1058
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] then_three_more@lemmy.world 65 points 1 month ago
[-] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 26 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Sure sure, the speed cam after the slope in the woods is for safety, mhm.

[-] then_three_more@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago

I mean I don't know how you could think it wouldn't be. Well signposted camera will help you pay more attention to your speed on the slope, it's woods so presumably animals could run out at you.

If you can't see a bright fucking yellow speed camera, and haven't been paying attention to the ten dozen signed, then that's 100% on you.

[-] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 18 points 1 month ago

They are hidden here, not yellow bright.

[-] obinice@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

It's clearly bright yellow.

Besides, you shouldn't have to be threatened with a speed camera to just stay under the bloody speed limit. It's literally a crime not to, and besides that it's reckless and dangerous.

Idiots that speed in cars deserve a special kind of hell where they're tortured by all the children their kind have murdered.

[-] then_three_more@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Sucks to be whenever you are I guess. I'm used to that way they work where I live.

Fixed speed camera housings located within an area of street or highway lighting should be coloured yellow either by painting both the front and back of the housing or covering both the front and back of the housing with retroreflective sheeting. In an area not covered by street or highway lighting, the speed camera housing should be treated with yellow retroreflective sheeting.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a819278e5274a2e87dbe588/dft-circular-0107.pdf

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

In the US every state I've seen has to put multiple warning signs out, starting about a mile out. It's 100% obvious.

[-] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 month ago
[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Well. Don't keep us waiting. What country is surprising people with speed cameras?

[-] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 month ago

I think whole D-A-CH? At least switzerland and germany.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Another stereotype busted for me. I really thought it's an ex-Soviet thing. "Скажи-ка, дядя, ведь недаром в кустах ты прячешься с радаром?"

[-] JayDee@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Probably you should be breaking on the hill? Regardless of if your foot's on the gas or you're just letting the slope do the work, you're still speeding which is a hazard.

Yeah, I'm sure it also racks up some revenue too. Why not get a few more bucks while keeping the careless on their toes?

[-] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

60 instead of 50 (because steep slope) is speeding?

[-] JayDee@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)
[-] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 month ago

I mean, i agree, but that one was really a trap. Steep slope out of the woods, hidden camera and then 100's of meters straight unobstructed road.

[-] thermal_shock@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

cameras do NOT make the roads safer. it's a revenue stream based off ripping off it's citizens. if anything everyone slams on their brakes when they see one causing more accidents.

[-] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 40 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Why on Earth is this unfounded argument getting upvoted so heavily? Objectively the science says that it reduces injuries and deaths. Per the linked Cochrane systematic review of 35 studies:

Despite the methodological limitations and the variability in degree of signal to noise effect, the consistency of reported reductions in speed and crash outcomes across all studies show that speed cameras are a worthwhile intervention for reducing the number of road traffic injuries and deaths. However, whilst the the evidence base clearly demonstrates a positive direction in the effect, an overall magnitude of this effect is currently not deducible due to heterogeneity and lack of methodological rigour. More studies of a scientifically rigorous and homogenous nature are necessary, to provide the answer to the magnitude of effect.

People on the Internet will just upvote the most confidently incorrect shit as long as it has enough confidence behind it and it vaguely aligns with their preconceptions, I swear.

[-] jballs@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 month ago

I think the sentiment against them stems from the fact that there are ways to reduce speeds without feeling like they're being used as a revenue stream.

Personally I like when there are warning signs saying "Speed camera in use ahead" since it has the effect of slowing down traffic and not feeling like a "gotcha" moment.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] rbesfe@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 month ago

Maybe just drive the speed limit?

[-] thermal_shock@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

yes, because no one has ever gotten a ticket or in trouble for something they didn't do.

[-] then_three_more@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Except they do make it safer and because there's always tonnes of signs around them you don't get the brake slamming. They act as a deterrent. Plus accidents at lower speeds are inherently less dangerous.

Mobile speed traps, however, are a definite revenue boost.

[-] thermal_shock@lemmy.world 14 points 1 month ago

they do not post camera signs in US

[-] then_three_more@lemmy.world -2 points 1 month ago

Maybe you guys ought to campaign to get the law changed. They used to be grey over here, but pressure was put on the government and how they're all high vis yellow with loads of warnings before them.

[-] thermal_shock@lemmy.world 12 points 1 month ago

how about just not ripping off people for doing 37 in a 35?

If the penalty for a crime is a fine, then that law only exists for the lower class. if it were a percentage of your annual income, completely different story.

