Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the stop sign cameras are absurd. if you dont stop long enough to eat a sandwich, they will ticket you.

It’s true. There should be an investigation.

People who are criminals or indigent don’t pay their tickets and don’t give an f. Rest of us pay endlessly. I bet there could be a class action lawsuit for the disproportionality.

I would love this. $75 for traffic tickets in MD where apparently my back wheels didn't make a complete stop on a road with no one in sight around 2 pm in a residential neighborhood. Why is this even allowed? Who made up the charge? Why does this intersection need a camera and for all day long?

The fact that you'll get dinged for that, but not for peeling out and then cruising at 10 over for the next half hour is the part that turns people against cameras. Generally people want enforcement aimed at the worst offenders doing the most dangerous things. But no, we get robotic Olympic judges seeing if you "stuck the landing" at the sign.

This. The stop sign cameras are handing out bullshit tickets for ticky tack infractions. They will turn the public against traffic cameras more generally.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the worst thing about the traffic cameras is not that they're racist or that they prey on the poor (they are and they do). it's that they cite so many people for trivial offenses. I'm talking about the stop sign cameras here. It's not enough to stop at a stop sign and the ticket itself says you're going 0.0 mph. you have to come to a complete stop and stay stopped for more than a couple seconds or you get a ticket. that's not a standard we subject anyone to the road else to.

A whole bunch of cities have been getting rid of red light/stop sign cameras.

Someone should start a ballot referendum to scrap them.

Name them.

Sacramento: https://www.kcra.com/article/sacramento-ends-red-light-camera-system-drivers-react/60206739

San Diego: https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/2013/02/01/san-diego-drops-red-light-cameras/

60 localities in California, in fact: https://www.sgvtribune.com/2014/01/21/red-light-cameras-being-stopped-across-southern-california-country/

Three Iowa cities: https://who13.com/news/speed-cameras-across-the-state-are-off-while-police-comply-with-new-law/

Raleigh: https://abc11.com/red-light-cameras-raleigh-driving-traffic/14520958/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the worst thing about the traffic cameras is not that they're racist or that they prey on the poor (they are and they do). it's that they cite so many people for trivial offenses. I'm talking about the stop sign cameras here. It's not enough to stop at a stop sign and the ticket itself says you're going 0.0 mph. you have to come to a complete stop and stay stopped for more than a couple seconds or you get a ticket. that's not a standard we subject anyone to the road else to.

A whole bunch of cities have been getting rid of red light/stop sign cameras.

Someone should start a ballot referendum to scrap them.

Name them.

Hundreds of communities have gotten rid of traffic cameras. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (which favors traffic cameras) says there used to be more than 500 communities nationwide with them. Now they say it's in the 200s.

Name three.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the worst thing about the traffic cameras is not that they're racist or that they prey on the poor (they are and they do). it's that they cite so many people for trivial offenses. I'm talking about the stop sign cameras here. It's not enough to stop at a stop sign and the ticket itself says you're going 0.0 mph. you have to come to a complete stop and stay stopped for more than a couple seconds or you get a ticket. that's not a standard we subject anyone to the road else to.

People stopped at stop signs. Anyone who saw them would say they stop. Yet they still a get a ticket. It's a racket.

I've seen those videos too, and no, those drivers didn't stop.

Anonymous wrote:the worst thing about the traffic cameras is not that they're racist or that they prey on the poor (they are and they do). it's that they cite so many people for trivial offenses. I'm talking about the stop sign cameras here. It's not enough to stop at a stop sign and the ticket itself says you're going 0.0 mph. you have to come to a complete stop and stay stopped for more than a couple seconds or you get a ticket. that's not a standard we subject anyone to the road else to.

People stopped at stop signs. Anyone who saw them would say they stop. Yet they still a get a ticket. It's a racket.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the worst thing about the traffic cameras is not that they're racist or that they prey on the poor (they are and they do). it's that they cite so many people for trivial offenses. I'm talking about the stop sign cameras here. It's not enough to stop at a stop sign and the ticket itself says you're going 0.0 mph. you have to come to a complete stop and stay stopped for more than a couple seconds or you get a ticket. that's not a standard we subject anyone to the road else to.

A whole bunch of cities have been getting rid of red light/stop sign cameras.

Someone should start a ballot referendum to scrap them.

Name them.

Hundreds of communities have gotten rid of traffic cameras. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (which favors traffic cameras) says there used to be more than 500 communities nationwide with them. Now they say it's in the 200s.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the stop sign cameras are absurd. if you dont stop long enough to eat a sandwich, they will ticket you.

It’s true. There should be an investigation.

People who are criminals or indigent don’t pay their tickets and don’t give an f. Rest of us pay endlessly. I bet there could be a class action lawsuit for the disproportionality.

I would love this. $75 for traffic tickets in MD where apparently my back wheels didn't make a complete stop on a road with no one in sight around 2 pm in a residential neighborhood. Why is this even allowed? Who made up the charge? Why does this intersection need a camera and for all day long?

The fact that you'll get dinged for that, but not for peeling out and then cruising at 10 over for the next half hour is the part that turns people against cameras. Generally people want enforcement aimed at the worst offenders doing the most dangerous things. But no, we get robotic Olympic judges seeing if you "stuck the landing" at the sign.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the stop sign cameras are absurd. if you dont stop long enough to eat a sandwich, they will ticket you.

It’s true. There should be an investigation.

People who are criminals or indigent don’t pay their tickets and don’t give an f. Rest of us pay endlessly. I bet there could be a class action lawsuit for the disproportionality.

I would love this. $75 for traffic tickets in MD where apparently my back wheels didn't make a complete stop on a road with no one in sight around 2 pm in a residential neighborhood. Why is this even allowed? Who made up the charge? Why does this intersection need a camera and for all day long?

Next time, obey the law by coming to a complete stop at the stop sign.

Universal Citation: MD. Transportation Code § 21-707 (2023)

(a) Unless otherwise directed by a police officer or traffic control signal, the driver of a vehicle approaching a stop sign at an intersection shall stop at the near side of the intersection at a clearly marked stop line.

(b) Unless otherwise directed by a police officer or traffic control signal, the driver of a vehicle approaching a stop sign at an intersection shall stop at the near side of the intersection and, if there is no clearly marked stop line, before entering any crosswalk.

(c) Unless otherwise directed by a police officer or traffic control signal, the driver of a vehicle approaching a stop sign at an intersection shall stop at the near side of an intersection and, if there is no crosswalk, at the nearest point before entering the intersection that gives the driver a view of traffic approaching on the intersecting roadway.

(d) The driver of a vehicle approaching a yield sign at an intersection, if required for safety to stop, shall stop at the near side of the intersection at a clearly marked stop line.

(e) The driver of a vehicle approaching a yield sign at an intersection, if required for safety to stop, shall stop at the near side of the intersection and, if there is no clearly marked stop line, before entering any crosswalk.

(f) The driver of a vehicle approaching a yield sign at an intersection, if required for safety to stop, shall stop at the near side of the intersection and, if there is no crosswalk, at the nearest point before entering the intersection that gives the driver a view of traffic approaching on the intersecting roadway.

Anonymous wrote:the worst thing about the traffic cameras is not that they're racist or that they prey on the poor (they are and they do). it's that they cite so many people for trivial offenses. I'm talking about the stop sign cameras here. It's not enough to stop at a stop sign and the ticket itself says you're going 0.0 mph. you have to come to a complete stop and stay stopped for more than a couple seconds or you get a ticket. that's not a standard we subject anyone to the road else to.

This is the law. Don't like it? Run for office and get it changed. Until then, a stop sign usually means stop.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the stop sign cameras are absurd. if you dont stop long enough to eat a sandwich, they will ticket you.

It’s true. There should be an investigation.

People who are criminals or indigent don’t pay their tickets and don’t give an f. Rest of us pay endlessly. I bet there could be a class action lawsuit for the disproportionality.

I would love this. $75 for traffic tickets in MD where apparently my back wheels didn't make a complete stop on a road with no one in sight around 2 pm in a residential neighborhood. Why is this even allowed? Who made up the charge? Why does this intersection need a camera and for all day long?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the worst thing about the traffic cameras is not that they're racist or that they prey on the poor (they are and they do). it's that they cite so many people for trivial offenses. I'm talking about the stop sign cameras here. It's not enough to stop at a stop sign and the ticket itself says you're going 0.0 mph. you have to come to a complete stop and stay stopped for more than a couple seconds or you get a ticket. that's not a standard we subject anyone to the road else to.

A whole bunch of cities have been getting rid of red light/stop sign cameras.

Someone should start a ballot referendum to scrap them.

Name them.

Anonymous wrote:the worst thing about the traffic cameras is not that they're racist or that they prey on the poor (they are and they do). it's that they cite so many people for trivial offenses. I'm talking about the stop sign cameras here. It's not enough to stop at a stop sign and the ticket itself says you're going 0.0 mph. you have to come to a complete stop and stay stopped for more than a couple seconds or you get a ticket. that's not a standard we subject anyone to the road else to.

A whole bunch of cities have been getting rid of red light/stop sign cameras.

Someone should start a ballot referendum to scrap them.

Anonymous wrote:the worst thing about the traffic cameras is not that they're racist or that they prey on the poor (they are and they do). it's that they cite so many people for trivial offenses. I'm talking about the stop sign cameras here. It's not enough to stop at a stop sign and the ticket itself says you're going 0.0 mph. you have to come to a complete stop and stay stopped for more than a couple seconds or you get a ticket. that's not a standard we subject anyone to the road else to.

Yes, you have to actually stop at a stop sign. That's the law.

the worst thing about the traffic cameras is not that they're racist or that they prey on the poor (they are and they do). it's that they cite so many people for trivial offenses. I'm talking about the stop sign cameras here. It's not enough to stop at a stop sign and the ticket itself says you're going 0.0 mph. you have to come to a complete stop and stay stopped for more than a couple seconds or you get a ticket. that's not a standard we subject anyone to the road else to.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP is mad Democrats are raising revenue without raising taxes

seriously?

No. They're complaining that it's racist. Black people pay the vast majority of the fines, which are very expensive and can ruin people's lives. The Washington Post (and a lot of other publications) have written about this.

Black people need to be given a pass then for speeding tickets.

The fact that black drivers pay 5x the fines that white drivers do isn't suspicious to you?