The Department of Transportation mapped out the speed of cars in areas near schools where

Well, the day has come. Starting today, speed cameras placed near schools throughout the city will begin ticketing people who are driving above the speed limit in school zones, Mayor Bill de Blasio announced yesterday.

City officials won’t release the locations of the new cameras, which were installed last September after New York State lawmakers passed a bill authorizing it. The “safety measure,” as the city is calling it, has been something former Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s administration tried to pass for more than a decade, according to a city website.

As we reported last year, the bill is a five-year pilot program and it allows 20 cameras to be installed. As of today, the city installed six of them in the fall, but did not issue fines – only warnings. Now the cameras will issue $50 tickets for those who go faster than the 20 mile-per-hour limit of slow zones near schools.

The 20 cameras will be rotated around 100 schools that the Department of Transportation deemed to be danger zones based on their studies and findings. While the location of the cameras at any given time will remain a mystery, the list of target schools is available here.

“The cameras are mobile so we’ll be able to move them around and address high-speed locations that may change over time,” former Department of Transportation Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan previously told WNYC. “Any school where there’s excessive speeding will be fair game. One of the deterrents is that people don’t necessarily know where they are.””

De Blasio also supports the “home rule,” which would allow the city to install cameras at their own discretion without having to wait for Albany to pass anything, a source of contention for the last mayor.

Related posts

  • Murry

    BRAVO !

    • http://www.mybrooklyn.com/ MyBrooklyn

      Sure let people suffer….we know how some special group of people will get away with it because they are crooks that have authority over us…they are taking away our freedoms everyday…even damn internet has less freedom nowadays then before

      • Maxwell Smart

        Ensuring motorists dont speed where schoolkids are crossing isnt a loss of freedom, as for the internet there should be more policing of criminals running scams etc ( that includes Google)

        • http://www.mybrooklyn.com/ MyBrooklyn

          who will police the crooks aka law makers, politicians and cops. I hate holding people more responsible meanwhile savages in authority get away more often then your average person…You know this is how they start under false pretense of this bull shit school safety then eventually they will start putting it everywhere…Stupid and naïve herd…slaves

          • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

            What are you talking about?

      • Murry

        Wish the hell I knew what you’re referring to.

        • http://www.mybrooklyn.com/ MyBrooklyn

          simple reminder of Washington Bridge lane closures not enough for your naïve empty head….it just what we know…how many things we don’t know that these bastards do to people in order to stress people out financially and physically….you stay naïve because you have no character in you….

          • Maxwell Smart

            The fact Gov Christie is being questioned about the closures negates your whole premise….BTW the gov’t is hiding space aliens from to use for nefarious purposes

          • http://www.mybrooklyn.com/ MyBrooklyn

            I guess you will bend over at any given time….”the gov’t is hiding space aliens from to use for nefarious purposes” i am not a conspiracy theorist

          • RKramden

            What the hell does Bridgegate and political corruption have to do with speeding cameras?!?

            One is the agenda of a crooked pol, and the other is a measure designed to save lives. I’m failing to see the connection.

          • Murry

            MrBrooklyn, what are you so afraid of?

  • RomanEmpireAgain

    I love listening to motorists so furious that their right to speed and drive recklessly is being inhibited. Shows how far we’ve fallen as a society: absolutely no shame in ones bad behavior, and no shame in arguing for it. We are so done, hello China!

    • disqus_4pva3wOg3a

      bc the reason for that is mostly to generate revenue (not that there’s
      any shame in that, but at least come out and say that) under the
      pretense of child safety. You know those big electronic signs that
      state “your speed is XX, speed limit is YY”? they GET everyone who
      passes to slow down, not just those who get ticketed and remember about
      the next time around, but don’t bring in the $$.

      • Kriston Lewis

        Those signs are a joke, they’re openly ignored.

  • Local Broker

    How does a hidden camera get anyone to stop speeding? What is speeding? Do you get a ticket if you are going 23 in a 20 (thats over 10%)? Red light and speed cameras have nothing to do with safety and have everything to do with money.

    • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

      Really, last year I got a red light ticket. that was the last time I will ever go through a yellow.

      • Local Broker

        So you went through a yellow and got a ticket for running a red? Did you harm anyone or drive recklessly through that yellow? Do you feel like you deserved that ticket? Do you think its a safer world now that you will never run a yellow again?

        • http://www.sheepsheadbites.com/ Ned Berke

          I feel like it’s a safer world that he’ll never run a yellow again. Pretty much every near miss I’ve ever been in was some jackass trying to make the light at all costs.

          That said, to answer your question, tickets are given for going 10+ miles over the speed limit, and, if I recall correctly, the cameras are not active during non-school hours.

          • Local Broker

            Why would you be walking into an intersection right as a light turns red? If they want to make it safer they should put a 1-2 second delay for peds getting a walk signal after the light turns red. If you are in the intersection at a time you shouldnt be then thats on you. 10+ over limit? so you can drive 29 in a 20 and not get a ticket? Anyone who thinks that traffic cams that issue tickets are for anything other than money is very naive.

          • http://www.sheepsheadbites.com/ Ned Berke

            People make turns, too, y’know.

          • Local Broker

            If someone is turning on a red or yellow you should not be in the intersection either. It should say dont walk at that point.

          • http://www.sheepsheadbites.com/ Ned Berke

            You’re right. It never turns yellow while I’m already in the intersection. Never. My apologies.

            Let’s get everyone a gun so they’re safe and remove the brakes from their car so they drive better. Got it.

          • Local Broker

            Whats one thing got to do with the other.? You have no argument so you bring up some silly shit that makes no sense. Like i said if you are crossing and the dont walk is blinking it means get out of the intersection. If a light is yellow for that driver that wants to turn im pretty sure the dont walk would be steady and not blinking which means you shouldnt be in the intersection at that time. So if you are walking somewhere when you shouldnt be, dont bitch if you almost get hit by some asshole. No matter how many laws are passed or cameras installed there will always be bad people doing bad things and bad drivers driving like assholes. Its always the same response from the pols, they want to tax the situation instead of actually taking time and effort to try to fix something or make it better. How many years have people been complaining about speeding on Oriental or Shore in MB? What was ever done? A sign? More police? A radar? Flashing yellow? A police scooter? ding ding ding. As for guns tell the police to stop carrying guns because they are dangerous and there is no reason we need weapons of war on the streets near our children. I like my guns i feel better and safer with one than without. Why are we blaming drivers here? Shouldnt we be blaming all these assault cars?

          • Maxwell Smart

            You proved the point again,,its for the A-holes ( any come to mind?)…maybe just maybe it will knock some sense into them

          • Andrew

            So let me see if I have this right.

            If a pedestrian breaks the law by “walking somewhere when you shouldnt be,” the appropriate penalty is death. Yet if a motorist breaks the law by exceeding the speed limit by over 33%, even a $50 penalty is excessive.

            Am I close?

          • BrooklynBus

            It’s not a “penalty”, but a consequence if someone is not attentive to his surroundings. That’s why smart pedestrians who are even legally crossing first make eye contact with a driver who is turning or slowing down before proceeding to walk. Others just start walking as soon as they see a green light and don’t even turn their head sideways to see if perhaps someone doesn’t see the signal and is barreling down the road and not slowing down. More lives could be saved if pedestrians were more attentive.

            You make it seem like its always driver wrong-pedestrian right, and that’s why the fatality rate is so high. It works both ways.

          • Andrew

            Please don’t blame pedestrians for not being yielded to. That’s the motorist’s legal responsibility. If only there were some way to persuade that motorist to obey the law, such as, hmmm, enforcement?

            Watch these two videos – especially the second one, from 0:49 to 1:20. I see a serious problem, and it’s not in what any of the pedestrians are doing.

            Why are you so strongly opposed to efforts to make sure that motorists, who have the capacity to kill others, obey the law (or at least don’t disobey it by more than 33%)? Yes, pedestrians sometimes take risks with their own lives, but most pedestrian fatalities are due to motorists taking risks with other people’s lives.

          • BrooklynBus

            I wish you would stop putting words in my mouth. I am not “so strongly opposed to motorists obeying the law. But you seem to oppose pedestrians having to obey the law. I can do a video showing 20 pedestrians crossing against the light on Brighton Beach Avenue.

            The videos show nothing new. We all know that motorists frequently do not give pedestrians the right of way in NYC. So what else is new? However at :45 into the second video, I see nothing wrong with the cars going first when they can all compete their turn without interfering with the pedestrian as she continues to cross the street without having to stop and wait for cars. No one is delayed. I guess you propose the eight cars or so all line up and wait for the pedestrian to completely clear the intersection before making their turn. I do see a problem, however with the guy who misses the light because no one gives him the right of way. What if they give him the right of way, and just after he passes, a pedestrian steps off the other side of the intersection? Are they then supposed to wait for that pedestrian to cross the street before making the turn even if they can make that turn 15 seconds before the pedestrian reaches them?

            Also, what about the pedestrians running in the street to catch that bus? Are they correct?

          • Andrew

            You’re missing the point. Drivers who speed on city streets, who run red lights, who fail to yield to pedestrians are taking risks with other people’s lives in order to save a few seconds (or maybe even minutes) of their time.

            There is already a built-in disincentive to take risks with one’s own life, but without real enforcement, there is no disincentive for a driver in a hurry to take risks with the lives of pedestrians. In New York City, most pedestrian fatalities occur with the pedestrian in the right. In my opinion (and apparently Mayor de Blasio’s as well), we need to reduce the plague of traffic violence in the city. Whoops, I didn’t see him, no criminality suspected won’t get us anywhere.

            If pedestrians are afraid to cross the street with the light, we have a problem. They unfortunately have every reason to be afraid.

            I see nothing wrong with the pedestrians running along the edge of the street to catch the bus rather than on the snow-covered sidewalk. Unlike the drivers in those two videos, they are not taking risks with other people’s lives. (They’re not even taking significant risks with their own lives – nobody’s likely to drive up directly behind a stopped bus in the curb lane except for another bus driver, and if there were another bus approaching they probably wouldn’t all be running for this one.)

          • 8asdj

            Pedestrian action is responsible for 7% of all car-pedestrian collisions based on NYPD’s own stats. I’d say that your out-of-ass assumption of “More lives could be saved if pedestrians were more attentive” incorrectly weighs the fault of pedestrians. Next time remember that the plural of anecdote isn’t data.

          • BrooklynBus

            Tell me why then has Commissioner Bratton stepped up enforcement against pedestrians jaywalking on the upper west side, and not focusing at all on motorists because of the three recent fatalities on the upper west side, if the cars were responsible for all three incidents, and the pedestrians did nothing wrong? Is he an idiot?

          • 8asdj

            Because he doesn’t know what a decimal is? His own stats say 7.36% but he said 73%. Him stepping up enforcement got an 84 year old Asian man dropped to the ground and left him blooded because he incorrectly attributed pedestrians fault and instead of stepping up motor vehicle enforcement like he should have he targeted much-easier-to-catch pedestrians.

          • BrooklynBus

            The bloodied Asian man did not result from the stepped up enforcement, but by poor police training. You don’t attempt to write a summons to someone and subsequently arrest them when they obviously did not understand English. The officer should have just let him proceed after the signal turned green.

            What really bothers me is this $250 fine for jaywalking. This must have been something done by Bloomberg. No way should the fine be so high for something everyone does. This sounds like another money grab on the part of city in the name of safety. Just a few years ago, the jaywalking fine was $20. How do you justify raising it from $20 to $250? A $20 fine is enough of a deterrent. Many people would reduce the number of times they jaywalk with a $20 or $25 fine. A $250 fine is a hardship for many and will not increase safety if no other measures are taken. This is just insane.

            If his statistics are wrong, someone better set him straight.

          • 8asdj

            The altercation was a result of NYPD stepping up enforcement which was a result in itself based on poor policy of the NYPD. That officer was poorly trained, but he should have never been instructed to cite jaywalkers. It’s typical NYPD blame the victim bullshit.

            The NYPD should not have been stepping up enforcement of jaywalking in the first place, but issuing citations for jaywalking is a lot easier than actually enforcing speed limits and citing motorists for failure to yield or putting people in danger. This underlies the need for cameras because of the difficulty of officers to enforce motor vehicle violations that put pedestrians in danger.

            No one is in any way claiming that a $250 fine for jaywalking is proportionate to the crime nor an effective way of reducing pedestrian fatalities and I’m confused why you’d posture that question towards me or any pro-camera person in the comments when we all agree that enforcing pedestrian action over driver action is dumb.

          • BrooklynBus

            I agree that the officers should not have been instructed to cite jaywalkers but to warn them, at least for the first few days or week. Since the man did not understand English, the fight might have broken out anyway even if he weren’t cited.

            I’m not going to get into a camera debate with you, but just say since tickets were written with such high fines, it seems that the prime interest is money, not safety and I fear the same with cameras. I would rather see hundreds of $20 tickets than 10 $250 tickets. That would get the message across better.

            They can’t continue to write more jaywalking tickets at $250 a shot because the people will start screaming and everyone will start hating DeBlasio. I wasn’t directing the $250 fine comment at you specifically, but just wanted to point it out to those who did not read the links.

          • Local Broker

            I dont want anyone to get hit by anything. If you are going to be in a place at a certain time when you should not be there you might have consequences. Like Brooklyn Bus just said in his comment you should be aware of your surrounding and pay attention just like all driver should be doing. I have almost been hit countless times while walking becuase of bad drivers and i have almost hit countless people because they were not paying attention. It works both ways.

          • Andrew

            There is no moral equivalence, and, more importantly, berating pedestrians for not jumping out of the way of motorists breaking the law will not save lives. Enforcement of the laws that protect pedestrians will, on the other hand, save lives. I’d prefer to go with the second approach.

          • http://www.flickr.com/photos/lisanne001 Lisanne!

            Brakes are for children’s bicycles. Grown ups don’t need them, they’re an unnecessary frill.

          • M. Smart

            Ned Its impossible to argue with immature, selfish people…,,Thats why we need the cameras and enforcement

          • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

            So when should you stop at an intersection? Is it up to every driver to decide when it is safe to keep going?

          • Local Broker

            If you dont think you can make it across you should stop before entering the intersection preferably before the crosswalk. Yes its up to the driver you are in control of you vehicle not the guy behind you laying down his horn. If you cant decide if its safe or not you should not be driving a 2-3 ton machine.

          • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

            is there a point where you defer to traffic control devices and not you personal judgement.

          • Local Broker

            I dont let traffic devices dictate how i drive. I stop and go when and where i am supposed to. I dont drive a car like most people do, i actually pay attention to my surroundings at all times. I have been in situations where i was stopped at a red and see a car barreling down on me from behind with no intention of stopping. I get the out of the way quick and avoid possibly being killed. Luckily that time no one was in front or crossing. Most people drive while being distracted by what ever or drive like robots with no care in the world. Everyone makes a big deal about texting or phones while driving and they are but what about eating or drinking. I have seen people eating cereal while driving I would rather they be on the phone at that point. What im saying is we need continuing education about road safety from teens to elderly. We dont need cameras so we can pay hundreds in fines for a second of driving.

          • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

            I bet you drive better when you are drunk too.

          • Local Broker

            I actually never drink and drive. EVER. Now you are just making stupid comments. People tend to do that when they have nothing productive to say. You are an idiot and i will not be responding to you anymore.

          • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

            Well… you are defending your right to make up your own rule for the road. I am just glad I don’t live in Sheepshead Bay anymore.

          • MyBrooklyn

            @ Chicken Underwear what a dumb ass comment to make. I guess he jay walks and crosses busy intersections and stares at his smartphone to check weather while crossing against the light……I see people do that all the time i might just slow down in order for them to cross even-though i have a right away or if i am in the rush i will give them piece of my mind….

          • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

            Yea, I am glad I don’t live in YourBrooklyn.

          • oy-gavolt

            What a fucking idiot. Chalk this one to the power of experience, right? Instead of making yourself a stationary object in a predicted place in order for the driver to know where you’ll be when he passes you you make yourself an unpredictable moving object. Fucking brilliant.