[-] then_three_more@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago

Over here if you're just a bit over they'll normally put you on a speed awareness course for the first time getting caught.

And I 100% agree on fines being income based. I think some of the Scandinavian countries have done that. I also think there needs to be some kind of catch for the super rich who work the system so they don't really declare an income. Maybe if your net worth is x times the national average the fine is the greater of either a percentage of your net worth or income.

[-] MutilationWave@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

And how am I supposed to attend a speed awareness course while working over 40 hours a week?

[-] then_three_more@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

"hi boss I need to take a half day holiday on X date, I have to attend a speed awareness course"

"Hey bob, can I swap a shift with you on X date, I'll work your X Saturday. I've got to attend a speed awareness course "

Or if you're to chicken to tell the truth replace with dentist. Or just throw a sickie.

It's hardly rocket science.

[-] MutilationWave@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

My work is not like that. Not all jobs do sick days. If I miss a day I delay a project and have to kill myself getting it back on track.

[-] then_three_more@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Riiighhtt because you're sooo busy and soooo important to your job that you can't take a morning off. Speed awareness course is like 4 hours and you can do over video call. Get a fucking grip.

Or, if you are genuinely so important and busy you must be paid a bomb, so just pay the fine, take the points, pay the bit extra on insurance. Job done.

Or, here's an idea. Don't break the mother fucking law in the first place.

[-] RaoulDook@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

I don't want the law changed where I live, because these cameras are prohibited!

Several states in the USA prohibit speed cameras and traffic light cameras, because a citizen must be able to face their accuser when accused of a crime. This is a great example of freedom in the USA, where we do not let machines automatically issue fines against human beings.

[-] yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de -1 points 1 month ago

The government would be the accuser?? Just because a camera is used for evidence doesn't make the camera THE accuser. Civilized nations have a way to fight the camera-issued fine, for example if the photo doesn't show your face.

[-] FelixCress@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

UK is not civilised in this case. Cameras usually photograph back of a car here.

[-] gmtom@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

They litterally demonstrably do. Either actually engage your brain and look things up instead of parroting nonsense or take your bullshit back to reddit.

[-] AbsoluteChicagoDog@lemm.ee 3 points 1 month ago

Do you have a source for your belief that speed cameras make the road significantly safer?

[-] then_three_more@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

In the vicinity of camera sites, the pre/post reductions ranged from 8% to 49% for all crashes and 11% to 44% for fatal and serious injury crashes. Compared with controls, the relative improvement in pre/post injury crash proportions ranged from 8% to 50%.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20927736/

[-] AbsoluteChicagoDog@lemm.ee 8 points 1 month ago

However, whilst the the evidence base clearly demonstrates a positive direction in the effect, an overall magnitude of this effect is currently not deducible due to heterogeneity and lack of methodological rigour. More studies of a scientifically rigorous and homogenous nature are necessary, to provide the answer to the magnitude of effect.

[-] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Nice of you to take that out of context.

Thirty five studies met the inclusion criteria. Compared with controls, the relative reduction in average speed ranged from 1% to 15% and the reduction in proportion of vehicles speeding ranged from 14% to 65%. In the vicinity of camera sites, the pre/post reductions ranged from 8% to 49% for all crashes and 11% to 44% for fatal and serious injury crashes. Compared with controls, the relative improvement in pre/post injury crash proportions ranged from 8% to 50%.

Authors' conclusions: Despite the methodological limitations and the variability in degree of signal to noise effect, the consistency of reported reductions in speed and crash outcomes across all studies show that speed cameras are a worthwhile intervention for reducing the number of road traffic injuries and deaths. However, whilst the the evidence base clearly demonstrates a positive direction in the effect, an overall magnitude of this effect is currently not deducible due to heterogeneity and lack of methodological rigour. More studies of a scientifically rigorous and homogenous nature are necessary, to provide the answer to the magnitude of effect.

the consistency of reported reductions in speed and crash outcomes across all studies show that speed cameras are a worthwhile intervention for reducing the number of road traffic injuries and deaths

They know they're objectively beneficial, and now they just want to firmly measure to what extent that is. They nonetheless express zero doubt that it's positive based on the existing evidence.

load more comments (1 replies)
this post was submitted on 01 Oct 2024
1058 points (93.5% liked)

Lemmy Shitpost

26951 readers
1663 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

6.You Should Know

7.Comedy Heaven

8.Credible Defense

9.Ten Forward

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)


Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS