If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   A single speed camera in DC has issued 116,734 tickets and $11.6 million in fines   (washingtonpost.com) divider line 242
    More: PSA, New York Avenue, Governors Highway Safety Association, d.c. police, FedEx Field, Verizon Center, Gwendolyn Crump  
•       •       •

10096 clicks; posted to Main » on 24 Oct 2012 at 9:54 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



242 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-24 04:29:16 PM
"...It's a profit motive!"
 
2012-10-24 04:34:41 PM
So?

Slow the f*ck down.
 
2012-10-24 04:46:02 PM
Single speed? Sounds awfully hipster to me.
 
2012-10-24 05:49:14 PM

skinnycatullus: Single speed? Sounds awfully hipster to me.


It's a type of camera you've never heard of. It was issuing tickets before that was cool.
 
2012-10-24 09:34:17 PM
If only there were signs on the road that advised people of the maximum speed they could drive without getting a ticket....
 
2012-10-24 09:56:25 PM
and yet...not a single life was saved.
 
2012-10-24 09:57:35 PM
How many of these fines were paid?
 
2012-10-24 09:57:59 PM
""There have been 16 fatalities in 2012, compared to 28 at this time last year, for a 43 percent reduction of traffic fatalities."

Congrats you can do math. You're a tard for trying to justify this by correlating the lower deaths to the speed cameras.

I could just as easily say there are fewer deaths because people are driving less due to the economy.
 
2012-10-24 09:58:28 PM
My, that's one dangerous intersection and/or stretch of road!

/dnrtfa
 
2012-10-24 09:59:40 PM
What, does it want a cookie or something?
 
2012-10-24 09:59:44 PM
I am guessing subby has never driven in the DC area. People drive like speed limits are a suggestion.
 
2012-10-24 10:01:13 PM
Wahhabi

Libertarian and or liberal as they come about the government saying you can't do things, but you don't have a constitutional right to break traffic laws
 
2012-10-24 10:01:37 PM

bssrf4: and yet...not a single life was saved.

"We believe we have made an impact," said Gwendolyn Crump, spokeswoman for the D.C. police. "There have been 16 fatalities in 2012, compared to 28 at this time last year


It's like you didn't read the article or something...no, that can't be it.

I'm confused, Fark, how am I supposed to feel?

Rev.K: So?

Slow the f*ck down.


Or...

St_Francis_P: "...It's a profit motive!"


??
 
2012-10-24 10:01:51 PM
Someone is making a lot of money by doing nothing.
 
2012-10-24 10:02:51 PM
dforkus: Libertarian and or liberal as they come about the government saying you can't do things, but you don't have a constitutional right to break traffic laws

Traffic laws aren't in the Constitution!
 
2012-10-24 10:03:06 PM

dforkus: Wahhabi

Libertarian and or liberal as they come about the government saying you can't do things, but you don't have a constitutional right to break traffic laws


Reading my constitution as fast as I can but I see no mention of speed limits so far.
 
2012-10-24 10:04:16 PM
"Most of the fatalities from speed crashes come on secondary and tertiary roads," said David Kelly, a former head of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration who now leads the National Coalition for Safer Roads. "You're talking about guys who are doing 50 in a 30 mph zone.


Ummm, OK. So then can we get some autobahns? You could go quite fast on most of I-95 and the ICC here in Maryland you could go blazing fast on.
 
2012-10-24 10:04:48 PM

mudpants: How many of these fines were paid?


None. Diplomatic Immunity...
 
2012-10-24 10:06:09 PM
i832.photobucket.com
 
2012-10-24 10:06:20 PM

mudpants: dforkus: Wahhabi

Libertarian and or liberal as they come about the government saying you can't do things, but you don't have a constitutional right to break traffic laws

Reading my constitution as fast as I can but I see no mention of speed limits so far.


I see no laws about owning a stinger missile or firing up my ham transceiver on the same frequency as the local am station, or pouring a 55 gallon drum of dioxin down the storm drain, so those must be ok too
 
2012-10-24 10:07:50 PM
"There's actually a science that goes behind speed limits, and the formulas have been tried and tested for decades."
So why is this science so often disregarded when speed limits are actually put in place?
 
2012-10-24 10:08:29 PM

austin_millbarge: ""There have been 16 fatalities in 2012, compared to 28 at this time last year, for a 43 percent reduction of traffic fatalities."

Congrats you can do math. You're a tard for trying to justify this by correlating the lower deaths to the speed cameras.

I could just as easily say there are fewer deaths because people are driving less due to the economy.


And the figures of 16 and 28 are completely meaningless without context to the total number of drivers or something. I mean out a million drivers, that becomes a pretty meaningless percentage, a 0.0012% reduction isnt statistically significant.

imgs.xkcd.com
 
2012-10-24 10:08:46 PM
OK, I gotta call b/s on this one.

They say there were 28 traffic fatalities last year and only 16 this year. Of those 28 fatalities, how many were directly and solely attributable to speeding AND NOTHING ELSE? That is, is it really safe to assume that the 14 fewer fatalities are due solely to people not driving as fast? There hasn't been a decrease in, say, drunk driving over the same period? A faster EMS response time? Better ER survival rates? Improvements in pedestrian crossings? Fewer high-speed police chases?

In other words, what were the 28 fatalities caused by last year that is different this year? Because if 10 of the 28 fatalities last year were caused by drive-by shootings, and this year there were zero drive-by shootings, then it wouldn't matter how many speeding tickets got issued, there would still have been a drop in traffic fatalities compared to last year due to fewer drive-by shootings. Likewise, if there were 10 deaths at an uncontrolled crosswalk, and a light was installed at that crosswalk in March, of course there would be fewer deaths at that crosswalk, again, regardless of the speed trap, er, camera up the road.

Why people don't ask these questions is a mystery to me.
 
2012-10-24 10:09:15 PM
RatMaster999: mudpants: How many of these fines were paid?

None. Diplomatic Immunity...


24.media.tumblr.com
 
2012-10-24 10:10:22 PM
Now that's what you call ROI!
 
2012-10-24 10:10:57 PM

dforkus: mudpants: dforkus: Wahhabi

Libertarian and or liberal as they come about the government saying you can't do things, but you don't have a constitutional right to break traffic laws

Reading my constitution as fast as I can but I see no mention of speed limits so far.

I see no laws about owning a stinger missile or firing up my ham transceiver on the same frequency as the local am station, or pouring a 55 gallon drum of dioxin down the storm drain, so those must be ok too


Hey you first brought up the constitution. Now you say there are no laws. That is a different matter.
 
2012-10-24 10:11:02 PM

mudpants: dforkus: Wahhabi

Libertarian and or liberal as they come about the government saying you can't do things, but you don't have a constitutional right to break traffic laws

Reading my constitution as fast as I can but I see no mention of speed limits so far.


nicely said. The best I could muster is "freedom isn't free" but I am a Canadian, and healthcare is both freedom and free, so there you have it.
 
2012-10-24 10:11:29 PM
FTFA: "There's actually a science that goes behind speed limits, and the formulas have been tried and tested for decades."

The science? Economics, in most cases.
 
2012-10-24 10:11:55 PM
Put one on every corner in DC and pay off the national debt.
 
2012-10-24 10:12:04 PM
If that many tickets are being issued, it tells me that:

a) The speed limit on the roadway in question is set too slow;

b) The city is using cameras as a Band-Aid fix for the perceived speeding problem, rather than more effective means like increased policing, rumble strips, "Your Speed" radar signs, etc.

c) The city really doesn't want to fix the speeding problem because, well, $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

d) There really isn't a speeding problem, but the City want$$$$ there to be one. 

e. (A few more $$$$$$$$$$ in there for good measure)
 
2012-10-24 10:12:40 PM

TofuTheAlmighty: "There's actually a science that goes behind speed limits, and the formulas have been tried and tested for decades."So why is this science so often disregarded when speed limits are actually put in place?


