Fuck Cars
A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!
Rules
1. Be Civil
You may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.
2. No hate speech
Don't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.
3. Don't harass people
Don't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.
4. Stay on topic
This community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.
5. No reposts
Do not repost content that has already been posted in this community.
Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.
Posting Guidelines
In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:
- [meta] for discussions/suggestions about this community itself
- [article] for news articles
- [blog] for any blog-style content
- [video] for video resources
- [academic] for academic studies and sources
- [discussion] for text post questions, rants, and/or discussions
- [meme] for memes
- [image] for any non-meme images
- [misc] for anything that doesn’t fall cleanly into any of the other categories
Recommended communities:
view the rest of the comments
To be fair speed cameras are a terrible way to address the problem of speeding. The solution isn't speed limit enforcement, it is road design. If you build a wide straight open road that feels like you're driving on a highway, drivers will naturally tend to drive on it at highway speeds. Slapping a low speed limit on a road like that will make following said speed limit extremely uncomfortable and drivers will naturally tend to go too fast the moment they stop monitoring their speedometer. Hiding a speed camera on a road like that is essentially tricking people into paying an extra tax and speed cameras are often being blatantly used in that way.
The real solution to keeping speeds low is narrowing the street and also if possible making it windy. Use the space to add trees and protected bike lanes. Suddenly drivers will feel comfortable driving a slower speed without the need for a speeding camera. As a bonus it improves the safety for cyclists and pedestrians far more than a stupid speed camera ever would, and it makes the road far more enjoyable to use for everyone, including the car drivers.
Design speed is the most important tool when it comes to managing speeds, but speed cameras are a useful tool in the toolbox to address specific problematic spots, in the very least until a design speed-based solution can be deployed, which may for economic reasons be when the road warrants resurfacing.
In Sweden, cameras are used to specifically reduce speed in crash-prone spots, such as in intersections where drivers merge onto a higher speed road. Drivers get advance notice in the form of a sign that a speed camera will be upcoming on the road in several hundred meters, and speed limit compliance naturally follows at the point of the camera. They are effective at reducing crashes when deployed in this manner.
It costs millions to refurbish just 1 road to safer standards while the cameras costs thousands to operate. Rehabilitation when due for resurfacing is the most economically viable option, hopefully most of the revenue from the cameras is dedicated to making safer streets. I'll take the cameras in the meantime because speed is one of the biggest factors in roadway safety. Its not a perfect solution, but is far better than doing nothing.
There an more refurbishing options for improvements, and you can use them to incrementally test before the next resurface.
Jersey barriers, concrete planters, surface treatments/paint, flexposts, and snow clearing width reduction pip to mind.