          • Local Broker

            Yeah dick. No where to go on a single one way lane with no chance of him passing only going through me. Another fucking genius. Ned I think we need background checks before people can comment on this site.

          • Maxwell Smart

            arent background checks an invasion of privacy and freedom…I like the way you invalidate your own beliefs

          • MyBrooklyn

            Ned I think we need background checks before people can comment on this site. i disagree with you let them say whatever they want to say these miserable people dont leave their houses or own a car. My family is working family my wife is a nurse and i am an IT guy and i have 2 jobs….we have 3 kids. I have 2 jobs because politicians and law makers make it difficult for true middle class to stay afloat.. i hope you are agree with me on that..

          • Maxwell Smart

            obviously he has the ability to calculate the speed, distance,tire wear, road conditions, damage to his vehicle,and pedestrian in .5 sec

          • 8asdj

            There is a 1-2 second delay but if an idiot runs a yellow to make a turn that delay won’t matter to pedestrians crossing parallel the car’s original direction of travel. I like how you try to spin the leniency you get of 9mph over the speed limit as reason for this being a money maker it would be brilliant if not stupid. Hold the speedometer at 20+/-5mph and you won’t get a ticket, it’s that simple.

          • Local Broker

            If there is a yello for someone who wants to turn it should say dont walk for that intersection at that point. If you are still crossing at that time then you are doing the same thing as the car. I didnt spin anything, I am responding with questions to statements made by others that are trying to make sense of something that doesn’t.

        • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

          I got the ticket because it actually turned red. and yes. The world will be a little safer if i don’t run the reds and a lot safer if nobody runs the reds.

          • Local Broker

            I agree the streets would be alot safer if no one ran red lights.A camera that takes a picture and sends out a fine (tax) will never prevent that from happening. My point from the beginning is that cameras are for money not safety.

          • http://www.mybrooklyn.com/ MyBrooklyn

            Lets fine damn pedestrians when they all stand on the street corners making difficult to turn and slowing down the traffic. I think sooner or later masters who control the naïve slaves will use face recondition cameras in order to match our faces in their database and issue you a ticket. I think its good idea….its safety concern, I am all for it

      • BrooklynBus

        If you entered the intersection on a yellow and it turned red while you were in the intersection, you did absolutely nothing wrong! You should only get a ticket if the light turned red before you entered the intersection. Think about it. You are doing the speed limit and the light turns yellow just as you reach the crosswalk. It is impossible to stop on a dime. Of course you will enter the intersection on a yellow. If it is a wide intersection, you may not be able to reach the end of the intersection before the light turns red especially if you are traveling below the speed limit. Why in the world should you be punished?

        • Andrew

          As he clarified yesterday, he entered the intersection on red.

          • BrooklynBus

            Well then, that’s a different story if he entered it on the red, he was clearly wrong if the yellow was long enough to stop while going at the speed limit. But he didn’t clarify it yesterday. He clarified it after I made my post. Yesterday, he just said “it turned red”. He didn’t specifically state when it turned red. why are you always so eager to prove me wrong when I am not wrong?

          • Andrew

            “If” he entered it on the red?

            His Friday afternoon clarification seemed quite clear to me, but I hope you’re pleased with his newly expanded clarification. Why you continue to insist today that you were not wrong is beyond me.

          • BrooklynBus

            If he had clarified his response before I made my comment, I didn’t see it because it appeared further down in the comments and I didn’t get to it yet. Why you continue to go out of your way to always try to prove I am always wrong is beyond me and extremely childish.
            Your comment here is totally unnecessary.

        • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

          It was red when I entered.

          When it turned yellow I accelerated, I wanted to “beat” the light. I got the ticket because I entered the intersection when it was red. The photos clearly show that.

          I was tired and I wanted to get home. All I did was get to the next light before the guy who did stop at the light.

          It was not a lot of money and no points were put on my insurance. But it was my bosses truck so it was a little embarrassing.

          • BrooklynBus

            Thanks for clarifying, but you were clearly wrong because you misjudged the length of the yellow. You may be able to get away with that elsewhere, but not in NYC. You really shouldn’t ever accelerate on the yellow. You should slow down and stop. You should go through the yellow when it is not safe to stop or there is not enough time to stop since you are very close to the intersection.

            In Jersey the yellows are so long like 7 seconds in places (we have a few greens that are only 10 seconds long) that a few times I would slow down to stop and seeing other cars going through, then speed up and still get through on the amber.

          • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

            I never said I didn’t deserve a ticket.

          • Brooklyn Bus

            You didn’t initially specifically say that, but it certainly was implied. If you knew you were guilty, I really don’t see a reason why you even mentioned that you received one. You made your comment in response to one about raising revenue.

          • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

            That was not my intention. I just wanted to describe the fact that I learned my lesson.

            I don’t think cameras the enforese moving violations are about revenue.

          • Andrew

            It’s pretty obvious to me that he was responding to the first sentence of Local Broker’s comment – “How does a hidden camera get anyone to stop speeding?” – by pointing out that a hidden red light camera got him to stop running red lights.

            Enforcement is what gets people to stop breaking the law and taking risks with other people’s lives.

  • Guest

    Sure, put more and more restrictions on people and scream SAFETY!
    This is simply to make money.
    I know plenty of people who are much safer drivers above the speed limit than the soccer mom in a minivan below the speed limit. Lots of factors go into how safe of a driver you are. Car, experience, focus, awareness, fear, weather, and again… EXPERIENCE. I’ve felt safer with a friend off road going over 100 than with my mother going shopping 10 blocks away.
    So to say this will make the road safer… I don’t know.

    • 8asdj

      Stop pretending you have a constitutional right to drive or speed. You don’t. Oh, and that stupid mind set you have about experience being the greatest factor in safe driving is the same egotistical shit show that occurs in a drunk fucktards brain just before he drives a two ton motor vehicle.

      If drivers were as responsible as some people (including Allan Rosen) say they are then there wouldn’t have been over 15k traffic injuries last year and hundreds of deaths.

      • Guest

        1. I never said that I have that right… you are assuming.
        2. I’m saying that installing speed cams doesn’t make an area safer. That its only there to make money for the city.
        3. I do believe that experience is one of the greatest factors in safety. Statistics prove that… that’s why insurance is higher for people which only recently began driving.
        4. Stop being angry… when you curse on the internet you just sound like an idiot.
        5. Why do you hate drivers? Some are stupid, some are smart, some are responsible, some are not? Accidents will happen!!! That’s why they are called accidents.
        6. I just think you are lonely at home and have no1 to talk to. So you sit on the interwebs arguing with people just to get some sort of human contact. You need to relax a little and realize that there are just some things you can’t control. And thats ok. Accidents will happen and life will go on. Without the risk of death, we would not value life.
        7. Who the hell is Allan Rosen? Actually, never mind. I don’t care.

        • 8asdj

          1. You made an argument for going over the speed limit, if that’s not reason to presume you feel you should be able to speed, I don’t know what is.
          2. Citation needed. If every time a pilot program for speed cameras are proposed no one ever provides facts, they just dismiss the possibility of success outright.
          3. Experience doesn’t give you the ability to predict the future and know of everything that you’ll encounter. Experience isn’t premonition. Experience won’t tell you when the idiot driving along side you hasn’t replaced his tires in a long time and has a blow out causing him to swerve into you.
          4. I’ll curse as much as I fucking want, if you’re fucking bothered by the language feel free to disengage yourself from the conversation. My message is no less correct because I use swear words.
          5. I don’t hate drivers. I’m a driver myself which allows me to experience how completely irresponsible and apathetic the majority of drivers are to safety on the road. Accidents is a word used by people who hit, maim, and kill to remove fault. Even the NYPD has stopped using that term because it implies lack of responsibility and fault of someone.
          6. You’re an idiot. We have plenty of death from natural causes that we don’t need another form. This is the argument of a 14 year old that thinks he’s being edgy and witty.
          7. He’s a pro-car columnist on this site.

          • dtokar

            They tried this in England. An amazing show called Top Gear showed that while the amount of people charged goes up… the deaths stay the same. Therefore this is done purely for $$$

          • http://www.mybrooklyn.com/ MyBrooklyn

            Man people are just weak and stupid minded…of course real crooks just want to extort money from people. People in US are afraid of their masters cops, law makers and politicians .

          • M. Smart

            You seem to forget,,every citizen has the ability to become a politician, A. Weiner et al, It isnt a select few who are eligible for the job..It does take a brain tho

          • 8asdj

            You’re comparing rural road speed cameras in a 94,060 sq mi country that has 1500 road deaths a year over a densely populated metropolitan area that is 305 sq mi and had 300 fatalities from 6/2011-6/2012. How do you intend to justify the comparison of a giant country having only 5x as many deaths than a city that is 0.3% the size?

          • 8asdj

            To add, that chart in the video in it’s incredibly accurate glory was from 2001 which means that the UK has cut their pedestrian deaths since then from 3500 to 1500 and suggests that their traffic measures are working.

          • Maxwell Smart

            Doesnt count They drive on the wrong side of the road

          • dtokar

            http://debatewise.org/debates/470-should-we-abolish-speed-cameras/

            Here is our argument already argued and laid out.

          • Guest

            Here is another article against.
            http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2337208/Speed-cameras-increase-risk-fatal-crashes-New-RAC-investigation-raises-doubts-usefulness.html

            While yes i know that there are also articles for the usefulness of the speed camera.

            Im just saying, we can go back and forth for a long time debating this.
            But since there is no clear proof maybe we should wait to spend money
            on them until there is?

          • M. Smart

            Everyone here agrees to the point it generates revenue, so money isnt being wasted

          • Guest

            While you preach that this is a good thing and should save lives… the amount of death from car accidents is tiny compared to other crap. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.htm <— here look.
            why not go after the bigger issues and spend money for better things. Like talk about the crap we feed our kids. Spend more money on schools and education. Stop big drug companies feeding us poison. When having commercials which say "Ask your doctor about so-and-so"… shouldn't your doctor tell you what you need? If you're asking your doctor, isn't he just your drug dealer?

          • 8asdj

            I see a link to debatewise.org which has more unfounded conjecture on speed cameras and arguments that being with

            After years of brainwashing from government and police adverts

            I also see a link to the dailymail which although is heavily pro car explicitely say

            The RAC Foundation said the new study broadly supported Professor Richard Allsop’s earlier 2010 study which concluded that speed cameras prevented up to 800 people a year being killed or seriously injured.

            and

            Overall, the professor’s analysis of data shows that on average the number of fatal and serious collisions in their vicinity fell by more than a quarter (27per cent) after the installation of cameras.

            There was also an average reduction of 15per cent in personal injury collisions in their vicinity.

            and a link to a cdc fact sheet about causes of deaths that are not the cause of irresponsible drivers in some inane way of comparing preventable and non-preventable causes of death.

            Are the anti-camera people so daft that they don’t even bother to read the arguments they themselves are making or is willful ignorance the name of the game?

          • Guest

            Freedoms are becoming extinct. Everything is controlled and regulated. People are too dumb to know what is good for them and what is bad. You want more government involvement in everything, dont you?

          • 8asdj

            Driving is a privilege not a right. There is no freedom being suppressed other than by reckless drivers suppressing others’ rights to life.

          • Allan Rosen

            I think you both have some points but are both too emotionally involved to have an intelligent conversation on this subject. I don’t know if speed cameras make an area safer or not, but do think there certainly is a possibility that they do. The fact that they raise revenue can’t be denied. Revenue becomes more important than safety when a municipality starts calculating anticipated revenue from cameras when preparing their next years budget. Because at that point they will decide to keep the cameras even if they have no effect on safety and will look to install more where they can raise more revenue.

            I do not like being characterized as a “pro-car columnist” because I am not sure I know what that means. I am for what is just and fair for everyone, motorists and users of mass transit, and that also includes cyclists whose safety I am very concerned for.

          • Andrew

            8asdj’s comments have been among the most rational comments in this thread. It’s amusing that you call out 8asdj for being emotional rather than MyBrooklyn and Guest.

            It is indisputable that speed cameras save lives.

            If you don’t want to be characterized as a pro-car columnist, then don’t be one. You object to virtually every measure proposed or taken to improve the lives of bus riders and bicyclists and pedestrians if there’s even a slight chance that those measures might slow down motorists.

          • Allan Rosen

            8asdj got very emotiona. I called out 8asdj and Guest. I didn’t see anything wrong with what MyBrooklyn said when he was talking on topic.

          • 8asdj

            The last thing a person who’s lost an argument can do is claim their opponent is emotional. Thank you for conceding defeat.

          • Allan Rosen

            “I’ll curse as much as I fuckin’ want” isn’t getting emotional? That’s what you said to Guest. And what argument did I lose and concede defeat?

          • 8asdj

            How dimwitted are you that you read the first part of the sentence and miss the last part: ” My message is no less correct because I use swear words.”

            Stop resorting to misquoting a person to questiong the legitimicy of a rational and valid argument on the benefits of camera enforced speed limits.

          • Allan Rosen

            I didn’t misquote you and I wasn’t even questioning your argument here. I only proved that you were too emotional in your comments by pointing out your swear words. All you have proved is that you can’t have a discussion without cursing or insulting someone and because of that I do not care to discuss this with you further.

          • Andrew

            Really? You think that 8asdj is emotional but MyBrooklyn isn’t?

          • Allan Rosen

            I didn’t see where MyBrooklyn cursed or insulted anyone as 8asdj did.

        • M. Smart

          It does make it safer,,you get enuf speeding, red light tickets ..try to buy insurance,,oh I forgot you dont need insurance to drive in NYC

          • wolftimber

            Plenty of people simply drive with NO insurance and no license either.

    • Andrew

      The question isn’t how safe you feel inside your car. The question is how safe other people are, especially those not inside cars. The faster you are driving, the more likely you are to make a mistake that brings your car in contact with a pedestrian, and the less likely that pedestrian is to survive.

      When you are driving off-road, do what you like, but in New York City, the are pedestrians. If you don’t want to pay the fine, don’t speed.

      • guest

        Fine. But, at the same time, you make sure you don’t run a red light on a bicycle or jaywalk in the middle of the street. Get off your iPhone and pay attention. Just as everyone should. Don’t give in to dumbing down syndrome. Don’t see this as an excuse for cyclist and pedestrians to be allowed to now do as they please. Personally, I think we need to bring the crossing guards back. Traffic lights and speed bumps are NOT replacements for human beings.

        • Andrew

          How many hundreds of people have been killed by bicyclists running red lights or by jaywalking pedestrians in the past year? Oh, right – NONE.

          Cyclists and pedestrians have a very strong incentive to not do stupid, unsafe things: the basic fear of death. Without enforcement, what incentive do motorists have to not do stupid, unsafe things like speeding, running fresh red lights, and failing to yield to pedestrians? Not much, since they are, by and large, taking risks with other people’s lives.

          The police do not seriously enforce driving laws, and, while they certainly could (and should) do a much better job, there is still only so much they can do themselves. Speed and red light enforcement can be automated, and it should be automated, so that the police can focus their limited human effort on items that can’t be automated.

          There is a very simple reason that so many motorists are so adamantly opposed to any form of automated enforcement: they routinely break the law now with no consequences and they want to continue breaking the law with no consequences. I’m afraid I don’t have much sympathy.

          • BrooklynBus

            I pretty much agree with you except for a few points. “cyclists and pedestrians have a very strong incentive to not do stupid unsafe things”. I’ve seen many pedestrians and cyclists do stupid unsafe things while driving. Cyclists who don’t realize that cars are much bigger than them and are more interested in proving a point by taking unnecessary chances and pedestrians who think they own the road while crossing and can cross wherever and whenever they want. (My mother lived her whole 83 years thinking like that and only had one accident at about 81 when she was struck by a cop or security guard in a motor scooter and had a minor injury. She was indeed very lucky.) People cross the street all the time with headphones on and not looking or paying attention. One guy actually stopped in the middle of the street while crossing in order to text, and looked up at me as I was making my turn and motioned to me he will be done shortly and I should wait. You are always criticizing motorists but never say anything bad about pedestrians or cyclists.