Miles per hour. So I can go 200 miles in about 15 minutes and then stop for a while?
 
2012-10-24 10:12:47 PM

TofuTheAlmighty: "There's actually a science that goes behind speed limits, and the formulas have been tried and tested for decades."So why is this science so often disregarded when speed limits are actually put in place?


Because the engineers can only suggest speed limits, its up to the government to actually put them in place. "Well, given overall grade, frequency of exits and onramps, average expected traffic in the next few years, the optimal travel speed of this highway is 75mph." "Well were going to set it at 60... for $aftey, yeah, $aftey..."
 
2012-10-24 10:14:33 PM
Google Maps Link

This road looks like a 55 MPH road.

They always set up right there.
 
2012-10-24 10:15:29 PM

mudpants: dforkus: mudpants: dforkus: Wahhabi

Libertarian and or liberal as they come about the government saying you can't do things, but you don't have a constitutional right to break traffic laws

Reading my constitution as fast as I can but I see no mention of speed limits so far.

I see no laws about owning a stinger missile or firing up my ham transceiver on the same frequency as the local am station, or pouring a 55 gallon drum of dioxin down the storm drain, so those must be ok too

Hey you first brought up the constitution. Now you say there are no laws. That is a different matter.



Exactly. The Constitution specifies the existence of a legislative branch, whose job it is to create laws. The judicial branch interprets the laws, and the executive branch codifies them. So, laws are constitutional (unless they break the provisions of the Constitution.)
 
2012-10-24 10:16:35 PM

destrip: If that many tickets are being issued, it tells me that:

a) The speed limit on the roadway in question is set too slow;

b) The city is using cameras as a Band-Aid fix for the perceived speeding problem, rather than more effective means like increased policing, rumble strips, "Your Speed" radar signs, etc.

c) The city really doesn't want to fix the speeding problem because, well, $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

d) There really isn't a speeding problem, but the City want$$$$ there to be one. 

e. (A few more $$$$$$$$$$ in there for good measure)


BINGO!

I may or may not have received one of the 116,734 tickets from this particular speed trap. I can confirm that this particular stretch of road looks & feels like a highway and doesn't exactly go out of its way to make the speed limit obvious. It's a shiat part of town, so you kinda wanna get the hell out of there anyways...
 
2012-10-24 10:18:04 PM
"POOKIE, LET'S BURN THIS MOTHERfarkER DOWN!"
 
2012-10-24 10:20:27 PM

Gyrfalcon: OK, I gotta call b/s on this one.

They say there were 28 traffic fatalities last year and only 16 this year. Of those 28 fatalities, how many were directly and solely attributable to speeding AND NOTHING ELSE? That is, is it really safe to assume that the 14 fewer fatalities are due solely to people not driving as fast? There hasn't been a decrease in, say, drunk driving over the same period? A faster EMS response time? Better ER survival rates? Improvements in pedestrian crossings? Fewer high-speed police chases?

In other words, what were the 28 fatalities caused by last year that is different this year? Because if 10 of the 28 fatalities last year were caused by drive-by shootings, and this year there were zero drive-by shootings, then it wouldn't matter how many speeding tickets got issued, there would still have been a drop in traffic fatalities compared to last year due to fewer drive-by shootings. Likewise, if there were 10 deaths at an uncontrolled crosswalk, and a light was installed at that crosswalk in March, of course there would be fewer deaths at that crosswalk, again, regardless of the speed trap, er, camera up the road.

Why people don't ask these questions is a mystery to me.


MY city council did a study on our traffic light cameras. The result was a near doubling of accidents directly as a result of people slamming on the brakes the second they saw the light turn from green to yellow because they were afraid of a ticket. However, since none of the accidents were fatal, and because the lights make money they declared them to be a 'success'.

So many people drink the kool-aid.
 
2012-10-24 10:21:13 PM

destrip: mudpants: dforkus: mudpants: dforkus: Wahhabi

Libertarian and or liberal as they come about the government saying you can't do things, but you don't have a constitutional right to break traffic laws

Reading my constitution as fast as I can but I see no mention of speed limits so far.

I see no laws about owning a stinger missile or firing up my ham transceiver on the same frequency as the local am station, or pouring a 55 gallon drum of dioxin down the storm drain, so those must be ok too

Hey you first brought up the constitution. Now you say there are no laws. That is a different matter.


Exactly. The Constitution specifies the existence of a legislative branch, whose job it is to create laws. The judicial branch interprets the laws, and the executive branch codifies them. So, laws are constitutional (unless they break the provisions of the Constitution.)


I like the 18th amendment, we never screwup.
 
2012-10-24 10:21:35 PM
"But its jackpot potential was eventually eclipsed by a pair of cameras..."

"Most drivers mistakenly assume D.C. 295 is an interstate highway or a U.S. highway, and they cruise along at what traffic engineers call the 85th percentile speed..."

truebrit.files.wordpress.com


Rather.
 

How proper of the auteur to be so reasonable in his or her outlaying of this unsettling business.
 
2012-10-24 10:22:37 PM
Speeding ticket?
24.media.tumblr.com
 
2012-10-24 10:22:48 PM

austin_millbarge: ""There have been 16 fatalities in 2012, compared to 28 at this time last year, for a 43 percent reduction of traffic fatalities."

Congrats you can do math. You're a tard for trying to justify this by correlating the lower deaths to the speed cameras.

I could just as easily say there are fewer deaths because people are driving less due to the economy.


I would like to buy your rock.
 
2012-10-24 10:23:34 PM
I say we test these so-called experts' metal and put them on the beltway in cars limited to 55 mph (the posted speed limit in non-construction zones) and we'll see how comfortable they feel.
 
2012-10-24 10:25:05 PM
Damn, that's one busy intersection.
 
2012-10-24 10:25:41 PM

Spaced Lion: austin_millbarge: ""There have been 16 fatalities in 2012, compared to 28 at this time last year, for a 43 percent reduction of traffic fatalities."

Congrats you can do math. You're a tard for trying to justify this by correlating the lower deaths to the speed cameras.

I could just as easily say there are fewer deaths because people are driving less due to the economy.

I would like to buy your rock.


30.media.tumblr.com
Tiger free since 83.
 
2012-10-24 10:27:43 PM
If you know it's a hot zone, why speed through it
 
2012-10-24 10:29:58 PM

dforkus: mudpants: dforkus: Wahhabi

Libertarian and or liberal as they come about the government saying you can't do things, but you don't have a constitutional right to break traffic laws

Reading my constitution as fast as I can but I see no mention of speed limits so far.

I see no laws about owning a stinger missile or firing up my ham transceiver on the same frequency as the local am station, or pouring a 55 gallon drum of dioxin down the storm drain, so those must be ok too


If it isn't explicitly stated in the constitution the federal government has no authority to disallow it. We don't need the government's permission for anything not stated.
 
2012-10-24 10:30:18 PM
Is it a flat rate $100 ticket? I have never seen a speeding ticket under 100 dollars and this average is 100 dollars?
 
2012-10-24 10:32:59 PM

Ravage: dforkus: mudpants: dforkus: Wahhabi

Libertarian and or liberal as they come about the government saying you can't do things, but you don't have a constitutional right to break traffic laws

Reading my constitution as fast as I can but I see no mention of speed limits so far.

I see no laws about owning a stinger missile or firing up my ham transceiver on the same frequency as the local am station, or pouring a 55 gallon drum of dioxin down the storm drain, so those must be ok too

If it isn't explicitly stated in the constitution the federal government has no authority to disallow it. We don't need the government's permission for anything not stated.


ding ding !!!!
 
2012-10-24 10:33:20 PM
When I lived in DC you could never reach the speed limit, let alone break it.
 
2012-10-24 10:33:50 PM
pretty sure you don't have to pay fines issued by anything other than an officer.
 
Displayed 50 of 242 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report