How about removing
> the underposted speed limit signs and increasing taxes on drivers instead?

I'm going to disregard the underposted speed limit argument here because a
competent driver can control their vehicle at all speeds, whether at 25mph
or 70mph (or the kilometer per hour equivalent speed). For those who have
cruise control on their cars, this should be simple enough-- the posted
speed limit on the road that is enforced determines the cruise control
setting to maintain that speed as a maximum. For those that don't have
cruise control it is still a trivial enough exercise to learn what throttle
position keeps a constant speed.

Plus, with rising gas prices, drivers should be setting a goal to drive as
slowly as possible, but also within reason (i.e., 25mph or an interstate
highway would be considered ridiculously slow). To that extent, I have found
by trial and error (i.e., driving various 4 cylinder cars) that driving
below 3250 rpm in the topmost gear of a 4 cylinder vehicle establishes
maximum fuel economy. Note that 3250 rpm in the topmost gear of a 4 speed
automatic overdrive transmission tends to be around 80mph--already above the
posted speed limit on many highways posted at 60/65/70mph. As such, the 65
to 70mph speed limit does actually put the speed limit at a reasonably good
speed for fuel economy as well, and tends to put the engine rpms close to
around 2750 rpm once the torque converter is locked up.

So as long as the cameras have a factor built in for speedometer errors
(e.g., something like +/- 5 mph speedometer error factor), photo ticketing
is the way to go to keep highways from becoming high speed racetracks. Yes,
it means people will have to leave that much earlier to get to work, or
wherever they are going. No, it isn't always necessary to pass everyone else
driving on the highways (except of course, the 20mph under the speed limit
big rig trucks that seem to overturn or jackknife with an ever increasing
frequency daily and often don't keep to the first two right lanes on any
stretch of highway that has five lanes on one side).

In contrast, increasing taxes on driving punishes all, even those who don't
exceed the posted speed limit on a frequent basis. But, photo
ticketing punishes the individual driver, per speeding offense... and that
is the preferred speed enforcement method (IMHO) when there aren't enough
traffic officers to do the enforcement.
Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS - 30 Apr 2008 04:12 GMT
On Apr 28, 12:54 pm, "Ed." <edDELitor...@highTHwayISrobbery.net>
wrote:
> Tomorow, Senate Bill 1325 is coming to a vote before a State Senate
> committee.  That's Tuesday April 29, at 1:30 p.m., in Sacramento. If it
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
>
> Ed

What's wrong with punishing criminals, esp ones that kill innocent
people every day.?
It's Americans OR Democrats - 30 Apr 2008 04:13 GMT
On Apr 29, 11:12 pm, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS"
<beta...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> On Apr 28, 12:54 pm, "Ed." <edDELitor...@highTHwayISrobbery.net>
> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
> What's wrong with punishing criminals, esp ones that kill innocent
> people every day.?

Cash cow that'll do NOTHING to reduce road hazards.  Speed doesn't in
itself kill, IDIOT drivers do.
Janice - 04 May 2008 06:54 GMT
In article
<cd02c500-1228-4cfb-8490-ef682ef458f9@24g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,

> On Apr 29, 11:12 pm, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS"
> <beta...@earthlink.net> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 29 lines]
> Cash cow that'll do NOTHING to reduce road hazards.  Speed doesn't in
> itself kill, IDIOT drivers do.

Plus the American *WAY* is that you are presumed innocent until proven
guilty.  These have no way of knowing YOU were the one driving the car,
should be ruled unconstitutional unless they have face matching software
that can match your fact to the registered owner of the car.
Day Brown - 05 May 2008 02:00 GMT
> Plus the American *WAY* is that you are presumed innocent until proven
> guilty.  These have no way of knowing YOU were the one driving the car,
> should be ruled unconstitutional unless they have face matching software
> that can match your fact to the registered owner of the car.
Well, OK, the first five are just to let you know that someone has been
speeding with your car. Now, if there's six, seems like you'd have some
explaining to do.

But does anyone here really think that anything said here will have any
effect on policy?
Janice - 05 May 2008 20:45 GMT
> > Plus the American *WAY* is that you are presumed innocent until proven
> > guilty.  These have no way of knowing YOU were the one driving the car,
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> But does anyone here really think that anything said here will have any
> effect on policy?

So in your mind a car is only driven by one driver?  A car never has
insurance for a father, a wife, and 2 kids, all legal to drive the car?  
If one of the kids drives the car the father is ticketed even tho their
are 4 people insured to drive the car.  And the father has to prove that
he is innocent.  

And I guess a husband and wife sharing a car just goes right over your
head.
djay - 30 Apr 2008 06:19 GMT
We already have them on the central coast of cal - don't tell me the local
yokles were ahead of the Capitol?

> On Apr 28, 12:54 pm, "Ed." <edDELitor...@highTHwayISrobbery.net>
> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
> What's wrong with punishing criminals, esp ones that kill innocent
> people every day.?
Ed. - 30 Apr 2008 07:36 GMT
They will be voting on it again, maybe in two weeks.  Today (4-29) they
were only able to get 5 yes votes, and needed 7.  But they are allowed
to try again.  So please call everyone you can.

Djay:  I know that San Jose had speed cams, but they got rid of them a
year ago.  Does someone else still have 'em?

Ed.

> We already have them on the central coast of cal - don't tell me the local
> yokles were ahead of the Capitol?
[quoted text clipped - 27 lines]
>>What's wrong with punishing criminals, esp ones that kill innocent
>>people every day.?
Eat the rich - 04 May 2008 08:00 GMT
> We already have them on the central coast of cal - don't tell me the local
> yokles were ahead of the Capitol?
[quoted text clipped - 26 lines]
> > What's wrong with punishing criminals, esp ones that kill innocent
> > people every day.?

The central coast?  I live on the central coast.
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.