          • guest

            People have been injured by cyclist. Don’t pull that nonsense. It’s NOT ok to injure someone on your bicycle either. If you truly think that cyclist and pedestrians have a strong incentive to do no wrong, you are being an arrogant fool. Too many times I have watched pedestrians jaywalk and cross on red lights. They are not paying attention. Cyclist are worse. I have witnessed cyclist run red lights, weave in and out of traffic and act like complete morons on the road. You make it sound as if a motorist is out to kill everyone on the road. Do you drive? I am guessing you do not.

            You have to pay attention to what you are doing. Regardless if you are driving a car, riding a bike or walking in the street. People get way to distracted by electronics and other things now and do not pay attention. Too many people have the attitude of it’s me me me me me. If a jerk wants to speed they are going to speed. You think a speed camera is seriously going to deter them? Don’t be naive.

            Many motorist oppose speed cameras because they do nothing to solve the problem. They are revenue generators pure and simple. Remember, motorist have to deal with moron drivers as well as moron cyclist and pedestrians as well. If you want to live in a bubble that’s not just your business. We all shouldn’t have to suffer because you feel you are entitled.

          • Andrew

            I never said that nobody’s been injured by cyclists, but the number of major injuries and fatalities caused by cyclists is minuscule in comparison with the number of major injuries and fatalities caused by motorists. The most recent fatality caused by a cyclist took place in April 2009; the most recent fatality caused by a motorist took place within the past 24 hours. And only 7.36% of pedestrian injuries and fatalities are due to pedestrian error.

            I have no objection to law enforcement toward cyclists, but the overwhelming bulk of the enforcement should be targeted to motorists, since motorists cause the overwhelming bulk of the damage to others.

            Motorists feel free to speed today because there is virtually no enforcement. Without enforcement, what incentive do motorists have not to take risks with other people’s lives? If, on the other hand, motorists realize that it costs them $50 to speed, they’re going to think twice before speeding.

            Your repeated vociferous objections to any and all attempts at enforcing the speed limit, even with a 33% grace window, suggest strongly that your only interest is in maintaining the illusion that motorists are entitled to do whatever they want, wherever they want, whenever they want. Alas, it looks like that illusion is about to come to a halt. Sorry about that.

            And please stop blaming the victim. It’s unbecoming.

      • Guest

        Yes, ok. Agree. More speed = greater risk. But I believe:
        1. that replacing actual officers with speed cams = greater risk. Just think about it. The speed cams wont catch those texting or talking on the phone. Or swerving. You cant replace a human with a machine… not yet at least.
        I know it never said that they are replacing them, just adding the cams…. but that’s how it starts.
        2. This is JUST TO MAKE MORE $$$. Me driving at 32 instead of 30 and getting ticketed will piss me the hell of.
        3. Everyone is screaming “America! Freedom!” while you just want to be controlled and in every possible way. If you want freedoms, learn how to deal with the consequences like a big boy. Yes, i agree that a pedestrian getting killed or hurt is a messed up thing. But stop trying to blame everyone else all the time… be more proactive your self… pay attention and keep alert.

        • Andrew

          Nobody’s replacing actual officers with speed cams, because there is virtually no enforcement of speed limits now. The 61st Precinct issued 13 speeding tickets in all of December – less than one per two days. That’s meaningless. It has no deterrent effect whatsoever.

          I very much hope that this program is a big money-loser, with motorists quickly learning that speeding hits them personally in the wallet. Unfortunately, it probably won’t be, but anybody who doesn’t want to pay for a speeding ticket can simply not speed.

          Hundreds of pedestrians are killed every year on sidewalks and in crosswalks while crossing with the light, because far too many drivers are perfectly happy to take risks with other people’s lives. Nine-year-old Cooper Stock was killed a week ago, while crossing a street with the light, holding his father’s hand, by a taxi driver making a turn who was in such a hurry to get to the red light a block away that he couldn’t be bothered to yield to pedestrians. Enough. It has to stop.

          • BrooklynBus

            What about the guy who was killed a few blocks away by a turning bus the same night? The driver was not charged and remained at the scene. Was he wrong and if so why wasn’t he charged? Or was the pedestrian not paying attention and just walked into the bus. I wasn’t in town and only heard reports from the first night. Can you please enlighten me?

          • Andrew

            The NYPD very rarely charges drivers, even when they kill pedestrians. The lack of a charge certainly doesn’t mean the driver wasn’t at fault! We will probably never know what exactly happened here, unless the NYPD tries to find surveillance video, which they rarely bother to do.

            And, in fact, the bus driver didn’t stop until witnesses flagged him down.

          • BrooklynBus

            Now that we have a new commissioner, I don’t think you should make generalizations now and give him a chance first. The bus driver was probably unaware of what happened if the rear of the bus struck the pedestrian. You didn’t answer if the pedestrian walked into the bus without looking.

            Sounds very similar to the kid who was killed last month by that truck on Northern Blvd. They never said that truck driver was responsible for that accident either. He was only arrested for driving with a suspended license, not because he was responsible. I think the kid misjudged how far the truck would swing out and just stood too close to it as it made the turn. That’s why more crossing guards are better than more traffic signals. The signal accomplished nothing.

  • bagels

    So the speed limit is 20 mph in a school zone. Are the cameras programmed to not snap pictures when schools are not in session?

    • BrooklynBus

      I thought it was only for school hours. There is no reason for a school zone during other hours.

  • Raphael

    I’m still waiting for Christine Whitman (and Bush Jr.) to go to jail for saying it’s was safe for people to go back to work near the world trade center after 9/11. You want to talk about public safety, we can start there, then allocate propert funds to attack white collar crime instead of petty marijuana smokers in poor, ethnic neighborhoods. This is just another middle class tax. Whatever happened to no taxation without representation?

  • MyBrooklyn

    Bend over people and take in like they tell you to and shut up..Naïve herd….I think monkeys are smarter then masses of idiots

    • Kilroy was Here

      The infinite monkey theorem!
      The only problem is, you are giving monkey’s a bad name.
      Thanks for playing.

  • guest

    This does sound like a money grab just like it did when Bloomturd talked about it. I think they should have crossing guards again at schools and put the speed cameras where they would actually deter speeding. Major intersections such as Ocean Parkway and Coney Island Avenue are some good local examples.

    If someone is given a ticket for going 30 on a local road designated as a school zone when there are no pedestrians and they have the green light, they are not causing a danger to anyone and it is not right.

    At the same time, when is school defined as NOT being in session. Most people would assume school is out at 3pm. Monday thru friday. How do the cameras know if it’s a holiday. Such as this monday as an example? Are half days taken into account?

    • Kriston Lewis

      The school speed zone nearest to my house is in effect from 7-9 am and again from 2-4 pm on school days.

      • http://www.mybrooklyn.com/ MyBrooklyn

        Is there a sign post it with hours to inform people? Thank you

        • Kriston Lewis

          Yes. There’s also a sign immediately before it that marks the start of a double fine zone.

          For reference, this is on East 15th Street, a bit north of Kings Highway.

          • http://www.mybrooklyn.com/ MyBrooklyn

            Thank you for your reply…Alright some lucky people will get to collect their money indirectly by imposing more restriction and fines

          • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

            you don’t have to speed.

          • Maxwell Smart

            There are places around the US where those signs have yellow lights that blink when that rule is in effect

  • RKramden

    The not-so-hidden light cameras on Ocean Parkway have, over time, had their intended effect. I see people slamming their brakes each time I come to the end of the Prospect and the light goes yellow.

    Likewise, these will slowly have an effect on motorists as more and more receive tickets in the mail. As someone who regularly goes 40 down one way streets, I applaud this. I intend to curb my driving habbits, and I’m sure others will too.

    If you’re angry about this, you’re probably one of the aggressive driver-types who have very little consideration until they hit someone, or even kill them.

