Police Details, Cameras, & Enforcement Methods

Status
Not open for further replies.
bigeman312 said:
This statement is a perfect example of the slippery slope fallacy. This would be a perfect example to use in a logic textbook.
Click to expand...
Fallacy?

Chicago is using it to raise funds (not enforce laws) https://www.illinoispolicy.org/chic...speed-limit-more-cameras-after-28m-fine-drop/

Washington D.C. and Chicago, which have come to rely on cameras to plug holes in the general revenue stream.

He even argues that camera revenue may itself create a perverse incentive to keep designing dangerous roads — and keep fining drivers who may not even know they’re exceeding a limit that’s set far lower than the design of the road suggests.

usa.streetsblog.org

Is Automated Enforcement Making U.S. Cities Safer or Just Raising Revenue? — Streetsblog USA

Cities should treat automated enforcement as a temporary tool as they build out holistically safe places. We can't punish our way to safe streets.
usa.streetsblog.org usa.streetsblog.org

So the fines are used to raise money. Don’t have the intended effect of safer streets (because fines aren’t immediate) and cities have perverse incentives to design streets for revenue with lower limits than streets appear designed for.
 
TallIsGood said:
Fallacy?

Chicago is using it to raise funds (not enforce laws) https://www.illinoispolicy.org/chic...speed-limit-more-cameras-after-28m-fine-drop/

Washington D.C. and Chicago, which have come to rely on cameras to plug holes in the general revenue stream.

He even argues that camera revenue may itself create a perverse incentive to keep designing dangerous roads — and keep fining drivers who may not even know they’re exceeding a limit that’s set far lower than the design of the road suggests.

usa.streetsblog.org

Is Automated Enforcement Making U.S. Cities Safer or Just Raising Revenue? — Streetsblog USA

Cities should treat automated enforcement as a temporary tool as they build out holistically safe places. We can't punish our way to safe streets.
usa.streetsblog.org usa.streetsblog.org

So the fines are used to raise money. Don’t have the intended effect of safer streets (because fines aren’t immediate) and cities have perverse incentives to design streets for revenue with lower limits than streets appear designed for.
Click to expand...
First, using Chicago as a reference is pretty off base. They sold the rights to all of their parking spaces for 75 years.

Second, the Curry interviewed in the article works for the Fines and Fees Justice Center, a thinktank (?) that is lobbying against all Fines and Fees. He's going to argue against it. Curry even admits that red light cameras and speed cameras do reduce collisions and crashes respectively. The rest haven't been studied, so he says there's no evidence and we should not pursue them.

Maybe we should talk to our representatives about what the safer streets we need look like rather than shutting down the possibility of a possibly helpful enforcement on an internet forum. That's the Slippery Slope Fallacy.
 
Last edited:
Badusername said:
bankerandtradesman.com

Bus Lane Camera Enforcement Bill Sent to Healey

Motor vehicles that stop or park in bus-only lanes could face fines ranging from $25 to $125, while those parked at bus stops could be fined $100 under the bill.
bankerandtradesman.com bankerandtradesman.com
Click to expand...
I categorize bus lane enforcement as a little different than other camera-enforcement proposals. For whatever reason, it feels less big brother-ish. Perhaps because it’s ticketing stationary cars that are making a very specific violation that causes actual, not potential problems for the common good (as in, speed and stoplight violations, as well as other parking violations, while predictive of potential for accidents, do not necessarily cause bad things to happen, whereas if the bus lane is blocked it necessarily causes a problem for the bus’s movement). My guess is the general population probably also feels this way, and won’t be as opposed to this.
 
FK4 said:
I categorize bus lane enforcement as a little different than other camera-enforcement proposals. For whatever reason, it feels less big brother-ish. Perhaps because it’s ticketing stationary cars that are making a very specific violation that causes actual, not potential problems for the common good (as in, speed and stoplight violations, as well as other parking violations, while predictive of potential for accidents, do not necessarily cause bad things to happen, whereas if the bus lane is blocked it necessarily causes a problem for the bus’s movement). My guess is the general population probably also feels this way, and won’t be as opposed to this.
Click to expand...
Right - the issues they're targeting are politically uncontroversial, and why school bus cameras tend to be one of the first - I have yet to come across a good argument against them other than bus stop location issues. Plus, a bus-mounted camera can only fine folks when there's a car parked in front of the bus it's obstructing.

That said, one of the more common issues with camera enforcement is that they're bad at accounting for edge cases - the exceptions written into the law, for example pulling into the lane for a right turn or to allow an ambulance to pass. A human wouldn't issue the citation, a camera will - Since the law as written requires a human in the loop to review and actually issue the citations, it should hopefully correct for that.

Most interesting however is whats not in the text of the law - while it defines the violation and max fines that can be levied, it notably doesn't define what constitutes a finite violation. It may be contained in another section of law that I'm not familiar with, but my understanding is that in MA there's no limit on how many times a ticket can be issued for the same violation. Say our hypothetical driver parks in a Mass Ave bus lane for an hour, where a 1 passes every 10 minutes. Would they accrue 6 tickets? I mean, nothing would deter a bus lane parker more, but a human enforcement officer probably wouldn't.
 
Stlin said:
It may be contained in another section of law that I'm not familiar with, but my understanding is that in MA there's no limit on how many times a ticket can be issued for the same violation. Say our hypothetical driver parks in a Mass Ave bus lane for an hour, where a 1 passes every 10 minutes. Would they accrue 6 tickets? I mean, nothing would deter a bus lane parker more, but a human enforcement officer probably wouldn't.
Click to expand...
I think this may be what I need. Anything to make the fines for the actual issue outrageous. I honestly don't trust our human enforcement officers (cops most probably) with being able to accurately issue tickets even for one ticket. Sometimes they really gotta finish their candy crush level, or maybe the violator is the right skin tone to not get a ticket.
 
I'm not sure Maura Healey is capable of doing anything. I wonder if she struggles with getting out of bed
 
Last edited:
cubbe8 said:
The legislature is not in session anymore…
Click to expand...

Pretty sure she still has the same ten days, but the bill is just dead if she doesn't sign it. (Also known as a pocket veto, mainly a constitutional quirk because the legislature having adjourned means she couldn't return the bill - a normal veto - even if she wanted to.)
 
thepixelnation said:
Doesn't this just say it's on the Governor's Desk? It isn't in the "Acted On" section
Click to expand...
1736465232693.png
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top