this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2025
74 points (95.1% liked)

Fuck Cars

12491 readers
1881 users here now

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 CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon'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 topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo 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:

Recommended communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
toaster@slrpnk.net
grue@lemmy.world
Toaster1@lemmy.world
74
San Francisco’s new speed cameras caught nearly 100K violators in May (www.sfchronicle.com)
submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by destructdisc@lemmy.world to c/fuckcars@lemmy.world
21 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

"Nowhere was it more apparent than on Geneva Avenue between Prague Street and Brookdale Avenue, where one camera averaged 1,779 violations a day, according to the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency. Another camera on Bryant Street, between Second and Third streets, zapped 944 speeding drivers a day."

Nearly TWO THOUSAND speeding violations in one day, in the heart of a major city. These people drive like morons.

top 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] wampus@lemmy.ca 2 points 14 hours ago

I think the most bizarre thing about this story, is that it's not 'new' to hear that traffic cams / automation can catch a ton of people speeding. Like I recall them setting these systems up in various cities two decades ago, and the number of people caught in the early stages of the programs was huge then too. It's "normal" for people to drive ~10mph over the speed limit, though that varies based on things like school zones (where you dont go over at all). It's also normal for drivers to align to the speed of surrounding traffic flows. The public pushback that resulted, killed many of the initiatives. Cams were still installed, but many cities that used them tended to have restrictive conditions. This isn't 'new' tech by any stretch, nor is it a 'new' idea to be tried.

The article hints that they're allowing a 10mph wiggle room this time, but the main thing that's changed, is the public has been beaten into submission by authoritarians -- it's unlikely there'll be any civil action against it.

[–] hildegarde@lemmy.blahaj.zone 28 points 1 day ago

If your speed cameras catch 100k violators a month, you've built the streets wrong.

Either build high speed roads with few intersections, limited access, and generous amounts of clearance to allow for high speed cars with less danger. Or build low speed narrow streets to keep traffic moving slowly.

The us builds high speed roads with frequent intersections with pedestrians a few inches away. This is a fundamentally dangerous design. It can't be fixed with ticketing and cameras. Tear out the roads.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 2 points 23 hours ago

they have this around the zoo to there, basically a very low-traffic area too.

[–] themaninblack@lemmy.world 33 points 1 day ago (1 children)

People don’t take the danger of driving seriously enough. I hope we come to view this as a lack of empathy.

[–] Venator@lemmy.nz 16 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I hope we come to view this as a lack of empathy.

It's not that at all, look at the road where it's happening... It's fucking 22 god damn meters(72 feet) wide from kerb to kerb, and the speed limit is 35mph(56kph)...

1000000623

The main issue is the road is very poorly designed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bglWCuCMSWc&t=280s

[–] Tudsamfa@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

I've seen this type of comment quite a lot here, and regardless of if you meant it that way I think it needs to be said for the benefit of all:

Bad road design does not excuse speeding.

Yes, changing the design is the more effective way to reduce the speed of traffic to a safe level. But just because the design was bad does not mean drivers can drive whatever feels right to them. The drivers still have a personal responsibility to drive safely, which in most cases means the same speed as the other vehicles, which means the speed limit bc that's the only one everyone can agree on.

If the road design tempts you to sin, cut off your engine.

[–] infinitesunrise@slrpnk.net 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

This is true. But practically (And generally) speaking: Redesigning a poor road makes cars go slower. Putting up a speed camera on a poor road does not. I get the desire to bring reckless drivers justice. But if the goal is to create safe streets for users, which option is closer to true justice?

That said it should be noted that safe streets are three-pillared: Infrastructure, Education, Enforcement. You generally can't do it with just one, and even an infrastructure-focused solution would be best to also lean on at least one of the other two, ideally all three.

[–] Venator@lemmy.nz 7 points 1 day ago

It seems to me like you're struggling to empathise with people that speed 😂( which if you don't drive is completely fair 😂)

But yeah I agree it's not a good excuse for speeding, just trying to say that putting a sign up is not very effective. It's better than nothing though and a good first step.

But adding speed cameras, while it might help a bit to reduce speeds, it's not very effective, and a much better solution would be removing the root cause of the problem: car centric infrastructure.

Speed cameras don't prevent people from speeding, they just punish people after the fact, whereas better designed roads prevent it from even happening in the first place.

[–] brewery@feddit.uk 9 points 1 day ago

Will be interesting to see once the fines start. Might just be an inconvenience to the ultra wealthy who might carry on but on the other hand people don't like losing money, and it just takes a few cars to slow down to force everyone else to. Do you have ant points system or mechanism that will take away your licence for multiple tickets?

[–] henfredemars@infosec.pub 8 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I much prefer speed traps to red light cameras that are often predatory and don’t make intersections safer.

[–] destructdisc@lemmy.world 21 points 1 day ago (2 children)

None of that nonsense. Implementing actual, physical traffic-calming infrastructure is where it's at. And bollards. Lots of bollards.

[–] 52fighters 7 points 1 day ago

We just need walkable cities and to gradually increase to acreage of car-free zones.

[–] henfredemars@infosec.pub 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

💯 A better solution through design instead of applying a technological Band-Aid.

[–] PhobosAnomaly@feddit.uk 6 points 1 day ago

I think both can be useful.

The most effective speed management I've seen are the average speed camera zones. There's a 50+ mile stretch with a 70mph limit near me, and very few (if any) folk ignore them and exceed the limit - as opposed to static cameras which involve someone doing excess speed; slamming on the anchors on approach to the camera; before hooning it back up to whatever speed they were doing before.

The downside to avg speed zones is that it encourages drivers to pop on a cruise control technology and zone out, but then I would imagine that people in that category would tune out on cruise control whether they were in a speed zone or not.

[–] deur@feddit.nl 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Nothinh predatory about rule enforcement! Hell yeah SF

[–] henfredemars@infosec.pub 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

In my town, the red light cameras tend to cause drivers to slam on the brakes when the light changes. The equipment is often owned by a third-party that loans it to the city and places stipulations like very short light times to produce more profit.

It does look like there’s significant evidence that speed traps do improve safety.

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

stipulations like very short light times

This probably invalidates the tickets under the definition of a "crime" in basically every common law system. Crimes has to be willful.

[–] Pogogunner@sopuli.xyz 2 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago)

Many crimes have "Strict Liability" where criminal intent is not necessary for one to be guilty.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strict_liability

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strict_liability_(criminal)

[–] henfredemars@infosec.pub 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If only it worked like that in practice everywhere. It’s a pretty addictive revenue stream, and the district is incentivized to bend the rules to collect their money.

Of course, I write this from the US, which is currently at critical levels of internal corruption, so this could be a factor.

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 9 points 1 day ago

Yes, yet another way even the requirement to show up in court is used to suppress regular people.

[–] pc486@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

FYI, these are speed cameras, not red light cameras. They're set such that you'd need to be doing 36+ mph in a 25 mph zone.