    Try leaving a few minutes earlier to get to where you have to go, and stop trying to justify reckless behavior.

    • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

      exactly.

    • Local Broker

      Lets say you are cruising along at or even below the limit when you get to the beginning of that intersection the light turn yellow and by the time you get across its red. Now you were not speeding actually driving less than the limit and there was no reason for you to stop at the light. Now you did nothing wrong but are going to get a ticket for running a red. If that was a cop standing there instead of a camera theres pretty much no chance that he would pull you over for that. You think thats fair? Is that anger i have?

      • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

        then you should have no problem stopping at the red light

      • BrooklynBus

        It all depends on if the light turns red before or after you enter the intersection.

      • wolftimber

        There was in the news a scandal that broke in Florida where they have red light cameras, turned out they shortened the yellow light’s interval slightly so as to catch more people, they raked in $100 million in additional fines by shortening the YELLOW light about 1/2 second!
        The cameras are all about MONEY and nothing about safety, a camera taking pictures after a person is run over and dead doe nothing to make the streets safer.
        If they want safer then make the yellow light intervals LONGER. Yellow lights are not a “floor the gas” nor a “jam the brakes on” light, they allow a buffer zone of time for clearing the intersection. A 3 second yellow should be 5 (the interval varies according to roads, locations etc)

        • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

          Sounds like Florida. The outsource a lot of things to private business.

          • wolftimber

            While yellow light times were reduced by mere fractions of a second, research indicates a half-second reduction in the interval can double the number of RLC citations
            — and the revenue they create. The 10 News investigation stemmed from a
            December discovery of a dangerously short yellow light in Hernando County. After the story aired, the county promised to re-time all of its intersections, and the 10 News Investigators promised to dig into yellow light timing all across Tampa Bay.

            Red light cameras generated more than $100 million in revenue last year in approximately 70 Florida communities, with 52.5 percent of the revenue going to the state. The rest is divided by cities, counties, and the camera companies. In 2013, the
            cameras are on pace to generate $120 million.

            “Red light cameras are a for-profit business between cities and camera companies and the state,” said James Walker, executive director of the nonprofit National Motorists Association. “The (FDOT rule-change) was done, I believe, deliberately in order that more tickets would be
            given with yellows set deliberately too short.”

          • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

            So who make the decision to shorten the yellows? The for profit businesses or the government?

          • wolftimber

            From what I can tell it was the county/state dept in charge of maintaining the traffic lights, which makes sense since the red light camera company would not have authority to change a citys’ traffic lights, it says as much in the article on this, the Florida Dept of Transportation did it:

            “Investigators discovered the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) quietly changed the state’s policy on yellow intervals in 2011, reducing the minimum below federal recommendations. The rule change was followed by engineers, both from FDOT and local municipalities, collaborating to shorten the length of yellow lights at key intersections, specifically those with red light cameras.”

            What an amazing coincidence it JUST happened to work in the state’s favor to rake in $100 million huh!
            As it turns out, both the camera company AND the state made a huge profit, the state got $100 million alone so you know the camera company got a big chunk too from innocent motorists scammed by this.
            What’s worse is if the ticket goes on your driving record your INSURANCE goes up, and gee, the state makes money off you again there with taxes, sales tax, whatever on that scam.

          • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

            If I were a reporter I would follow the money on that one. Why would a bureaucrat do that? Someone got paid.

          • wolftimber

            Here’s the url to the full story on the news site:

            http://www.wtsp.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=316418

          • BrooklynBus

            It also happened in Maryland.

      • wolftimber

        Apopka red-light camera lawsuit results in partial refunds of fines.

        10:35 p.m. EST, March 9, 2012|

        By Stephen Hudak, Orlando Sentinel

        In Ocoee Florida , the camera company earned $40 per ticket, Frank said.

        That process prompted claims that the cameras were set up to make money, not save lives, and it led to lawsuits alleging that municipalities had illegally enacted traffic laws, an authority reserved for the state.

        The change in state law also raised fines to $158 and let the state take $80 of each fine.

        American Traffic Solutions, which installed, monitors and maintains
        Apopka’s cameras, will pay $178,000 to settle the lawsuit, according to a
        settlement document provided to Apopka commissioners. To get refunds,
        motorists will have to provide evidence that they paid a fine. A website
        and toll-free number for claimants will be set up later.

        Truck driver Harry Nixon Davis, 53, will receive about $500 as lead plaintiff in the lawsuit.

        Davis said he decided to fight the law after he got a red-light ticket because he was the registered owner of a vehicle his stepson was driving.

        “I understand we need to stop people who speed up when a light turns yellow or those who just blow through a red light because they’re playing with their cellphone. I totally get that,” Davis said. “But I don’t think [red-light cameras] are about safety. It’s all about money-making.”

        Anderson said that Apopka, which in 2007 became the first in Central Florida and the second in the state to deploy red-light cameras, banked about $1.8 million that it collected from red-light runners who were ticketed before the lawsuit was filed. Subtracting the settlement costs
        and fees paid to American Traffic Solutions, the city still ended up more than $1 million in the black from fines paid by motorists whose violations were caught on video.


        TheBlaze.com says this too:

        Consider, too, the red light camera schemes that have been popping up all over the country. These traffic cameras, little more than intrusive, money-making scams for states, have been shown to do little to increase
        safety while actually contributing to more accidents. Nevertheless, they are being inflicted on unsuspecting drivers by revenue-hungry municipalities, despite revelations of corruption, collusion and fraud.

        In most cases, state and local governments arrange to lease the cameras from a corporation such as Redflex, which takes its cut of ticket revenue first, with the excess going to the states and municipalities. The cameras, which are triggered by sensors buried in the road, work by taking photos of drivers who enter intersections after a traffic light
        turns red. What few realize, however, is that you don’t actually have to run a red light to get “caught.” Many drivers have triggered the cameras simply by making a right turn on red or crossing the sensor but not advancing into the intersection.

        For red light camera manufacturers such as Redflex, there’s a lot of money to be made from these “traffic safety” fines. Redflex, which has installed and operates over 2,000 red light camera programs in 220 localities across the United States and Canada, made $25 million in 2008. In addition to revenue from fines, Redflex also gets paid for
        installing the red light cameras, which cost $25,000 a pop, plus $13,800 per year for maintenance.

        Fortunately, the resistance against these programs is gaining traction, with localities across the United States cancelling their red-light camera programs in droves. In early May 2013, officials in Phoenix, Arizona backpedaled on a one-year extension of their contract with
        Redflex, with the city’s chief financial officer, Jeff Dewitt saying, “We made a mistake.” Voters in League City, Texas became the fifth city in the state to vote to end red light camera enforcement, ending another of Redflex’s contracts in the United States. Cities in Florida, Arizona, and California have terminated contract negotiations with the
        company, and in March 2013, a parish in Louisiana voted to refund nearly $20 million in revenue from red-light cameras after yet another corruption scandal came to light. Florida state legislators are also considering banning all red light cameras in the state.

        Motorists.org has this to add:

        Investigative reporter Noah Pransky of Tampa Bay TV station WTSP filed an explosive report about the intentional shortening of yellow-light intervals at red-light camera intersections for the purpose of raising ticket revenue. Pransky noted that of the more than $120 million of photo ticket revenue collected across Florida in 2012, $50 million was directly attributable to red-light camera program operators setting yellow lights too short.

        WTSP news adds:

        TAMPA BAY, Fla. — A subtle, but significant tweak
        to Florida’s rules regarding traffic signals has allowed local cities and counties to shorten yellow light intervals, resulting in millions of dollars in additional red light camera fines. The 10 News Investigators discovered the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) quietly changed the state’s policy on yellow intervals in 2011, reducing the minimum below federal recommendations. The rule change was followed by engineers, both from FDOT and local
        municipalities, collaborating to shorten the length of yellow lights at key intersections, specifically those with red light cameras.

    • Peter

      “The not-so-hidden light cameras on Ocean Parkway have, over time, had their intended effect. I see people slamming their brakes each time I come to the end of the Prospect and the light goes yellow.”

      AFAIK, there are no cameras going south from Prospect crossing Church Ave.

  • http://www.mybrooklyn.com/ MyBrooklyn

    Lets fine damn pedestrians when they all stand on the street corners
    making difficult to turn and slowing down the traffic. I think sooner or
    later masters who control the naïve slaves will use face recondition
    cameras in order to match our faces in their database and issue you a
    ticket. I think its good idea….its safety concern, I am all for it

  • Guest

    I see people talking about running yellow lights. What a joke. They are way past that, running thru the red lights 1,2,3 seconds after it has turned red. We’re way beyond the yellow light discussion , we are now into how long after red is okay!

    • BrooklynBus

      My question is does a red light camera even snap a picture if someone enters the intersection 15 seconds after the light turns red or is just programmed to snap during the first one or two seconds?

  • MyBrooklyn

    You poor soles keep arguing amongst yourselves. People in authority just do whatever the f@#$ they want to do…They have no morals…These kind of things not for safety measures…Are you herd that naive…? you truly believe its for safety purposes…ITS NOT. They want to control masses, put extra burden on people financially, mentally and physically. First they condition you to believe its for safety purposes but ITS NOT.. don’t be surprise if in near future crooks will demand installing face recondition cameras in order to fine pedestrians. I personally hate when people stand on street corners just to cross the street and they were many close calls when people stand so far away from the curb that I ended up honking at them and in return I get a curse word or some kind of funny hand gesture. I think its a safety concern but you know what i wont demand cameras or any other regulations just to control people,,,

    I came here in 1994 and back in 1994 i believe i had more freedoms then now. Our freedoms are either being reduce by some kind new laws or extort money. Keep complying and always respect cops because they are your heroes (sarcastic) I personally cant stand them they arrogant, rude, abusive and useless. Their sole purpose is to extort money. I will say this there are just very a few cops left with decent personalities…

    To all drivers I am not sure if you all aware about Driver Responsibility Assessment Program that was in effect in 2004. Don’t you think its another bogus law in order to extort money….

    • Andrew

      Thank you for making my point.

  • Murry

    I sincerely hope the empty header remarks on this site are simply the work of trools. I can’t imagine anyone in their right mind objecting to saving someones life. If they are not trools, then we are surrounded by a bunch of childless whiners that have no right to get behind the wheel of a car.

  • BrooklynCBR

    Of course it’s for the money…

    Speeding cameras without a sign doesn’t stop people from speeding; no one knows it’s there, so people will still continue driving the way they drive.

    If they really cared about the pedestrians, put a sign up to alert drivers of speeding cameras; this will make people aware, and slow down at intersections that have “high speeding” rates.

    And you can say what you want; but the city is a business for the mayor — every individual is a customer, and they all (most) pay taxes. This is just another way to increase revenue.

    • 8asdj

      Alerting people to camera locations make them drive safer in specific spots. Not telling them makes sure they drive safely everywhere. After getting a ticket for speeding where you didn’t expect one you’ll expect them everywhere. Give me a disincentive for reckless driving other than money and I’ll be all ears but so far drivers don’t even value safety since the NYPD won’t prosecute when a pedestrian is killed.

      • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

        Exactly. Knowing that there could be a camera anywhere would make some driver obey the speed limit everywhere.

      • BrooklynCBR

        Well, they said they want to address “high speed locations”, so why does it matter if people will be alerted and slow down only in that area? That’s the point anyways, to slow people down in that area…

        • 8asdj

          High speed locations will change over time and the cameras will be mobile. Let’s put it this way, if you’re a driver who routinely drives 45 in a 30 and you know you have to drive past a school zone with a marked camera you’ll adjust for the 1 minute that you’re in the speed zone and speed elsewhere to make up that time.

          If you don’t know where the cameras might be you’ll adjust your whole commute to account for drive time at the speed limit and save some lives in the process.

          People who are adamantly against the cameras are selfishly valuing their convenience over the safety of others. Those who argue that it’s for revenue attempt to absolve themselves of their own responsibility since they are the ones who choose to speed and therefore get ticketed. You can argue that raising the water rates is for revenue since you can’t avoid using water but no one forces your foot down onto the accelerator.

          • BrooklynCBR

            But like someone else in here mentioned, there have been studies and it’s proven that speeding cameras do not reduce the number of accidents/deaths or whatever it was — because people who are unfamiliar with the area will still speed through the place. How is this making that particular “dangerous” intersection any safer? What happens after someone gets hit by a car on the intersection with a speeding camera? I just feel like there won’t be results unless a sign is posted to alert drivers of the speeding camera.

            Don’t get me wrong, I don’t mind speeding cameras if it’s going to save lives, and if its being used during school hours, that’s fine — but to tell me I can’t drive 45mph on ocean parkway at 11PM is ludicrous.

          • 8asdj

            The link provided had testimony from different sources citing why they do save lives and prevent accidents. He didn’t even bother reading his own source.

            If signs about speed being enforced were capable of preventing speeding the signs that say “Speeds enforced by radar: would be sufficient. There is no reason for people to know where a camera is other than making de facto “ok to speed here” zones where there aren’t cameras.

            Oh and the speed limit on Ocean Parkway is 30mph and it’s irrelevant how comfortable you feel driving down OP at night due to reduced capacity. It’s the same stupid mindset of “I’ll drive what I feel comfortable” that led Isaac Chehebar to kill 2 young girls in 2001 and he only served 4 months in prison for that. Now tell me, in the absence of proportional punishment for when drivers kill, what is a good disincentive for speeding in the entirety of the city if not a monetary penalty?

          • BrooklynBus

            First you make a generalization. “NYPD won’t even prosecute when a pedestrian is killed” And in the same sentence you condemn all drivers. Then you cite a case where someone was prosecuted for killing two young girls in 2001. Perhaps it wasn’t enough and not enough cases are prosecuted, but that doesn’t give you a right to condemn all drivers and state no one is prosecuted when that is not true.

            These cameras are only for school zones, not for streets like Ocean Parkway, so let’s stick to the subject. And driving 5 or 10 mies over the speed limit does not make you an unsafe driver if conditions permit it. At 11 PM, I don’t think 45 mph on Ocean Parkway is necessarily unsafe if you are between blocks and able to stop in time if the signal turns red. You should never go across, but going across intersections at at speed or even at 0 mph would be unsafe because you cannot see what is happening at tat intersection.

          • BrooklynBus

            I meant to say even at 35, not 0 mph.

          • user0912387

            Oh shut up Allen. You know damn well that in the overwhelming majority of pedestrian killings no charges are filed and you know damn well no one is condemning all drivers but stating the damn fact that the NYPD won’t file charges when a driver does kill. If you can’t recognize the simple fact that people respond to incentives and no one gives reckless drivers an incentive to slow down then they won’t drive safely.

            This is why you’re seen as a pro-car advocate, because instead of recognizing that speed kills you try to bend the speed limit by creating meaningless hypotheticals. So here’s the reality, people have killed on OP at 35, 45, 55, 65,and greater so believe me when I tell you that people are fed up with your “but on some conditions” bullshit when the reality is people are dying and if you aren’t responsible to drive the speed limit get the fuck off the road.

          • BrooklynBus

            Speed limits are set at a level that is lower than what it is safe to drive at under optimal road conditions. That is a fact. So quit making it sound like anyone driving one mie over the speed limit is a menace to society.

            Yes, no charges are filed in the overwhelming majority of pedestrian deaths, and most likely that needs changing, but to assume as you do that the motorist is at fault in virtually all instances, and every driver who kills someone automatically must go to jail is also wrong. Each case is unique and all must be properly investigated. Charges should not be automatically filed when there is a death. There still are such thingsas accidents. And yes Sometimes it is the fault of the pedestrian and it is unavoidable as much as you want to believe that never happens. None of that makes me a “pro-car advocate.” why don’t you at least be polite? I am sure that people have also been killed by cars below the speed limit too and I never advocated going 55 or 65 on Ocean PRkway

          • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

            Why should he be polite. You are defending you “right” to drive over the speed limit because you think it’s ok. Some of us have children that walk home from school and cross the streets.

          • BrooklynBus

            As I stated driving a little over the speed limit is not automatically dangerous. Parents also have responsibilities. Why wasn’t the parent whose kid was killed on the upper west side protecting his kid? And why was that 8 year old crossing a wide street like Northern Blvd without an adult? I wasn’t permitted to cross any wide streets by myself until I was around 12. As far as I heard both those were “accidents” and not caused by speeding drivers who you would like to blame for every incident. And being polite is a separate issue.

          • Andrew

            As I stated driving a little over the speed limit is not automatically dangerous.

            It’s not for you to decide what risks are acceptable to take with other people’s lives.

            Parents also have responsibilities.

            When it comes to traffic law, actually, they do not.

            Why wasn’t the parent whose kid was killed on the upper west side protecting his kid?

            Cooper Stock was killed by a taxi driver, Koffi Komlani, who turned without yielding to the pedestrians in the crosswalk with the light. He was with his father, Richard, who suffered a leg injury. And you place the blame on Richard Stock?

            And why was that 8 year old crossing a wide street like Northern Blvd without an adult?

            Noshat Nahian was crossing the street with his older sister on their way to school. He was killed by a truck driver, Mauricio Osoario-Palominos, who turned without yielding to the pedestrians in the crosswalk with the light – and whose license happened to have been suspended at the time.

            I wasn’t permitted to cross any wide streets by myself until I was around 12.

            Congratulations for you.

            As far as I heard both those were “accidents” and not caused by speeding drivers who you would like to blame for every incident.

            Yes, they were purely accidental. I can’t imagine what the drivers could have done to avoid them!

          • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

            and if you think “accidents” which cause DEATH are not the result of speeding drivers then would you think the laws should be changed to SAVE LIVES.

          • Andrew

            Speed limits are set at a level that is lower than what it is safe to drive at under optimal road conditions.

            That’s very good for highways, but the discussion isn’t about what’s safe for the driver; it’s about what’s safe for other people on city streets who aren’t protected by steel cages, like pedestrians. A small mistake by either the driver or the pedestrian shouldn’t be fatal. That’s why city streets have speed limits.

          • BrooklynBus

            It also holds true for city streets. 30 mph isn’t a magic number. It is an average speed that is safe for most streets during optimal road conditions. On some narrow streets, only 10 or 15 mph is safe. On a wide street with little traffic and no pedestrins in sight and if you are not near any parked cars, it is certainly safe to do 40 mph and even 45 in mid block as long as you are not near a traffic signal and may have to stop. The city can’t have different speed limits for each street and every traffic condition, and won’t spend the money for additional speed limit signs all over, so we have an average speed limit. The problem is some drivers do not exercise common sense and think they can drive at the speed limit even when conditions are not optimal, and you’ve got the crazies who think there is no limit if there are no cars in front of them. Those are the ones who shouldn’t be allowed to drive.

          • Andrew

            Any speed is safe until something goes wrong. The point of speed limit enforcement on city streets is (a) to reduce the likelihood that something goes wrong, and (b) when something does go wrong, to reduce the likelihood that it results in a fatality or serious injury.

            If you are driving down a city street at 45 mph, the likelihood that a small mistake (yours or somebody else’s) results in a fatality is much greater than if you’re driving at 30 mph.

            It’s not for you to decide what risks are acceptable to take with other people’s lives.

          • BrooklynCBR

            But accidents will happen even when people are driving 30 mph; I know of a personal event where the driver of a car STOPPED completely to let a lady cross the street, and the car behind slammed into him and led his car to run the lady over and caused her death — yet the driver that stopped was responsible; what should his penalty be?

            And a car driving at 30MPH can jump over a curb on ocean parkway just as easy as a car doing 45, do you know how fast the Porsche was driving in this incident?

            And even if a car is driving at 30mph and accidentally jumps a curb and hits somebody, causing death — lets say 20 witnesses saw it; how many people do you think will say the car driving under 30mph? Most people don’t walk around with radar detectors, so how do you punish drivers that were doing no wrong?

            Anyhow, we’re drifting off topic — I just feel that this camera enforcement thing won’t work, accidents will still occur at the intersections with speeding cameras because drivers that aren’t familiar with the area will drive just as fast.

          • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

            “But accidents will happen even when people are driving 30 mph”

            and people will have heart attacks even if they eat healthy. I know a vegan that just had one.

            But LESS ACCIDENTS WILL HAPPEN IF PEOPLE DRIVE SLOWER!

          • BrooklynBus

            Yes, many drivers rush unnecessarily and need to drive slower. I agree with you on that one. But that doesn’t mean that everyone should always crawl at 20 or 25 mph when traffic conditions say they can drive faster.

          • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

            and everybody who causes and accident things they were driving safely till they were not.

          • BrooklynBus

            I don’t agree with that. There are many maniacs out there weaving in and out of traffic who have no illusion they are driving safely. The just want to get where they are going as fast as they can. Others think they are driving safely and might be driving safely although they might be speeding, but have no control how others are driving and an accident is still the result.

          • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

            really, How do you know?

            Why would anyone knowingly drive unsafely?

          • BrooklynBus

            Because they are idiots, watch too many movies where no one ever gets hurt by driving like crazy, or don’t value human life. But that is a small percentage of drivers, but it is still too high.

          • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

            I think I heard this before.

          • Andrew

            We’re talking about pedestrian safety here. “Traffic conditions” are beside the point.

          • BrooklynCBR

            … Right, that’s not the point I was trying to get across, lol.

          • 8asdj

            Yes it is. You’re arguing against cameras as a panacea but not one person claimed that it was.

          • BrooklynCBR

            “If they really cared about the pedestrians, put a sign up to alert drivers of speeding cameras”

            This is what I’m arguing about;

            Put a camera on every block with a sign if needed be, but simply putting cameras in some locations WITHOUT signs will not be effective. People will still get into accidents, people will still get hurt. If people don’t know about the camera on that block, why will they slow down on that intersection? Sure, most people will, but the ones who are aggressive drivers and speeding most the time, they won’t. You’re telling me that once a person goes through a red light camera and gets a ticket, they NEVER do it again? Ideally, that’s what you would like, that’s the purpose, but it’s not what happens.

            Hell, even speed bumps would be more effective than a speeding camera **AND SPEEDING BUMPS HAVE SIGNS TO WARN THE DRIVER**

          • 8asdj

            If the premise is true that the majority of drivers are responsible then there is no need to alert a driver to the location of a camera – they won’t need to slow down.

            The point isn’t to modify driving behavior in isolated spots, it’s to modify driving behavior in New York City as a whole and I don’t understand why you don’t get that. It’s not about making 1 spot safer, it’s about making every spot safer. So when you get a speeding ticket and don’t know when you’re being watched you’ll be damn sure to slow down everywhere because of the possibility of being caught again. Not every instance of speeding will result in a fatality or injury, but if cameras make you drive 30 instead of 40 diminishing the probability of death to 7% (or 20% depending whose numbers you use) then that’s success.

            Also, speed bumps are a terrible idea. People often speed in between them, after snowfall you’re unlikely to see them well or stop fast enough when you do, and when a driver is acting recklessly and speeding they can often be sent airborne and cause greater damage. Cameras punishing drivers for reckless behavior will prevent the behavior from happening again and a speed bump will only cause them to slow down at spots that have speed bumps much like your sign idea. When you limit the effective area of traffic enforcement such as a speed bump or a sign alerting drivers to a camera, you make every location without them an “ok to be speed” area.

  • Pingback: Sheepshead Bites » Blog Archive A $250 Fine For Jaywalking Is Absurd, And What We Really Should Be Doing » Sheepshead Bay News Blog

  • madeline c

    traffic camers cause more back ups and they cause traffic . its just a trap to get more money for the city of ny camers .they are not doing it for the children .. maybe they should giving out licenses to people that dont speck english . this major is so dumb he does not no what hes doing .nyc is in for more trouble .

    • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

      What?

  • Lance

    If you want to avoid costly traffic camera tickets be sure to check out http://www.photofuzzy.com There license plate cover works like a champ!