Police Details, Cameras, & Enforcement Methods

[Balerion]

Doesn't this just say it's on the Governor's Desk? It isn't in the "Acted On" section

You may be mixing up the school bus bill and the bus lane bill, which are separate pieces of legislation.

 

[Badusername]

You may be mixing up the school bus bill and the bus lane bill, which are separate pieces of legislation.

Smile, Gov. Healey Signs Bus Lane Camera Enforcement Bill - Streetsblog Massachusetts

Massachusetts law will now allow public transit agencies to use bus-mounted cameras to issue fines against illegal parking in dedicated bus lanes and bus stops. On Wednesday, Governor Healey signed “An Act relative to bus lane enforcement,” which passed in the Massachusetts legislature’s...

mass.streetsblog.org

Bus lane bill is signed, school bus bill is still on the desk.

 

[as02143]

View attachment 59335

S2884 - yes! Camera based enforcement of bus lanes on vehicles and camera based bus stop enforcement with safety sticks! This is great! Every city and town should be putting these in every square like Somerville has done in Davis Square!

 

[cubbe8]

Governor's Budget Bill Would Legalize Speed Limit Enforcement Cameras Statewide - Streetsblog Massachusetts

If it's approved, the legislation would take effect on July 1, 2026.

mass.streetsblog.org

 

[OldColony]

Governor's Budget Bill Would Legalize Speed Limit Enforcement Cameras Statewide - Streetsblog Massachusetts

If it's approved, the legislation would take effect on July 1, 2026.

mass.streetsblog.org

WCVB has a similar news report this morning, but the chit chat was mostly about allowing traffic light cameras.

Two proposals in new Mass. state budget could affect candy and traffic

Candy may soon be taxed across the state and cameras could be coming to intersections.

www.wcvb.com

 

[TallIsGood]

This statement is a perfect example of the slippery slope fallacy. This would be a perfect example to use in a logic textbook.

And here is the proposal for speed cameras statewide.

Lights. Camera. Ticket? Healey wants to allow Mass. cities, towns to deploy speed cameras. - The Boston Globe

Officials from Boston, Cambridge, and elsewhere have for years sought the ability to use automated cameras for traffic enforcement, arguing it could lessen the burden on local law enforcement and help reduce crashes.

www.bostonglobe.com

Slippery slope just got even slipperier. Along with other tax raising proposals.

 

[sneijder]

And here is the proposal for speed cameras statewide.

Lights. Camera. Ticket? Healey wants to allow Mass. cities, towns to deploy speed cameras. - The Boston Globe

Officials from Boston, Cambridge, and elsewhere have for years sought the ability to use automated cameras for traffic enforcement, arguing it could lessen the burden on local law enforcement and help reduce crashes.

www.bostonglobe.com

Slippery slope just got even slipperier. Along with other tax raising proposals.

Seems like this generally a universal boon for anyone outside of a car? Less box-blocking, better traffic flow and increased road capacity from lower travel speeds. Lower tire noise, lower engine noise, lower particle pollution from tire wear, fewer accidents, lower insurance premiums, safer streets for pedestrians, safer streets for cars. Safer streets for bikers, more predictable car movements, more tax revenue to support transit and infrastructure projects. Potentially discourages people from driving and mode-shifting into other transit. Only thing is I'm not sure how it will impact buses.

 

[Equilibria]

Seems like this generally a universal boon for anyone outside of a car? Less box-blocking, better traffic flow and increased road capacity from lower travel speeds. Lower tire noise, lower engine noise, lower particle pollution from tire wear, fewer accidents, lower insurance premiums, safer streets for pedestrians, safer streets for cars. Safer streets for bikers, more predictable car movements, more tax revenue to support transit and infrastructure projects. Potentially discourages people from driving and mode-shifting into other transit. Only thing is I'm not sure how it will impact buses.

Translation: Seems like the majority of people in Massachusetts will be punished for their lifestyle choices with potentially overzealous and corruptly-implemented automated fines!

Representative of Chicago Area Red-Light Camera Company Sentenced to Five Years in Federal Prison

CHICAGO —A sales agent for a Chicago-area red-light camera company, Company A, has been sentenced to more than five years in federal prison for conspiring to pay bribes to a public official and for filing a false tax return.

www.justice.gov

 

[JeffDowntown]

Translation: Seems like the majority of people in Massachusetts will be punished for their lifestyle choices with potentially overzealous and corruptly-implemented automated fines!

Representative of Chicago Area Red-Light Camera Company Sentenced to Five Years in Federal Prison

CHICAGO —A sales agent for a Chicago-area red-light camera company, Company A, has been sentenced to more than five years in federal prison for conspiring to pay bribes to a public official and for filing a false tax return.

www.justice.gov

You mean as opposed to today's corruptly implemented lack of fines for scofflaws, where Massachusetts police officers get massive overtime for looking the other way and not ticketing anybody?

 

[Equilibria]

You mean as opposed to today's corruptly implemented lack of fines for scofflaws, where Massachusetts police officers get massive overtime for looking the other way and not ticketing anybody?

Two wrongs don't make a right.

 

[bigeman312]

Translation: Seems like the majority of people in Massachusetts will be punished for their lifestyle choices with potentially overzealous and corruptly-implemented automated fines!

Representative of Chicago Area Red-Light Camera Company Sentenced to Five Years in Federal Prison

CHICAGO —A sales agent for a Chicago-area red-light camera company, Company A, has been sentenced to more than five years in federal prison for conspiring to pay bribes to a public official and for filing a false tax return.

www.justice.gov

Driving isn’t a right and the fact that driving is viewed as a necessity is a societal problem worth solving.

Driving isn’t a lifestyle choice. It’s a privilege that should only be accessible to those capable of and willing to do it in a way that doesn’t harm others.

EDITED TO ADD: In case it wasn’t clear, this doesn’t punish people for driving. It punishes people for breaking the rules of the road while driving.

 

[ritchiew]

Seems like the majority of people in Massachusetts will be punished for their lifestyle choices

By "lifestyle choices," you mean "speeding?" The proposal is to automatically ticket people who are speeding.

potentially overzealous and corruptly-implemented automated fines!

There's nothing in that press release that says the system was being overzealous. They were ticketing people who ran red lights. That is exactly what it was supposed to do.

And I don't see how the corruption charges make the automated ticketing a bad thing. The bad part was the corruption. In Chicago people have also paid bribes to get city contracts for concrete, trash removal, hospital services. That doesn't make any of those things inherently bad. Just the bribery part is bad.

 

[DZH22]

Anecdotally, I have found that other drivers are a lot less tolerant of fellow drivers moving at the signed limit if they perceive that it’s possible to drive faster. I have caught myself pushing more aggressively to avoid the annoyed honks and dirty looks.

You need to understand the "true" speed limits vs the posted speed limits. Basically, there are 2 sets of additional penalties that trigger at 10 over the speed limit and again at 20 over the speed limit. Thus, on non-highway roads you can really do the posted speed limit +9, so say 39 in a 30 or 44 in a 35. One more mph and you'll trigger that next penalty and get pulled over. On the highways they more typically lean to the 20 mph penalty, particularly on the 55's. Thus you can go up to 74 mph on a 55, but you'll get pulled over at 75.

This is specifically for Massachusetts, although really covers most of New England and most of the Northeast. Small towns can be a different story but usually not in Massachusetts with an in-state plate. Also on 65 mph highways sometimes they'll get you starting at 80 instead of 85, particularly on a holiday weekend. Memorial Day weekend is a notorious one for speed traps.

Since everybody knows they have a buffer before getting pulled over, everybody typically exceeds the speed limit by at least a little bit. Even the "slow" drivers are typically doing 3-5 mph over on the roads and 5-10 mph over on the highways. That's why anybody going under the speed limit is actually among the most dangerous people on the road, as they're often doing 10+ mph slower than everybody else (ie not "driving with traffic").

If you're going below the posted speed limit it would make sense that people would be frustrated, since that's slower than about 99/100 drivers around here and probably significantly slower than at least 95/100 drivers. If everybody else is doing 34-39 in a 30 and you're doing 28, you're actually driving about 25-30% slower than normal traffic.

 

[Equilibria]

By "lifestyle choices," you mean "speeding?" The proposal is to automatically ticket people who are speeding.


There's nothing in that press release that says the system was being overzealous. They were ticketing people who ran red lights. That is exactly what it was supposed to do.

And I don't see how the corruption charges make the automated ticketing a bad thing. The bad part was the corruption. In Chicago people have also paid bribes to get city contracts for concrete, trash removal, hospital services. That doesn't make any of those things inherently bad. Just the bribery part is bad.

The opportunity for corruption comes from the fact that once this is legal, companies that manage these cameras and often collect the fines will start hitting up every municipality in the Commonwealth hawking their system and the revenue it would generate. In that environment, graft is inevitable. My read is that folks here wouldn't care about that, because the negative incentive for driving only gets stronger as the fines get higher and the thresholds on the cameras get even more hair-trigger.

Driving is absolutely a lifestyle choice. Millions of people across Massachusetts live in suburban, exurban, or rural environments that have low enough density that it is a necessity for every aspect of life. No matter how much TOD we construct, it is not possible that we will ever in the US have an urban form that looks like the Netherlands, which means that a substantial percentage of the population will continue to live in these areas. And they vote, as we just saw illustrated in November when they rejected progressive ideals in favor of libertarian ones that have a far longer and stronger history in this country (and I hate that outcome).

The tone of the post I was originally responding to referred to "anyone outside of a car" as if that's the majority. Allowing for how everyone is a pedestrian at least briefly in any trip, they are a definite minority.

 

[RandomWalk]

You need to understand the "true" speed limits vs the posted speed limits. Basically, there are 2 sets of additional penalties that trigger at 10 over the speed limit and again at 20 over the speed limit. Thus, on non-highway roads you can really do the posted speed limit +9, so say 39 in a 30 or 44 in a 35. One more mph and you'll trigger that next penalty and get pulled over. On the highways they more typically lean to the 20 mph penalty, particularly on the 55's. Thus you can go up to 74 mph on a 55, but you'll get pulled over at 75.

This is specifically for Massachusetts, although really covers most of New England and most of the Northeast. Small towns can be a different story but usually not in Massachusetts with an in-state plate. Also on 65 mph highways sometimes they'll get you starting at 80 instead of 85, particularly on a holiday weekend. Memorial Day weekend is a notorious one for speed traps.

Since everybody knows they have a buffer before getting pulled over, everybody typically exceeds the speed limit by at least a little bit. Even the "slow" drivers are typically doing 3-5 mph over on the roads and 5-10 mph over on the highways. That's why anybody going under the speed limit is actually among the most dangerous people on the road, as they're often doing 10+ mph slower than everybody else (ie not "driving with traffic").

If you're going below the posted speed limit it would make sense that people would be frustrated, since that's slower than about 99/100 drivers around here and probably significantly slower than at least 95/100 drivers. If everybody else is doing 34-39 in a 30 and you're doing 28, you're actually driving about 25-30% slower than normal traffic.

I think that is separate from what I was talking about. I was describing the case where I am driving on a city street at, or very near, the posted speed limit with no one behind me. A driver approaches and honks because I choose not drive as they would.

 

[Stlin]

You need to understand the "true" speed limits vs the posted speed limits. Basically, there are 2 sets of additional penalties that trigger at 10 over the speed limit and again at 20 over the speed limit. Thus, on non-highway roads you can really do the posted speed limit +9, so say 39 in a 30 or 44 in a 35. One more mph and you'll trigger that next penalty and get pulled over. On the highways they more typically lean to the 20 mph penalty, particularly on the 55's. Thus you can go up to 74 mph on a 55, but you'll get pulled over at 75.

This is specifically for Massachusetts, although really covers most of New England and most of the Northeast. Small towns can be a different story but usually not in Massachusetts with an in-state plate. Also on 65 mph highways sometimes they'll get you starting at 80 instead of 85, particularly on a holiday weekend. Memorial Day weekend is a notorious one for speed traps.

Since everybody knows they have a buffer before getting pulled over, everybody typically exceeds the speed limit by at least a little bit. Even the "slow" drivers are typically doing 3-5 mph over on the roads and 5-10 mph over on the highways. That's why anybody going under the speed limit is actually among the most dangerous people on the road, as they're often doing 10+ mph slower than everybody else (ie not "driving with traffic").

If you're going below the posted speed limit it would make sense that people would be frustrated, since that's slower than about 99/100 drivers around here and probably significantly slower than at least 95/100 drivers. If everybody else is doing 34-39 in a 30 and you're doing 28, you're actually driving about 25-30% slower than normal traffic.

Hell, even the proposed speed camera bill defines speeding that way with a significant buffer - the camera trigger is to be set at posted limit +11, +6 in school zones. And, as currently written, it specifically excludes limited access highways (other than MassDOT work zones), where most of the speeding occurs anyways.

That said, I do think they'll be of questionable utility in greater Boston. +11 is hard to actually hit in the city with 25 limits. Honestly, I feel most are likely to end up deployed along the suburban 2 &3 digit state routes- more 46 in a 35 or 56 in a 45. Plus they're required to have signs telling you that there's one ahead, and most map apps including Google maps will tell you when you're approaching one. But If you've ever driven somewhere where speed cameras are common - the UK for example - drivers will behave as they do with a visible cop. Slow momentarily then accelerate once out of view.

 

[Justbuildit]

And here is the proposal for speed cameras statewide.

Lights. Camera. Ticket? Healey wants to allow Mass. cities, towns to deploy speed cameras. - The Boston Globe

Officials from Boston, Cambridge, and elsewhere have for years sought the ability to use automated cameras for traffic enforcement, arguing it could lessen the burden on local law enforcement and help reduce crashes.

www.bostonglobe.com

Slippery slope just got even slipperier. Along with other tax raising proposals.

Wasn't familiar with any other tax raising proposals except for making candy subject to state sales tax, from which it's currently exempt. Obviously the revenue generated from the traffic cameras would fund the capex and opex of these systems. Generally I think Healey has been pretty clear that new activities are not being funded by new taxes, and that the "new" $1M+ tax is being allocated to either schools or transit per statute.

With the speed limit buffers (11 over or 6 over) there seems to be some leeway for "normal" drivers.

 

[ritchiew]

The opportunity for corruption comes from the fact that once this is legal, companies that manage these cameras and often collect the fines will start hitting up every municipality in the Commonwealth hawking their system and the revenue it would generate. In that environment, graft is inevitable.

Like I was saying, though, graft is possible in basically any government program. That doesn't make those government programs bad. The graft is bad. For example, we can have an MBTA and still prosecute anyone trying to bribe the MBTA. Likewise, we can have traffic enforcement cameras and prosecute anyone from those companies trying bribe government officials.

Driving is absolutely a lifestyle choice.

The camera system will not penalize someone for simply driving. It would ticket someone if they are speeding. You will still have a right to drive. You do not have a right to speed. Speeding is against the law.

 

[Equilibria]

Like I was saying, though, graft is possible in basically any government program. That doesn't make those government programs bad. The graft is bad. For example, we can have an MBTA and still prosecute anyone trying to bribe the MBTA. Likewise, we can have traffic enforcement cameras and prosecute anyone from those companies trying bribe government officials.


The camera system will not penalize someone for simply driving. It would ticket someone if they are speeding. You will still have a right to drive. You do not have a right to speed. Speeding is against the law.

The MBTA is a single agency with easy accountability. There are 352 cities and towns worth of officials to bribe here (and not even necessarily personally).

I agree that the buffers written into the law are a reasonable constraint, and that's because American culture expects people to speed. It's not a right to speed, it's a cultural norm. Until recently, it was illegal to jaywalk, too. It's illegal for bicycles to run red lights, ride on the sidewalk, and all sorts of other things that most cyclists do with casual regularity.

 

[bigeman312]

…You will still have a right to drive. You do not have a right to speed. Speeding is against the law.

Nitpick, that I believe is important to correct:

If you’ve fulfilled the necessary requirements, you may be granted the privilege of being allowed to drive. You do not have a right to speed. Speeding is against the law.