The Daily Progress reports that VDOT is proposing more traffic cameras in the Charlottesville region. Fortunately, these are not the kind of cameras that get you for running red lights or speeding. Still no word on when traffic law cameras will be installed.
Anyway, just be happy when you drive up 29N, in case you didn’t know already, you will now have a video feed of how much it sucks. Oh.. that video feed will cost $800,000. I have a proposal: pay 4 dudes $50,000 a year to hold a video camera and pay me the rest. Deal? Ok.
[via DP]
Popularity: 24% [?]
Tagged as: camera, money, spend, traffic
as we become more like a military state this should seem normal no? Patriot Act, Guantanamo, lack of rights, cameras everywhere….its like V for Vendetta…only this actually sucks.
This only sucks if they use them for enforcement. If they use them for keeping traffic flowing, then I’ll take it. Of course, it’s only a small hop from traffic management to enforcement, if they send the wireless signal to the county cops HQ down 5th Street.
I’ll say it before someone else does…Big Brother is Watching You!
….its like V for Vendetta…only this actually sucks.
Your attitude is noted
Luckily the whole traffic law enforcement by camera thing is still a tough subject for law makers. It really comes close to unconstitutional I’d say. It’s such a tough subject. When people are mugged on the street and a camera helps apprehend the criminal then the cameras are praised, however, when a camera catches someone tailgating and a ticket comes in the mail the cameras are condemned. Tough call…
@5, I’m with ya…def a tricky situation, but if they’re not using it to issue tickets, I suppose I don’t have a problem with it…
@2, 6: You guys are falling for their trap. At first, they will only be used for monitoring/improving traffic flow. Then they will start using them to help determine who’s at fault in an accident, and before you know it, they are using it to mail you a ticket for speeding/running red lights/tailgating. They phase it in slowly, so you don’t notice your freedom being taken away.
@7 What’re your thoughts on cameras say on the downtown mall or in the shooting ridden areas of town to prevent common crime? They use them all the time in larger cities now and in Europe they’re all over the place. Is it kind of a catch 22?
@7: You don’t have a “freedom” to speed, tailgate, nor run redlights. They aren’t “taking away your freedoms”.
@9, tousche, and I agree…with those things, it’s illgel whether you get caught or not, and now just more people will get caught, which obviously sucks but maybe it’ll make the roads safer?
The real question; how is a public camera any different than having a policeman standing there? Is it an invasion of “public” privacy or a simple force multiplier for law enforcement?
What’s the difference between Barney Fife or a camera catching you breaking the law?
@9: They are taking away my freedom to choose whether or not i want to be videotaped. Whenever you enter any establishment that has video surveillance, they have to post a sign informing you that you are being recorded. By entering said establishment, I am choosing to be videotaped. If they start taping all the roads and other public areas, I no longer have that freedom of choice.
@8: It’s good in theory, but it will be abused.
@11: It’s similar to the baseball instant replay argument. It takes away human judgment. If I’m speeding down 29 on my way to the hospital because my wife is going into labor, and a cop pulls me over, he’ll give me an escort. If I’m speeding down 29 on my way to the hospital because my wife is going into labor, and a speeding camera sees me, I’m still getting a ticket. That’s an extreme example, but it gets my point across.
I was walking by Three on the Corner a few weeks ago and a bunch of suits were standing at a corner between two buildings talking about putting a camera there. There’s pretty much no crime at that location and studies show that crime always moves to wherever the cameras are not. People are fucking retarded.
@13 Explain it to the judge!
I don’t like the camera idea either and is takes away from the self governing idea that America was base on. I hate the British!
Explain it to the judge!
It’ll still cost me $80 in court fees just to see a judge.
@7, 13
It’s entirely different camera types for traffic flow vs. traffic enforcement. These cameras aren’t equipped or designed to take photos. Assuming they purchase the memory capability to save all of the video, they could be used to go back and determine fault and red-light running, if they had the manpower. These traffic cameras are generally mounted atop the pole with the stoplights. Red-light running cameras have to be placed in entirely different locations to catch the light change before you enter the light, and then shoot you in the intersection. Plenty of them in DC and suburban MD if you want to check them out.
You could still fight a ticket from a camera if your wife happened to be in labor. Just like if the cop gave you one for speeding and endangering your wife and unborn baby!
/who will think of the children!
ment 15 @ 14 To easrly in the morning or was to late last nite.
I don’t want cops using “human judgement” - enforce the law, allow judges to judge.
If your wife’s going into labor, call an ambulance
@14 With that argument if we cover the city in cameras then crime will move out of the city right? I’m not taking a side yet I’m just trying to create good argument that is going to convince me one way or the other.
@12 there is no right to privacy in a public place, so therefore nothing is being taken away from you.
need lawyer… where’s orchid or stormy?!
@22 see, supra at 2 and 17.
/I play at being a lawyer on the interweb!
but not one who can use html tagging properly
I meant for the “no privacy in public space” comment.
@14,20
How about in the private sector? As TSU knows, I recently set up a security feed of my front yard/parking area. It was MacGuyvered together from spare parts around the house and was purpose driven. It was built to address a specific crime issue in my front yard, and to prevent/assist after the fact for any future issues.
If the logic follows that crime goes where the camera’s are not… Mission Accomplished.
My neighbors are thanking me already.
/makes me feel like the paranoid neighbor.
//I probably am.
///You kids get off my lawn!!
@7 they SHOULD use camera to determine who’s at fault in the accident.
bitch in the silver murano on hydraulic last may, THISMEANSYOU!
/f lawyering.
Do any of you fules read the paper? These things in practice are operated by private businesses that maximize profits by tagging people for questionable and outright fraudulent tickets. I’m not talking the Conspiracy Times here, it’s been reported repeatedly in the Wash. Post, etc. Lockheed Martin sells the service to local gov’ts at no cost, then takes a cut of the tickets, IIRC.
You can buy a clear license plate cover that may or may not produce a glare when photographed too. Or shoot the camera good-ole-boy style while riding your dirtbike on the sidewalk toting a young-un on the seat in front of you.
Whoops, I didn’t read the article. Oh, traffic cameras… well, they don’t work either. You can’t watch them in your car. So you call 511, talk your way through the computer menu, and get outdated and terrible info on current conditions. Same crap that’s on the state’s AM stations near congested areas. They invest millions to set up these channels for information and then do not bother to maintain them with actual information. It’s all about getting contracts and then not paying anybody except fatcat contractors. It is a SCAM! Spend the money on cameras after we fix the current system.
The only good thing about traffic cameras is that they do not lie when you want to see if there is a backup. But just turn on 3WV, it’s a lot cheaper. And it rocks. In your car.