1046
Get to work, crackheads (lemmy.today)
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by to c/lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world
295 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

EDIT: since apparently a bunch of people woke up with the wrong foot this morning or forgot to check the group they’re in:

This is a joke. Do not steal or vandalize speed enforcement cameras (or anything else for that matter). That’s against the law and you will likely get arrested.

If you’re addicted to crack or any other drugs, please seek professional help.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 8 points 2 years ago (5 children)

Sorry but it's a black and white thing in this case, r either you're under the speed limit and not breaking the law or you're over the speed limit and breaking the law.

Also, tons of people object to speed camera tickets and win, the only difference is that there's no officer there when the event happened to tell them "Say that to the judge if you're not happy.", the end result is the same.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

    We also need to keep in mind the mechanism it is using to detect speed. If it uses radar it will need regular calibration. Handheld units for example are supposed to be spot checked before and after each shift with tuning forks and sent back to the manufacturer to be recalibrated every 6 months or so.

    Lidar and optical flow most likely have different requirements, but I am not as familiar with them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Sorry but it’s a black and white thing in this case, r either you’re under the speed limit and not breaking the law or you’re over the speed limit and breaking the law.

    This isn't actually true. It's entirely possible to be breaking the law while driving under the speed limit: "driving too fast for conditions" is very much a thing.

    But that's beside my point, which really was just that changing the design of the street to make people not want to speed in the first place is way more effective (and frankly, way less totalitarian) than punishing them after-the-fact for doing so.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    "Driving too fast for conditions" won't be enforced by cameras, will still exist if the road is modified and is 100% subjective which is a problem speed cameras don't have so you should be happy about that.

    It might be more effective, it's still not possible to change all roads as quickly as speed cameras can be deployed.

    It's also a very stupid argument, that's like saying "If that person didn't want me to steal from them they shouldn't have left their car unlocked." The rule is there, it's your responsibility to respect it no matter what the road looks like. Both things need to be used in conjunction, roads need to be adapted to their limit but you need something to enforce the limits too.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    What if the speed limit is unreasonably high or low?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    "unreasonably low"

    Eh... What? Car drivers can get fucked in this case, they don't have a right to travel quickly, it's a privilege.

    "Unreasonably high"

    Then a police officer there won't change a thing and the road design won't change.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    if it's too low, good, drivers shouldn't go fast. If it's too high, fine, drivers can go fast.

    Eh .... What?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Never said it was fine, I said the issue lies elsewhere and the solutions we're currently taking about aren't the ones that will solve it.

    If the speed limit is too high it's an administrative decision, they won't change the road design because they decided to have a high speed limit, a speed camera or a police officer won't charge people who are driving fast unless they're going over the speed limit that's already too high.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    So you consider the law to be the definition of safety?

    My question was intended to get you think about the fact that laws (and speed limits) are made by people, with all their flaws and biases, and they don't always do a good job.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I don't know how you can come to that conclusion from my message.

    Good day to you!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Sorry but it's a black and white thing in this case, r either you're under the speed limit and not breaking the law or you're over the speed limit and breaking the law.

    Your words make it sound like you think the speed limit is some objective truth that cannot be questioned.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    It can be questioned, not enforcing them isn't questioning them and won't make them change, if people disagree with the speed limit somewhere they can complain to the authorities responsible, in the meantime is still the limit and you're breaking the law by not respecting it. It's the same thing with every laws and is the reason why when they change, criminals don't suddenly get released from prison because the law they broke doesn't exist anymore.

    Ever heard of the social contract theory?

    Heck, what if I believe that school zones are bullshit and want to do 50mph in them and it's the kids responsibility to act safely? Would you defend my right to drive 50mph because you believe I have the right to question the speed limit in school zones this way or would you tell me to address the right people and live with the current limits until they're changed?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    What would you prefer? That some people drive slightly over the speed limit? Or a spot where people suddenly slam on the brakes to avoid getting a ticket, endangering those who might be behind them with their sudden change of speed?

    Because the latter is what these devices tend to do.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    Show me evidences that they increase accidents please, I've provided two sources showing they work in another comment, surely you can provide one that they cause accidents.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent