213
this post was submitted on 28 May 2026
213 points (97.8% liked)
Ontario
3733 readers
1 users here now
A place to discuss all the news and events taking place in the province of Ontario, Canada.
Rules
- No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
- Be respectful, especially when disagreeing. Everyone should feel welcome here.
- No porn.
- No Ads / Spamming.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This is more a chart demonstrating bad road design or regulation, and the incompetence of the enforcement. Either the roads are designed in such a way that huge numbers of people feel safe driving at these speeds (because the speed limit is too low, or the road designed unsafely) or there is a large number of unsafe drivers who only stopped in the presence of cameras, and who went right back to unsafe driving without issue.
This is a chart demonstrating that speed cameras are an effective intervention for an otherwise badly designed road.
Reports from my city indicate collisions go up with speed cameras.
We already know speed has little to do with safety.
These are a shit implementation of a bad idea.
I would be very interested to see these reports. What city, what reports?
Clearly you are just making things up now. Why are you doing this? Are you really this broken?
It's quite difficult to retroactively adjust the traffic speed, without causing knock on issues.
A road might have been designed to cope with 50, but hidden junctions, or pedestrians might knock it down to a 30. Making it feel like a 30 is quite different.
I'd personally prefer other, more polite methods. In the UK, the signs showing your current speed in either green (good) or red (too fast) are remarkably effective. I accept that speed cameras are needed when the other methods fail.
Proviso, the cameras should be blatantly obvious, with no ambiguity over the limit. It should only catch people both deliberately speeding, and not paying enough attention to spot the risks of speeding.
...thus proving the effectiveness of cameras...
Only if you have cameras on literally every road. No substantial action is being taken, so they go right back to dangerous driving as soon as they aren't on-camera, as this graph seems to indicate.
If they need to be monitored at all times to be safe, do you not think it would be better to take away their licence?
You don't have stop lights at literally every intersection. You're being foolish.
The point of speed cameras isn't to stop you from speeding, it's to stop innocent people from getting fucking slaughtered. We can put up with you speeding where the risks are relatively low.
Jesus fucking christ, it's like you people are going out of your way to find the stupidest takes. I think on some level, that's exactly what you're actually doing, because you simply don't want to draw the obvious and correct conclusions.
If speeding isn't a meaningful measure for safety, why are we enforcing the current limits? If it is, why are we allowing drivers to consistantly drive over those speeds?
How about you just tell me what I'm supposed to say so we can get to whatever the fuck your point is supposed to be
This. I've driven in many roads where the speed limit was so unreasonably low that you'd get honked at consistently for respecting it