cross-posted from: https://sh.itjust.works/post/44712264
These up-eds usually complain that photo radar would be fine if the radar worked properly. This one doesn’t even do that. It just complains that speed limits aren’t fair and now drivers have to change their behavior. jfc
It is true that drivers can avoid such tickets by sticking to the posted speed limits, but it is also true that drivers are hardly ever expected to strictly observe those limits.
…
It’s like the generally accepted contract between drivers and police – just drive at a reasonable speed and you’ll be fine – has been broken.
Speeding tickets don’t have to be a regressive tax, as others have pointed out. Many countries slide speeding tickets based on income.
Revenue generator… for whom? Policy matters. E.g. California’s AB 645 authorization for speeding cameras only allows for recovery of program costs and “any excess revenue shall be used for traffic-calming measures within three years of the end of the fiscal year in which the excess revenue was received.” California’s speeding cameras reduce speeding by improving road infrastructure and active transportation.
Citation needed, otherwise you’re just spreading carbrained misinformation.
Any ticket that is a flat cost is a regressive tax. I think we both know that income based tickets would never fly in the US.
That’s a great policy California has to limit local government from using it as revenue generation, but it far from normal. I’m in Chicago and we don’t have anything like that.
https://www.illinoispolicy.org/chicago-speed-cameras-take-90-9-million-from-drivers-in-2024/
https://www.propublica.org/article/chicagos-race-neutral-traffic-cameras-ticket-black-and-latino-drivers-the-most
That link title should be self-explanatory.
Income based tickets can fly in the US, but it hasn’t been normalized everywhere yet. CA AB 645 doesn’t slide upwards, even though it should, but it does slide downward. The law even requires analysis of the local population before authorizing a speed camera installation.
“a designated jurisdiction shall reduce the applicable fines and penalties by 80 percent for indigent persons, and by 50 percent for individuals up to 250 percent above the federal poverty level.”
“A speed enforcement program developed pursuant to paragraph (1) shall place the speed safety systems in locations that are geographically and socioeconomically diverse. The designated jurisdiction shall describe how it has complied with this provision in the Speed Safety System Impact Report described in subdivision (h)”
“A racial and economic equity impact analysis, developed in collaboration with local racial justice and economic equity stakeholder groups. The analysis shall include the number of notices of violations issued to indigent individuals, the number of notices of violations issued to individuals of up to 250 percent above the poverty line, and the number of violations issued to each ZIP Code.”
The issues you raise are real, but they’re not because of speed cameras. They’re issues of selective speeding enforcement and flat-rate tickets being regressive in a car dependent society. Police officers regularly issue speeding tickets against the impoverished and minority populations without checks and balance. At least speeding cameras won’t lie about where it sits or inspect the color of the driver before writing a ticket.
Illinois, do better with your speeding tickets.