- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
There is a discussion on Hacker News, but feel free to comment here as well.
You must log in or register to comment.
Fuck that noise.
Good!! When we visited the UK literally no one speeds. It’s so much safer!
They use average speed cameras. One at point A another a few miles down the road at point B. If you get there faster than the possible posted speed limit, boom, speeding ticket.
Our taxi driver in the UK pointed out that many of the speed cameras average the vehicle speed between two points several miles apart. The speed limit also changes based on traffic. Literally nobody was speeding.
People do speed an awful lot on residential roads where there are never are any cameras, but yeah other than that it’s not too bad.
What you do get is reckless driving though so, swings and roundabouts.
deleted by creator
But your accuser wouldn’t be the camera it would surely be whoever happens to be in charge of reviewing those cameras.
None of that is true.
In the UK you absolutely do have your right to face your accuser it’s just not in some magic constitution it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist though as a law.
But as has already been pointed out to you the accuser isn’t the traffic camera, it’s the police. If you speed the camera takes a picture of you, it looks you up in a database and it sends you a fine. If you then want to contest the fine then the police will review the footage, in some cases they will drop the charge at this point, otherwise it goes to court. So in any scenario where it goes to court a human will have looked at the footage, and therefore the human will be your accuser.
Arguing that you should be allowed to speed regularly just because of a technicality is stupid (and probably won’t work as a legal defence) and isn’t in the spirit of the law.
We’re taking about California, which has already automated red and speeding traffic enforcement in places like San Francisco and they send the tickets with zero human review.
Right, but I’m just pointing out that what you said about the UK is not true, in the UK you do have the right to face your accuser.
I then explained why that is not an issue with speed cameras.
That’s the dumbest shit I’ve ever heard. “Your accuser” is fucking physics. You can’t travel 10 miles in 5 minutes at 60 miles per an hour. Reviewed by a human.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Gavin Newsom signed legislation on Friday approving a trial run of enforcement systems that can automatically flag errant drivers for citations.
The new state law comes as pedestrian deaths have spiked in California and across the country because of more reckless driving, bigger vehicles and a lack of traffic enforcement.
Legislators and advocates for pedestrian safety had tried but failed three times in six years to push a speed camera law through the State Legislature.
Opponents had raised concerns that the cameras would invade driver privacy and that people of color in low-income neighborhoods would receive a disproportionate share of citations.
After lawmakers amended the proposal this year to address such concerns, including allowing low-income people to perform community service instead of paying the fines, the bill made it out of the Legislature for the first time in September.
San Francisco officials will be allowed to install 33 automated speed cameras in the city, and drivers caught going at least 11 miles per hour above the posted limit will be fined $50.
The original article contains 410 words, the summary contains 172 words. Saved 58%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
