Of all the places I'd expect negative reactions to this, I'm shocked HN is one of them.<p>This is automation of a dangerous job that is expensive to pay the labor costs of. That's our <i>thing</i>, folks! That's what tech is all about!<p>If you think the speed limits should be higher so you can drive faster, fine, but that's completely orthogonal to the point here.<p>Better enforcement of road laws, fewer police deaths from road accidents, lower cost to achieve these goals. I see this as entirely beneficial.<p>The only people complaining are the ones who want to disregard road laws because they don't care about the danger they pose to others, and like that there's barely any enforcement.
I wish they took the French and German (and elsewhere approach) where they use some of the revenue to identify the driver and fine them + penalize their license.<p>If you just send the ticket to whomever is the easiest to target (regardless of guilt), then it’s more about revenue than safety.
It would be amazing if speeding was enforced 100%, and then the official limits were pushed up where needed. This business where everyone drives above the limit and cops enforce when they feel like it is annoying and is a big enabler of bias in policing.
Too old-fashioned. Too passive. Too half-assed.<p>1.) Make any private or commercial car going over 80mph illegal. No exceptions except law enforcement and emergency services, no grandfathering in, no aftermarket upgrades.<p>2.) Enforce lower limits by geofencing and active beacons, to be strictly observed by mandatory driver assistance systems. Issue immediate death penalty for circumvention by automated rocket launchers at the next possible free spot.<p>3.) Also limit the maximal acceleration, no matter if ICE supercar or EV, don't want to have unnecessesary microplastics by needlessly burnt rubber, aren't we?<p>4.) Do the same for acoustics.<p>5.) Enjoy.<p>6.) Move all opposers by force to live in the fenced reservations of the race tracks.
From the article:<p>It would make California the 19th state to install cameras that would automatically issue tickets to the owners of vehicles that are spotted exceeding the speed limit by at least 11 miles an hour.<p>[...]<p>The fines could be reduced if the vehicle owner is unable to pay.<p>[...]<p>“We’re out to change behavior. We’re not out to be punitive.”<p>---<p>So:<p>1. The unintended consequence is that more people may feel comfortable going 8-10 mph over the limit.<p>2. Those who can afford the $50 fine (which, knowing CA, is a big part of the population) without any other consequences will end up ignoring it and just paying the fee or using their significant wealth to fight the fees.<p>3. The rest of the people just won't pay it because they cannot afford it.
One of my work projects was developing a system for managing the deployment locations of speed cameras. (Don't want to give away the state.) The speed cameras are rotated around to different locations each day. The vendor that supplies the speed camera systems is called RedFlex. It issues a couple thousand violations a day. Maybe around 1-2% of the total traffic. The legislation makes it lack teeth. There must be a warning sign before the camera. (so if you are paying attention, you simply slow down.) First offense is a warning, must be going 11 mph over, no points, etc.
<a href="https://youtu.be/pH9dnJ8BmY0" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://youtu.be/pH9dnJ8BmY0</a><p>Didn't LA get rid of their cameras recently? Linked a YouTube video about this from an engineer.