Permanent speed cams in playground zones?

[G-ZUS]

Who didn't seen this one coming?




You’ve hated them on freeways, loathed them at intersections, and detested them on city streets.

This time though, it’s going to be pretty hard to argue.

Whether you call photo radar a cash cow, lazy policing or even something unprintable in a family newspaper, you can’t help but support them when the safety of children is in question — and that’s why permanent playground and school zone cameras are almost a certainty for Calgary.

How certain? When the head of the Calgary Police Service Traffic Section wants permanent cameras tested near schools and parks, you know the first speeding tickets are as good as in the mail.

“There’s a real push across the country to have speed cameras in playground zones, and cities are looking at putting them in full-time, and I don’t think anyone can deny that’s a critical piece to have,” said Insp. Ken Thrower, head of traffic.

Thrower says he wants to try the same in Calgary, by installing cameras in school and playground zones, and making the radar locations obvious to motorists via signs — so basically, if you speed, you know a ticket is a certainty.

“Regina is going to put them into five school zones permanently and that’s something I’m going to check into, to look at doing that here,” said Thrower.

“Any kid being hit in a playground, that’s one kid too many.”

It won’t be the first time a high-ranking police officer has successfully pushed for cameras on Calgary roads, with both red light cameras and speed on green technology the result of police officials campaigning for technology to improve intersection safety.

Thrower specifically cites Saskatchewan as a province that’s currently making the cameras a permanent threat for any motorist who thinks a 30 km/h limit is too low in areas where children gather.

In three cities — Regina, Moose Jaw and Saskatoon — a handful of school zones are being chosen for camera rotation, along with warning signs warning drivers the area may be under surveillance by photo radar.

Much like Calgary’s intersection camera boxes, Saskatchewan will rotate the actual camera through the chosen school zones, so the motorist can never be sure whether the location is armed to issue tickets or not — the key being, it might be.

The threat seems to have a drastic impact on speeds, going on the experience of cities like Chicago, which in 2013 installed automated speed enforcement cameras in 51 “Children’s Safety Zones” near schools and parks.

In areas with the cameras, the number of speeding violations dropped by an average of 43% over the first year, with some zones recording a 99% reduction.

To do the same in Calgary would likely require changes to Alberta’s Traffic Act, but with the province willing to allow mobile photo radar and stationary cameras at intersections, it’s unlikely to stand in the way of an initiative aimed at keeping children safe.

In fact, Thrower says the province has been leaning on cities to do more to enforce school and playground speed limits, so testing permanent cameras in Calgary is almost certain to get the green light.

“The province has been pushing that, and it’s always a big thing on our plate too,” said Thrower.

“If sometime in the future we get all these cameras set up, and no one speeds, then hallelujah.”

Unlike traditional photo radar, which is moved around and typically hidden, permanent school zone cameras would be a visible and constant deterrent to lead-footed motorists, including parents in a rush to drop their kids.

For that reason, Coun. Shane Keating says he’s completely in support of the inspector’s plan to make school zones safer with permanent cameras — and he’ll even help pen a letter to the province, if it helps to accelerate the process.

“I have absolutely no problem with that idea at all,” said Keating, chair of city council’s Transportation Committee.

“This is not about revenue, it’s about controlling speed. What we’re talking about is absolutely about safety, and I see no problem with the police doing that.”




http://www.calgarysun.com/2014/11/11/calgary-police-keen-to-test-out-speed-cameras-in-school-and-playground-zones

[nykz]

This I wouldn't really mind, seen a few close calls with wreckless or oblivious drivers going 50-60KM/H in a playground or school zone with kids close by.

[Manhattan]

:banghead: :guns: :barf: Enough is enough.

[phil98z24]

If it gets people to pull their head out of their ass and start considering their speeds through these zones, why would you have a problem with this? Seriously, those zones are filled with idiot drivers doing idiotic things that are imperiling pedestrians.

I've handed out enough fail to yield for pedestrian, speeding through playground/school zone, careless driving, and other tickets as a result of the things I've witnessed alone, to know that if I'm witnessing it, there must be plenty of it happening when we AREN'T around.

We can't enforce these things all the time, so anything to help enforce the laws in these zones is welcome.

[Sugarphreak]

...

[ercchry]

might as well be staring at the speedo instead of scanning for children who were never told that car>skull...

[The_1]

don't mind this at all
i've seen people going 50-60 km/h at like 7pm

[Tik-Tok]

Originally posted by phil98z24
If it gets people to pull their head out of their ass and start considering their speeds through these zones, why would you have a problem with this? Seriously, those zones are filled with idiot drivers doing idiotic things that are imperiling pedestrians.

I've handed out enough fail to yield for pedestrian, speeding through playground/school zone, careless driving, and other tickets as a result of the things I've witnessed alone, to know that if I'm witnessing it, there must be plenty of it happening when we AREN'T around.

We can't enforce these things all the time, so anything to help enforce the laws in these zones is welcome.

You have to admit though Phil, the timing of this, right after they increased the times for the school zones is pretty ridiculous.

Do you think these camera's are really going to help anyone except your offices income, when they're sending out photo-tickets for driving through a school zone at 8:55pm in the middle of winter when it's -30 out and there hasn't been a kid around for 4 hours?

[phil98z24]

Originally posted by ercchry
might as well be staring at the speedo instead of scanning for children who were never told that car>skull...

Everytime I hear that, I just laugh.

What a ridiculous thing to say. You don't actually believe that, do you?

If you have been driving a car for more than 2 weeks, you know how to maintain a consstant speed, it isn't that hard. What really galls me is putting the blame on children for acting like children. They aren't necessarily aware of the dangers around them, and they don't have fully developed brains that give them the same situational awareness as me and you.

These sorts of stupid opinions, which seem to have flourished in the other thread about changing the zone times, are real head shakers.

[theken]

The playground zone that pisses me off the most. 9th avenue heading towards Blackfoot trail after inglewood, they are constructin a building there, the playground is fenced off, kids can't use it and there is a fucking cop there daily.

[lilmira]

If the safety of children is that important, shouldn't we be enforcing the law, stopping the act then and there instead of mailing you a piece of paper after the fact?

[Tik-Tok]

Originally posted by phil98z24

They aren't necessarily aware of the dangers around them, and they don't have fully developed brains that give them the same situational awareness as me and you.

And yet I've personally never had a kid run out in front of me in a school or playground zone in 20 years of driving... :dunno:

[FraserB]

Isn't delayed punishment useless and just shows this is about revenue generation?

All that will happen is either people learn where these are, the cameras get vandalized or people just start covering their plates.

Realistically, there is no risk at all to covering your plate since all you need is a bunch of snow, some mud, scraping the red parts off or a bike rack.

Also, what is the legality of parent volunteers standing in the road in these school zones and trying to restrict movement of vehicles and keep people from parking in legal zones? Wouldn't this be considered jaywalking?

[AG_Styles]

yes, more money wasting proposals as opposed to teaching your kids to actually look both ways before crossing the road. I wonder how the rest of the world manages to move on without this crap. :rolleyes:

I'd rather spend money enforcing parking rules in school zones where parents block a whole main road off parking beside the school with their van/suv because junior can't walk 5mins to school; or doing illegal U-turns in places where their vehicles clearly can't fit.

[Ca_Silvia13]

So me speeding at 8:45 through a playground zone with no one around is endangering children enough to warrant full time speed camera's?

CPS would be better off using that Bluetooth/GPS checkpoint thing for deerfoot.

[phil98z24]

Originally posted by Tik-Tok


You have to admit though Phil, the timing of this, right after they increased the times for the school zones is pretty ridiculous.

Do you think these camera's are really going to help anyone except your offices income, when they're sending out photo-tickets for driving through a school zone at 8:55pm in the middle of winter when it's -30 out and there hasn't been a kid around for 4 hours?

I won't admit that because I don't share that opinion. It will help them, because the fact is, I see the stats and what is happening out there. People drive terribly through these things, and for too long people have been "confused" about what 1 hour after sunset means. I fully agree with the idea that times should have been more cut and dry, and if it slows people down for all of 30 seconds while they go through a zone, who cares? Further to that, playground zones aren't just necessarily about the safety of children, it's also about numbers of pedestrians who are in close proximity, and who need to cross them.

You guys are smarter than the average driver, obviously. You guys are car enthusiasts, and you get it. But I can tell you that after doing this job for many many years, my faith in the ability of Calgary drivers is gone. Completely and utterly gone. People drive so poorly in this city, and there aren't enough of us to enforce the laws, so we need all the help we can get.

[quick_scar]

Fuck this shit.

7PM, dark out, middle of December, with not a soul in sight but an ever watching photo radar camera "for the safety of the children".

I am going to say this even though it may be the unpopular opinion. If little johnny is not smart enough to know not to play in the street, little johnny should not be protected through life long enough to reproduce. If little johnny is young enough that he doesn't know not to play in the street yet, little johnny shouldn't be unsupervised. Natural selection needs to start playing a role in our society if we are going to survive. We can't keep this cycle going by enacting laws to protect the stupid at the cost of the rest of society.

/rant

[nickyh]

Originally posted by Tik-Tok


And yet I've personally never had a kid run out in front of me in a school or playground zone in 20 years of driving... :dunno:

While this has not happened to me in a playground / school zone, but it does happen more I like in my residential area. I know which homes have the kids that like to dart out into the road on bikes etc and I'm doing 30 in that area. Most playgrounds / school zones are set back far enough from the road (or fenced in) that hopefully a parent paying attention would see their child running away in time.


I'm for this. I am sick and tired of people trying to drive over me, through me, around me in the playground zone where I live. It's almost a daily occurrence.
The biggest joke is, the people doing this actually live in my area and know better.

[snoop101]

I wish they spent more money enforcing laws on stupid people than this. I agree people will just learn to slow down and then speed up and the others will find out a month later they got it.

I don't think I have ever seen a speed trap in the correct spot in my many years of driving. Every time its in an area where going 10-15 km over would do no harm at all and they make it so obvious that its for money. You know the 4 lane highway were you go 60km with fields on both sides of you. Who makes these speed laws anyways. At least BC raised all their speed limits (on highways)

[phil98z24]

Originally posted by lilmira
If the safety of children is that important, shouldn't we be enforcing the law, stopping the act then and there instead of mailing you a piece of paper after the fact?

There isn't enough manpower to do that. We are too tied up doing other police work to be in those zones often enough.



Originally posted by Tik-Tok


And yet I've personally never had a kid run out in front of me in a school or playground zone in 20 years of driving... :dunno:

So that means it isn't happening? I drive around 12 hours a day and every year I've had a pedestrian, child or adult, run out, in front, around me, or into a crosswalk without waiting.



Originally posted by FraserB
Isn't delayed punishment useless and just shows this is about revenue generation?

All that will happen is either people learn where these are, the cameras get vandalized or people just start covering their plates.

Realistically, there is no risk at all to covering your plate since all you need is a bunch of snow, some mud, scraping the red parts off or a bike rack.

Also, what is the legality of parent volunteers standing in the road in these school zones and trying to restrict movement of vehicles and keep people from parking in legal zones? Wouldn't this be considered jaywalking?

Parents can't do it because they don't have that authority.

And again, no manpower to enforce all playground and school zones with officers, all the time.



Originally posted by AG_Styles
yes, more money wasting proposals as opposed to teaching your kids to actually look both ways before crossing the road. I wonder how the rest of the world manages to move on without this crap. :rolleyes:

I'd rather spend money enforcing parking rules in school zones where parents block a whole main road off parking beside the school with their van/suv because junior can't walk 5mins to school; or doing illegal U-turns in places where their vehicles clearly can't fit.

Just because they are taught to do it doesn't mean they are going to. Kids will be kids, and other pedestrians will do the same things. We can't change that, but we can slow people down for all of 30 seconds. Big deal.



Originally posted by Ca_Silvia13
So me speeding at 8:45 through a playground zone with no one around is endangering children enough to warrant full time speed camera's?

CPS would be better off using that Bluetooth/GPS checkpoint thing for deerfoot.

That's an interesting and completely unfounded conclusion. You certainly know that these zones start early in the morning and most of the posted time is during daylight hours when these zones see their highest use. But I guess anything that interferes with your right to speed is worthy of such a solid argument?

[CapnCrunch]

Originally posted by nykz
This I wouldn't really mind, seen a few close calls with wreckless or oblivious drivers going 50-60KM/H in a playground or school zone with kids close by.

+1. I always see old pricks fly through them without a clue.

[ercchry]

Originally posted by phil98z24


Everytime I hear that, I just laugh.

What a ridiculous thing to say. You don't actually believe that, do you?

If you have been driving a car for more than 2 weeks, you know how to maintain a consstant speed, it isn't that hard. What really galls me is putting the blame on children for acting like children. They aren't necessarily aware of the dangers around them, and they don't have fully developed brains that give them the same situational awareness as me and you.

These sorts of stupid opinions, which seem to have flourished in the other thread about changing the zone times, are real head shakers.

you bet im staring at the speedo if i know there is a speed camera, yes i can maintain a speed within reason, but a half km+ playground zone will see a fluctuation in speed of +/- 8km/h or so, which usually isnt an issue but as a percentage while only traveling 30km/h its a lot more than at 60km/h, and will probably still result in a ticket. as for the children... im a fan of darwin

[phil98z24]

Originally posted by quick_scar
Fuck this shit.

7PM, dark out, middle of December, with not a soul in sight but an ever watching photo radar camera "for the safety of the children".

I am going to say this even though it may be the unpopular opinion. If little johnny is not smart enough to know not to play in the street, little johnny should not be protected through life long enough to reproduce. If little johnny is young enough that he doesn't know not to play in the street yet, little johnny shouldn't be unsupervised. Natural selection needs to start playing a role in our society if we are going to survive. We can't keep this cycle going by enacting laws to protect the stupid at the cost of the rest of society.

/rant

And what cost is that? Your freedom to drive whatever speed you want? 30 seconds of your time spent slowing down?

This isn't about children playing in the street. Just like the other thread, this is quickly filling with ridiculous notions about protecting children who play in the streets. This is about making it so pedestrians and vehicles can interact more safely in areas where pedestrians tend to be in higher amounts. Why the hell is this such an issue with some of you?

[phil98z24]

Originally posted by ercchry


you bet im staring at the speedo if i know there is a speed camera, yes i can maintain a speed within reason, but a half km+ playground zone will see a fluctuation in speed of +/- 8km/h or so, which usually isnt an issue but as a percentage while only traveling 30km/h its a lot more than at 60km/h, and will probably still result in a ticket. as for the children... im a fan of darwin

Again, that's quite the assumption to be making. Before this is even implemented, you are assuming that you will receive a ticket for slight speed variations. We have been doing photo radar in these zones for years, and I have never seen them set that low.

With regard to Darwinism and children, that's a pretty sad position. Children aren't savvy enough to know what's happening around them, and the implication that they will learn through serious injury or death is a terrible thing to say.

[ercchry]

Originally posted by phil98z24


Again, that's quite the assumption to be making. Before this is even implemented, you are assuming that you will receive a ticket for slight speed variations.

With regard to Darwinism and children, that's a pretty sad position. Children aren't savvy enough to know what's happening around them, and the implication that they will learn through serious injury or death is a terrible thing to say.

well since the regular limit is only 50km/h yeah i think its pretty logical to think these speed tolerances will be lower than green light cams, also if the child is too young to figure out how cars work then they should be supervised...

[CapnCrunch]

Originally posted by FraserB


Realistically, there is no risk at all to covering your plate since all you need is a bunch of snow, some mud, scraping the red parts off or a bike rack.



Do you or someone you know actually cover their plate so that they can speed through playground zones? Seriously, do you really think this is an issue?

[snoop101]

I still think that one cop for an hour in the morning and an hour in the afternoon randomly through out the week in different school zones would make a larger impact then some camera in a box clicking away and letting the person know a month later.

Once people know there "could" be a cop there pulling you over they act a lot differently. Also getting pulled over in front of a crowd of people would really hit the nail on the head to that person and others.

[FraserB]

Originally posted by phil98z24
Parents can't do it because they don't have that authority.

And again, no manpower to enforce this with officers.




Perfect.

Will an officer respond to direct complaint about this activity? Standing in the middle of the road, safety vest or not, and forcing drivers into the oncoming lane is a safety hazard not just to the person doing this, but to drivers as well. Not to mention the fact that a lot of the time, these people have their own kids right there with them.

[phil98z24]

Originally posted by ercchry


well since the regular limit is only 50km/h yeah i think its pretty logical to think these speed tolerances will be lower than green light cams, also if the child is too young to figure out how cars work then they should be supervised...

I think focusing on the children aspect of this is mentally lazy, and just an easy cop out argument for why you don't like it. There are other pedestrians in these zones, and yes, many of them are children, but the fact is we can't change the undesirable behaviours of those who may do things that are dangerous around vehicles... but we sure can try to change those of road users.

It's completely out of line to expect that the onus should be completely on pedestrians or completely on drivers. There needs to be a compromise, and from what you're telling me, you seem to think otherwise.

[Aleks]

We live in a great, polite society. These cameras wouldn't last long in a lot of places :rofl:

[phil98z24]

Originally posted by FraserB


Perfect.

Will an officer respond to direct complaint about this activity? Standing in the middle of the road, safety vest or not, and forcing drivers into the oncoming lane is a safety hazard not just to the person doing this, but to drivers as well. Not to mention the fact that a lot of the time, these people have their own kids right there with them.

I imagine they would. I think that what these parents or volunteers are doing is in theory a good idea, but it's dangerous because they simply don't know what they are doing and I think it can create a greater hazard.

BTW, when I said no manpower to enforce this with officers, I meant playground and school zones.. I looked at your quote and I didn't word that sentence properly, haha.

[InRich]

I dunno about you guys. But Im really starting to get sick of all this laser and photo and cop speed enforcement in Calgary. really sick of it.

[ercchry]

Originally posted by phil98z24


I think focusing on the children aspect of this is mentally lazy, and just an easy cop out argument for why you don't like it. There are other pedestrians in these zones, and yes, many of them are children, but the fact is we can't change the undesirable behaviours of those who may do things that are dangerous around vehicles... but we sure can try to change those of road users.

It's completely out of line to expect that the onus should be completely on pedestrians or completely on drivers. There needs to be a compromise, and from what you're telling me, you seem to think otherwise.

there is infinitely more pedestrians in the downtown core, yet we get by with 50-60km/h speed limits, so yeah... im thinking its about the children, they even draw them on the signs. as for the "compromise" how about both parties pay attention to their environments and pedestrians use crosswalks and come to a full stop before they cross the road and drivers can in return stop at these parts of the road if someone is waiting to cross... the two parties can make eye contact even to be sure that yes, i am ready for you to cross the road

[403ep3]

I'm totally up for this. Across my house is a playground and many kids to play on it. Too many stupid fucks speed past my house at 50-60+.

What's the $ for speeding in a playground zone anyways? minimum?

[kenny]

I normally wouldn't have a problem with this, but I think this is too soon if implemented right away. I've caught myself going over the limit a couple times now at about 8:45 not realizing I was even in a playground zone. Both times were in downtown, really dark and of course no one in the playground.

I think a better compromise to the whole "1 hour after sunset" would be to have a separate winter schedule where playground zones end at 7pm and rest of year it can end at 9pm. It'd till be simpler than the 1 hour after sunset and we wouldn't have this crazy playground zone in effect hours after some kids have already gone to bed.

[snoop101]

Originally posted by ercchry


how about both parties pay attention to their environments and pedestrians use crosswalks and come to a full stop before they cross the road and drivers can in return stop at these parts of the road if someone is waiting to cross... the two parties can make eye contact even to be sure that yes, i am ready for you to cross the road

Whats amazing is when I was a kid we were told to look both ways and not run across the road at a crosswalk. What is wrong with parents now a days? I watch kids right up to adults J-Walking without even looking.

We live in a country where no one does anything until someone dies. In Europe if you step out on the street J-Walking you will die and its your fault 100% and no one gives a crap.

[bjstare]

I don't think these are such a bad idea. I'd much rather see them in playground zones than on deerfoot/crowchild/stoneyburgring.

There is no reason you're so important and under such demand that you cant take an extra few seconds to get through one of these zones. And if you're just arguing based on principle, pick a better hill to die on. This is a miniscule inconvenience in the big scheme of things.

[phil98z24]

Originally posted by ercchry


there is infinitely more pedestrians in the downtown core, yet we get by with 50-60km/h speed limits, so yeah... im thinking its about the children, they even draw them on the signs. as for the "compromise" how about both parties pay attention to their environments and pedestrians use crosswalks and come to a full stop before they cross the road and drivers can in return stop at these parts of the road if someone is waiting to cross... the two parties can make eye contact even to be sure that yes, i am ready for you to cross the road

Again, relying on people to do that on their own doesn't work. That is why it has to be mandated by law, and then enforced. People can't seem to figure this stuff out in their own!

[phil98z24]

Originally posted by cjblair
I don't think these are such a bad idea. I'd much rather see them in playground zones than on deerfoot/crowchild/stoneyburgring.

There is no reason you're so important and under such demand that you cant take an extra few seconds to get through one of these zones. And if you're just arguing based on principle, pick a better hill to die on. This is a miniscule inconvenience in the big scheme of things.

Agreed. On high speed roads they are a revenue generator/stupid tax, but in these zones I see their value.

[ercchry]

Originally posted by phil98z24


Again, relying on people to do that on their own doesn't work. That is why it has to be mandated by law, and then enforced. People can't seem to figure this stuff out in their own!

but why is that? where does it end?

[finboy]

Anyone have stats on kids getting hit in playground zones?

[quick_scar]

Originally posted by phil98z24


Again, that's quite the assumption to be making. Before this is even implemented, you are assuming that you will receive a ticket for slight speed variations. We have been doing photo radar in these zones for years, and I have never seen them set that low.

With regard to Darwinism and children, that's a pretty sad position. Children aren't savvy enough to know what's happening around them, and the implication that they will learn through serious injury or death is a terrible thing to say.

1. Edmonton is leading by example. A couple years ago no one had seen limits set that low up there. Now they are refusing to answer as to how many sub 10 km over tickets they issued last year. As well as how many sub 5KM.... 5KM over they issued. Whats to say Calgary wont follow suit? Clearly CPS are jealous of the millions in increased budget they (EDIT: EDMONTON) are getting.

2. I stand by natural selection for all regardless of age. It is the parents responsibility to supervise their children and guide them through life until they can fend for themselves. No different then in the wild. At that point if they are stupid enough to step in front of a moving car, then nature should take its course.

I remember traveling to Ontario when I was a kid. Pedestrians don't have the same right away there. You waited until the road was clear or you had a walk light. Plain and simple. You watched for the cars more then they watched for you.

[kenny]

Originally posted by phil98z24


Agreed. On high speed roads they are a revenue generator/stupid tax, but in these zones I see their value.

Forgot to include this point, I think if there are going to be speed cameras mounted anywhere they should be in playground zones. :thumbsup:

[snoop101]

Originally posted by ercchry


but why is that? where does it end?

Cause we live in a country where anyone can get a drivers license.

I would rather Canada be like other countries where you have to spend a decent amount of money to get a license and actually take courses on driving.

Education is much more effective than enforcing it after the fact. I hate to say it, but its like sex in teens. Educate them so they can make a correct decision instead of no education and dealing with it later.

[killramos]

So Phil if this is implemented are you supportive of laying off all the police officers who this change will make redundant? After all you keep saying it will greatly reduce needed manpower?

Because in reality it just means these same officers will be sitting somewhere else hiding behind bus stops and trees where these cameras aren't in place collecting twice the revenue.

Where else do you support having cameras tracking all of the things that we can possibly be doing wrong? It is a slippery slope and guess what every year there are more and more cameras being put in more and more different situations.

Nineteen-Eighty-What?

:thumbsdow

[phil98z24]

Originally posted by ercchry


but why is that? where does it end?

Why is that? Because humans aren't good at figuring out these types of things, obviously. We wouldn't have traffic laws if people could figure out for themselves the complexities of working with other users of the roads.

I'm also not going to get into the "where does it end" discussion. I would say that driving a privilege that is very fairly administered and we are generally allowed to do many things without state interference. This isn't the beginning of some larger crack down.

[ercchry]

Originally posted by snoop101


Cause we live in a country where anyone can get a drivers license.

I would rather Canada be like other countries where you have to spend a decent amount of money to get a license and actually take courses on driving.

Education is much more effective than enforcing it after the fact. I hate to say it, but its like sex in teens. Educate them so they can make a correct decision instead of no education and dealing with it later.

i'd love that... but we'd have to make registries government owned, as long as there is still profit to be made people will still figure out a way to "buy" their licenses


Originally posted by phil98z24


Why is that? Because humans aren't good at figuring out these types of things, obviously. We wouldn't have traffic laws if people could figure out for themselves the complexities of working with other users of the roads.

I'm also not going to get into the "where does it end" discussion. I would say that driving a privilege that is very fairly administered and we are generally allowed to do many things without state interference. This isn't the beginning of some larger crack down.

you got to travel more... other countries seem to get it, north america, not so much, nanny laws galore

[snoop101]

I wonder what BC does since they removed all Cameras from the province. It must be a rampage over there, oh wait I was there for a month last month and people drive better there then here. Imagine that.

[schocker]

Just put a camera on every street and be done with it :rofl:
The play ground zone time change catered to morons who can't read signs.
Speed limits haven't been adjusted in decades and if anything would only go down even though car safety is gotten much better.

[killramos]

Originally posted by schocker
Just put a camera on every street and be done with it :rofl:
The play ground zone time change catered to morons who can't read signs.
Speed limits haven't been adjusted in decades and if anything would only go down even though car safety is gotten much better.

:werd:

[phil98z24]

Originally posted by killramos
So Phil if this is implemented are you supportive of laying off all the police officers who this change will make redundant? After all you keep saying it will greatly reduce needed manpower?

Because in reality it just means these same officers will be sitting somewhere else hiding behind bus stops and trees where these cameras aren't in place collecting twice the revenue.

Where else do you support having cameras tracking all of the things that we can possibly be doing wrong? It is a slippery slope and guess what every year there are more and more cameras being put in more and more different situations.

Nineteen-Eighty-What?

:thumbsdow

I didn't say that at all. I said we don't have enough manpower to enforce this type of thing in addition to all our regular duties. I said nothing of it reducing needed manpower, or that we don't need to enforce these with officers. I said it was an aid to us, because there aren't enough of us.

I can't for the life of me figure out how you drew any of what you said from the things I've said.

As for the rest of it, like I said, I'm not getting into it. There are cameras everywhere, noone is being tracked, and if you are in the public space anywhere in this world you are on some video feed somewhere. Drop the "slippery slope" Orwellian act, it's ridiculous.

[phil98z24]

Originally posted by ercchry


i'd love that... but we'd have to make registries government owned, as long as there is still profit to be made people will still figure out a way to "buy" their licenses



you got to travel more... other countries seem to get it, north america, not so much, nanny laws galore

I've travelled to many of these countries that "get it", thanks. And no, they don't seem to get it. Both drivers and pedestrians in these countries die on their roads in similar numbers.

[g-m]

Originally posted by snoop101


Cause we live in a country where anyone can get a drivers license.

I would rather Canada be like other countries where you have to spend a decent amount of money to get a license and actually take courses on driving.

Education is much more effective than enforcing it after the fact. I hate to say it, but its like sex in teens. Educate them so they can make a correct decision instead of no education and dealing with it later.

Yea, at first look I was on board with the whole idea but the more I thought about it, the less it makes sense. It just follows the American enforcement model. In north America we just assume everyone is an idiot, then legislate and enforce. True, most people ARE idiots right now but instead of progressive changes to educate and make people into better drivers, we're taking the easy way out (enforcement).

What we should see is progressively harder, mandatory driver training, re tests after every few years, and other measures meant to increase the overall collective driver skill. The enforcement model only serves to reduce the amount of thinking and accountability of drivers since it's essentially a tax, and it's not always applied.

The concept, children's safety, is a good one. The execution is as progressive as the war on drugs

[snoop101]

Originally posted by ercchry


i'd love that... but we'd have to make registries government owned, as long as there is still profit to be made people will still figure out a way to "buy" their licenses



you got to travel more... other countries seem to get it, north america, not so much, nanny laws galore

I'm sure things have changed a lot, but we have a relative in Germany who at the time was going through her course. It was like $2k and it was more or less a college course. They had to learn everything including basic maintenance and how to change a flat tire.

[ercchry]

Originally posted by phil98z24


I've travelled to many of these countries that "get it", thanks. And no, they don't seem to get it. Both drivers and pedestrians in these countries die on their roads in similar numbers.

so you are saying the numbers dont change with or without nanny laws? well then...

[phil98z24]

Originally posted by quick_scar


1. Edmonton is leading by example. A couple years ago no one had seen limits set that low up there. Now they are refusing to answer as to how many sub 10 km over tickets they issued last year. As well as how many sub 5KM.... 5KM over they issued. Whats to say Calgary wont follow suit? Clearly CPS are jealous of the millions in increased budget they (EDIT: EDMONTON) are getting.

2. I stand by natural selection for all regardless of age. It is the parents responsibility to supervise their children and guide them through life until they can fend for themselves. No different then in the wild. At that point if they are stupid enough to step in front of a moving car, then nature should take its course.

I remember traveling to Ontario when I was a kid. Pedestrians don't have the same right away there. You waited until the road was clear or you had a walk light. Plain and simple. You watched for the cars more then they watched for you.

Yeah, they are jealous. :rolleyes:

Maybe read up a little bit before you offer up your opinion. Traffic enforcement is hot button issue with citizens of this city, and that information can be found by doing a little searching. It has nothing to do with revenue.

BTW, nowhere in Canada do pedestrians have the right of way unless they are in a crosswalk, waiting for one, or are already in the process of crossing a road. Ontario has the same pedestrian rules we do.

[lilmira]

Just don't fix the potholes around schools and playgrounds. People slow down, and property tax reduces, win-win. ;)

[CapnCrunch]

Originally posted by kenny


I think a better compromise to the whole "1 hour after sunset" would be to have a separate winter schedule where playground zones end at 7pm and rest of year it can end at 9pm. It'd till be simpler than the 1 hour after sunset and we wouldn't have this crazy playground zone in effect hours after some kids have already gone to bed.

They just got rid of the 1 hour after sunset rule. They're all set times now.

[phil98z24]

Originally posted by ercchry


so you are saying the numbers dont change with or without nanny laws? well then...

So we should just get rid of them, right? And if you think Europe doesn't have incredible numbers of nanny laws or speed cameras, than you clearly haven't travelled enough. That shit is everywhere, and they enforce traffic laws with a vigor that you better hope we never start doing.

I would say without the laws and enforcement we are doing, things would be very different, and it wouldn't be for the better. We don't have the same system of driver education as they do in Europe, and until we do, we need to tell people what the fuck they should be doing on the roads because clearly they can't figure it out for themselves or the driver training we do isn't sticking.

[killramos]

Originally posted by phil98z24


As for the rest of it, like I said, I'm not getting into it. There are cameras everywhere, noone is being tracked, and if you are in the public space anywhere in this world you are on some video feed somewhere. Drop the "slippery slope" Orwellian act, it's ridiculous.



Coming from the guy on the other side of the camera :rolleyes:

And these cameras reducing workload on officers is an obvious corollary from your statements.

1. You have stated that lots of these tickets are already given out

2. You have said these these areas of enforcement take a huge amount of manpower

Extension

Reduce need to do 1 (implementing cameras) then you reduce 2 ( manpower needed )

To me reducing manpower needed should result in a proportional drop in said manpower (ie laying off cops) :dunno:

Similarly to Canada post going to community mailboxes should by extension lead to laying off thousands of postal workers.

[g-m]

Or the cops we have would be able to spend more time on the important things. We're lucky to have Phil posting here so circular arguments might not be the most productive

[blitz]

Originally posted by kenny
I think a better compromise to the whole "1 hour after sunset" would be to have a separate winter schedule where playground zones end at 7pm and rest of year it can end at 9pm. It'd till be simpler than the 1 hour after sunset and we wouldn't have this crazy playground zone in effect hours after some kids have already gone to bed.

But how are people supposed to know what season it is? :rofl:

I'm cool with going 30km/h in playgrounds zones that are actually playgrounds or parks, but I find there are so many in Calgary that make no sense what so ever.

Remove the BS ones and enforce the ones that actually have a purpose.

[88CRX]

Originally posted by kenny
I normally wouldn't have a problem with this, but I think this is too soon if implemented right away. I've caught myself going over the limit a couple times now at about 8:45 not realizing I was even in a playground zone. Both times were in downtown, really dark and of course no one in the playground.

I think a better compromise to the whole "1 hour after sunset" would be to have a separate winter schedule where playground zones end at 7pm and rest of year it can end at 9pm. It'd till be simpler than the 1 hour after sunset and we wouldn't have this crazy playground zone in effect hours after some kids have already gone to bed.

:werd: :werd: :werd: :werd:

The whole 9pm after its been dark for 5 hours during winter is not a very logical decision.... but makes sense now if they throw in cameras :rofl:

[ExtraSlow]

Originally posted by blitz
Remove the BS ones and enforce the ones that actually have a purpose.
This would be awesome. I have little kids, and there are some playground ands chool zones that make no sense, and only infuriate drivers.

[phil98z24]

Originally posted by killramos


Coming from the guy on the other side of the camera :rolleyes:

And these cameras reducing workload on officers is an obvious corollary from your statements.

1. You have stated that lots of these tickets are already given out

2. You have said these these areas of enforcement take a huge amount of manpower

Extension

Reduce need to do 1 (implementing cameras) then you reduce 2 ( manpower needed )

To me reducing manpower needed should result in a proportional drop in said manpower (ie laying off cops) :dunno:

Similarly to Canada post going to community mailboxes should by extension lead to laying off thousands of postal workers.

Yeah, I'm not saying what I'm saying because of bias. I'm telling you what the reality of the situation is. I'm not going to attempt to have a conversation with someone who already has a preconceived notion and won't hear what I'm saying because you already don't believe me.

And your little breakdown is a poor attempt at covering for the fact that you can't comprehend very simple statements. There is no other inference to be made than we can't do this type of traffic enforcement in large enough numbers because there isn't enough of us to do it, due to our other duties. I then said it will help to enforce these laws because of that. If there were a number of us already doing this, and only this, then it would be an obvious conclusion that cameras could render those jobs redundant and we would get rid of bodies.

Sorry to rain on your parade, but this doesn't mean layoffs of police officers. :cry:

FYI, in the event you are completely confused and think photo radar units are manned by police officers and that is what you are talking about, then let me help you - they are peace officers, not cops.

[Sugarphreak]

...

[revelations]

PHIL - do you know what locations have the most recorded pedestrian collisions in the city?

(eg near a Ctrain station?, a school zone in the NW)

[killramos]

Originally posted by phil98z24


Yeah, I'm not saying what I'm saying because of bias. I'm telling you what the reality of the situation is. I'm not going to attempt to have a conversation with someone who already has a preconceived notion and won't hear what I'm saying because you already don't believe me.



Trust is earned, why should I believe your or anyone else on face value alone (oh wait there is no face value on an internet forum) on what cameras are or could be used for? Though apparently that is enough for you to completely invalidate my statements and arguments...


Originally posted by phil98z24

And your little breakdown is a poor attempt at covering for the fact that you can't comprehend very simple statements. There is no other inference to be made than we can't do this type of traffic enforcement in large enough numbers because there isn't enough of us to do it, due to our other duties. I then said it will help to enforce these laws because of that. If there were a number of us already doing this, and only this, then it would be an obvious conclusion that cameras could render those jobs redundant and we would get rid of bodies.

Sorry to rain on your parade, but this doesn't mean layoffs of police officers. :cry:

FYI, in the event you are completely confused and think photo radar units are manned by police officers and that is what you are talking about, then let me help you - they are peace officers, not cops.

I don't care about your distinction between police and peace officers, both of them perform speed enforcement in these zones and if steps are taken to reduce this load (that cost taxpayers money) then these people should be layed off in order to help pay for the equipment. If my company hired a consultant to do my work i would expect that they would seriously consider the value of having me around.

You seem to be trying to make the argument that implementing these cameras will in no way shape or form affect the workload of the police force.

I can comprehend simple statements just fine. Can you comprehend simple cause and effect?

Because writing this off by saying that the officers will find something else to do isn't an acceptable justification. Though it is the answer i would expect by a public service in this country.

[schocker]

Originally posted by Sugarphreak
Well, we definitely need this… there was 35 kids hit by cars last year alone, 10 of which died. The statistics alone support this extreme measure to be implemented even if some of our citizens don’t.


Hang on a second… was it over 35 kids struck and 10 deaths…. or was it ZERO kids struck and ZERO deaths? Because if it is the second, this is kind of a pointless program.
You are forgetting why they would suggest something like this.....

http://i.imgur.com/015S5NQ.png :rofl:
http://www.calgary.ca/cps/Pages/Business-reports/Calgary-Police-Service-business-plans-and-budgets.aspx

[FraserB]

Phil, the problem with this kind of thing is we're basically training entire generations to rely on the state to implement laws to protect them and eliminate the need for critical thinking. If we reduce the speed to 30kph for so long, why not just make it a 24 hour zone? And since we are looking out for pedestrian safety, any road that has a sidewalk near it needs to be dropped as well, not just near schools and playgrounds.

15 years ago, kids were being taught to look both ways, stick their arm out and use designated crossings. Now you have morons running into the road from between parked cars thinking that pedestrians have right of way, because their parents are teaching them bullshit and demanding the government do their job of parenting. There are parents up the street from me who think that putting a little yellow "kids at play" sign out lets their kids run out into the road whenever. I've nearly hit those morons at least 5 times and the signs are disappearing next time I see them. They are the same ones who make "slow down" motions at me when I go 30-40 on a residential road.

Despite what the city and your own department would like people to believe, there is NOT an epidemic of pedestrian fatalities in Calgary. The mayor and the chief of police use inflammatory language to sell revenue generation to people who don't bother to look at the stats. If you want a real method to cut vehicle/pedestrian collisions, get people to teach their kids right and realize that in a lot of places, peds DO NOT have right of way.

In fact, the rate of pedestrian injury and death has gone down 36% in the last 10 years without measures like this.

[revelations]

Here are the city's BASIC stats (uncorrelated to number of registered vehicles, average traffic, population, etc)

Collision statistics
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Reported Collisions 38619 39542 38415 34297 32812
Involving Bicycles 269 294 256 238 227
Involving Pedestrians 562 517 459 498 5 06
Fatal Collisions 39 36 22 23 20


edit - this version of VB is too old to support lists

[phil98z24]

Originally posted by killramos


Trust is earned, why should I believe your or anyone else on face value alone (oh wait there is no face value on an internet forum) on what cameras are or could be used for? Though apparently that is enough for you to completely invalidate my statements and arguments...



I don't care about your distinction between police and peace officers, both of them perform speed enforcement in these zones and if steps are taken to reduce this load (that cost taxpayers money) then these people should be layed off in order to help pay for the equipment. If my company hired a consultant to do my work i would expect that they would seriously consider the value of having me around.

You seem to be trying to make the argument that implementing these cameras will in no way shape or form affect the workload of the police force.

I can comprehend simple statements just fine. Can you comprehend simple cause and effect?

Because writing this off by saying that the officers will find something else to do isn't an acceptable justification. Though it is the answer i would expect by a public service in this country.

Wow, just wow. I never said ANY of that. I've explained why your idea of simple cause and effect isn't that, because it won't have the effect on POLICE OFFICERS you think it does. We AREN'T doing it that much already, and it doesn't shift our workload because we are ALREADY doing OTHER duties. I didn't write this off saying we would find other things to do. I said we are already doing those other things because those are our primary duties and are in terms of our duties, are higher priority. This is supplemental to help us to do those things we CAN'T do because we are already inundated with work.

You are acting like a prick now and trying to get personal, and I'm out. You know you are deriving a completely offside conclusion from words I didn't say, and trying to attribute those words to me, and then calling me out like I'm an idiot? Get lost.

[killramos]

Originally posted by revelations
Here are the city's BASIC stats (uncorrelated to number of registered vehicles, average traffic, population, etc)

Collision statistics
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Reported Collisions 38619 39542 38415 34297 32812
Involving Bicycles 269 294 256 238 227
Involving Pedestrians 562 517 459 498 5 06
Fatal Collisions 39 36 22 23 20


edit - this version of VB is too old to support lists

So 20 fatal collisions a year which cant even be isolated to pedestrians let alone playground zones.

Sounds like pretty thin justification to me.

What do they place the value of human life at these days?

[phil98z24]

Originally posted by FraserB
Phil, the problem with this kind of thing is we're basically training entire generations to rely on the state to implement laws to protect them and eliminate the need for critical thinking. If we reduce the speed to 30kph for so long, why not just make it a 24 hour zone? And since we are looking out for pedestrian safety, any road that has a sidewalk near it needs to be dropped as well, not just near schools and playgrounds.

15 years ago, kids were being taught to look both ways, stick their arm out and use designated crossings. Now you have morons running into the road from between parked cars thinking that pedestrians have right of way, because their parents are teaching them bullshit and demanding the government do their job of parenting. There are parents up the street from me who think that putting a little yellow "kids at play" sign out lets their kids run out into the road whenever. I've nearly hit those morons at least 5 times and the signs are disappearing next time I see them. They are the same ones who make "slow down" motions at me when I go 30-40 on a residential road.

Despite what the city and your own department would like people to believe, there is NOT an epidemic of pedestrian fatalities in Calgary. The mayor and the chief of police use inflammatory language to sell a lie to people who don't bother to look at the stats. If you want a real method to cut vehicle/pedestrian collisions, get people to teach their kids right and pull their heads out of their as around the roads.

There isn't any language being used to say there is an epidemic of fatalities. They are saying these zones are dangerous and bad things are happening in them. It's about mitigation of risk. FYI, it's the inspector and a councillor saying it, not the chief and the mayor.

And again, this talk of nanny state and teaching kids that everything else will protect them when they should be doing it themselves is complete bullshit - it's been this way since any of us were kids, and our parents before us. Kids will be kids, period. If you think parents are just relying on the state to do their parenting for them with regard to road safety and this the net result, I think you are out to lunch. I also think if you don't give any weight to the idea that when people are safely crossing, or doing things the way they should be, and some vehicle going too fast and not paying attention doesn't factor into this, you are only paying attention to one side of this.

Anyways, clearly you guys think the idea of slowing down for a few seconds and potentially making a section of roadway a little safer is too much to handle. I can't comprehend that, but whatever. :rofl:

[firebane]

Ugh just another stupid idea.

I already say fuck the stupid speeds once its dark and just do as I please. Cameras will not deter me in any way.

[phil98z24]

Originally posted by schocker

You are forgetting why they would suggest something like this.....

http://i.imgur.com/015S5NQ.png :rofl:
http://www.calgary.ca/cps/Pages/Business-reports/Calgary-Police-Service-business-plans-and-budgets.aspx

Blame your city council for it being that way, not us. We are told to fund ourselves because the city expects it to be that way.

[firebane]

Originally posted by FraserB
Phil, the problem with this kind of thing is we're basically training entire generations to rely on the state to implement laws to protect them and eliminate the need for critical thinking. If we reduce the speed to 30kph for so long, why not just make it a 24 hour zone? And since we are looking out for pedestrian safety, any road that has a sidewalk near it needs to be dropped as well, not just near schools and playgrounds.



I thought we were already past that point...

[FraserB]

Originally posted by phil98z24

Anyways, clearly you guys think the idea of slowing down for a few seconds and potentially making a section of roadway a little safer is too much to handle. I can't comprehend that, but whatever. :rofl:

It's just that more and more things are being introduced to increase ticket revenue with safety as the main reason when the stats don't back it up. The CPS should release the amount of extra hours this opens up to issue violations, the number is at least 500,000.

If you look at all the incidents of pedestrian collisions in school/playground zones, how many were after sunset in the winter months? Pedestrian collisions and fatalities are not on the rise and have been falling without measures like this.

[msommers]

Just a guess but something tells me there are more close-calls/injuries/fatalities downtown from adults crossing the road like asshats than in playground/school zones by children who are simply unaware or careless.

...And all of downtown goes to 30km/h :rofl:

[ercchry]

Originally posted by msommers
Just a guess but something tells me there are more close-calls/injuries/fatalities downtown from adults crossing the road like asshats than in playground/school zones by children who are simply unaware or careless.

...And all of downtown goes to 30km/h :rofl:

will someone think about the executives?! :cry:

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by Sugarphreak
The problem with these will be that permanent speed cameras will probably work… people will learn they are there and for that section stop speeding; which means no revenue to support the camera, so they will be considered a failure by the city.

Just like red light cameras, build the casing and rotate the camera around the city.

Less operation cost, more income and if you tell everyone it's permanent, people will slow down.

But yeah, this is pretty low after setting the playground/school zone to 9pm then bring out the cameras. Truth be told, I have blown thru a few school zones at 8:49pm lately thinking sun is down/school is out. City would have got me and they will definitely got rich off this if only just initially.

I would do this may be 2 years from now when everyone get used to the 9pm school/playground zones.

[firebane]

Originally posted by Xtrema


Just like red light cameras, build the casing and rotate the camera around the city.

Less operation cost, more income and if you tell everyone it's permanent, people will slow down.

But yeah, this is pretty low after setting the playground/school zone to 9pm then bring out the cameras. Truth be told, I have blown thru a few school zones at 8:49pm lately thinking sun is down/school is out. City would have got me and they will definitely got rich off this if only just initially.

I would do this may be 2 years from now when everyone get used to the 9pm school/playground zones.

Nobody is going to get used to the 9pm school grounds. People will see no kids and just drive as normal as they do now and forever will.

[killramos]

Originally posted by phil98z24


Wow, just wow. I never said ANY of that. I've explained why your idea of simple cause and effect isn't that, because it won't have the effect on POLICE OFFICERS you think it does. We AREN'T doing it that much already, and it doesn't shift our workload because we are ALREADY doing OTHER duties. I didn't write this off saying we would find other things to do. I said we are already doing those other things because those are our primary duties and are in terms of our duties, are higher priority. This is supplemental to help us to do those things we CAN'T do because we are already inundated with work.

You are acting like a prick now and trying to get personal, and I'm out. You know you are deriving a completely offside conclusion from words I didn't say, and trying to attribute those words to me, and then calling me out like I'm an idiot? Get lost.

Yes because if anyone in this thread is making personal arguments and attacks its me...

I may have given you a mild taste of your own medicine and read between the lines of what you are saying but you are proving to ultimately be so jaded in your opinion of these cameras it's laughable.

The fact of the matter is, as stated by many other members in this thread, the city of calgary is continuing to spend time and money on measures that are not backed up by facts or statistics but to appease vocal minority who think that people driving 50 km/hr within walking distance of a tree will lead to the end of the world.

And the net effect? Calgary police service gains another revenue stream. It's a tax plain and simple and clagarians have had enough of stupid taxes especially in the name of false progress and safety.

[max_boost]

That is one thing that baffles the heck out of me. What was wrong with 1 hour after sunset? I hate this 9pm school/playground zone thing. :banghead: :nut: :dunno:

[killramos]

Originally posted by max_boost
That is one thing that baffles the heck out of me. What was wrong with 1 hour after sunset? I hate this 9pm school/playground zone thing. :banghead: :nut: :dunno:

At least it was based in reality.

Playground zone until it is SOLIDLY dark. Not to hard to confuse.

[max_boost]

It's 530pm right now and it's dark outside. You Beyonders let your kids play outside at this time? Or they all home for dinner? lol

[rage2]

Truth be told kids haven't really played in playgrounds for a decade now haha.

[speedog]

Originally posted by killramos


Yes because if anyone in this thread is making personal arguments and attacks its me...

I may have given you a mild taste of your own medicine and read between the lines of what you are saying but you are proving to ultimately be so jaded in your opinion of these cameras it's laughable.

The fact of the matter is, as stated by many other members in this thread, the city of calgary is continuing to spend time and money on measures that are not backed up by facts or statistics but to appease vocal minority who think that people driving 50 km/hr within walking distance of a tree will lead to the end of the world.

And the net effect? Calgary police service gains another revenue stream. It's a tax plain and simple and clagarians have had enough of stupid taxes especially in the name of false progress and safety.
It's only a tax if one so chooses - I did the math the other day on a school zone I went through and figured that school zone cost me an extra 12 seconds out of my 86,400 second day, not that big a deal. What does need to happen IMHO is for the re-examination of where a school or playground zone is placed - they're either too long or just shouldn't be. Problem is we'd probably move to a worse state then we are in now.

[killramos]

Originally posted by speedog

It's only a tax if one so chooses - I did the math the other day on a school zone I went through and figured that school zone cost me an extra 12 seconds out of my 86,400 second day, not that big a deal. What does need to happen IMHO is for the re-examination of where a school or playground zone is placed - they're either too long or just shouldn't be. Problem is we'd probably move to a worse state then we are in now.

Except the stupid cameras cost us money even if we never speed through them. Who do you think pays for the system, installation, monitoring.

[ExtraSlow]

Originally posted by killramos


Except the stupid cameras cost us money even if we never speed through them. Who do you think pays for the system, installation, monitoring.
I thought they generated revenue?

[killramos]

Originally posted by ExtraSlow

I thought they generated revenue?

Just for CPS.

[firebane]

Originally posted by speedog

It's only a tax if one so chooses - I did the math the other day on a school zone I went through and figured that school zone cost me an extra 12 seconds out of my 86,400 second day, not that big a deal. What does need to happen IMHO is for the re-examination of where a school or playground zone is placed - they're either too long or just shouldn't be. Problem is we'd probably move to a worse state then we are in now.

I totally agree with this. I have a school zone with a playground zone in tandem and it creates for a idiotically long zone to be doing 30km/h through. On top of that the school zone ends in completely different locations.


Originally posted by killramos


Except the stupid cameras cost us money even if we never speed through them. Who do you think pays for the system, installation, monitoring.

And this would be on top of the cost already associated with replacing the signs.

[J-D]

Originally posted by rage2
Truth be told kids haven't really played in playgrounds for a decade now haha.

This.

Not to mention, all of the kids that I've seen in dangerous traffic situations in the past few years have all been at marked crosswalks - not looking while crossing, cars parked too close and blocking the view, snowplowed snow blocking the crosswalk, or just plain ol' speeding. I can't even remember the last time I saw a kid in a playground zone that wasn't inside a fence.

[max_boost]

Originally posted by rage2
Truth be told kids haven't really played in playgrounds for a decade now haha.



Originally posted by J-D


This.

Not to mention, all of the kids that I've seen in dangerous traffic situations in the past few years have all been at marked crosswalks - not looking while crossing, cars parked too close and blocking the view, snowplowed snow blocking the crosswalk, or just plain ol' speeding. I can't even remember the last time I saw a kid in a playground zone that wasn't inside a fence.

So why? lol there has gotta be some sort of backroom deal hand shaking going on haha

[88CRX]

Originally posted by max_boost





So why? lol there has gotta be some sort of backroom deal hand shaking going on haha

Of course there is. City needs to balance their budget somehow. Anyone who doesn't think CPS doesn't have quotas or pressure to generate revue doesn't have a clue to what's going on.

*cough*
window tint tickets
9pm playground zones
Photo radar
Red light cameras
Enlarged exhaust outlet
Vehicle noise violations
*cough*

[codetrap]

http://i678.photobucket.com/albums/vv150/jclaudius/Datehookup/whine.jpg

I find it surprising that you guys would jump all over Phil on this. He didn't make up the rules. He's just trying to explain some of the reasoning behind them, yet you all jump on him like it's his personal fault. Seems like all you want to do is argue with him about it like a bunch of little bitches on the rag. Stupid.

Want to effect change? Yell at your Councillor. Write a letter. Get involved. They're the ones that responsible. Not this beyonder who is good enough to even bother to talk to you about it from his side of the camera.

[rage2]

I'm sure a lot of people will complain after this winter. It's been dark since 5ish tonight and the playground and the more ridiculous school zones run for another 4 hours.

I drove through a long school zone at 7, even the busses were doing 50 lol. I was passed by everyone.

Once the tickets come in, Calgarians will bitch. Can't blame Nenshi for this one, he's only one vote and he actually voted against it.

[speedog]

Originally posted by rage2
I'm sure a lot of people will complain after this winter. It's been dark since 5ish tonight and the playground and the more ridiculous school zones run for another 4 hours.

I drove through a long school zone at 7, even the busses were doing 50 lol. I was passed by everyone.

Once the tickets come in, Calgarians will bitch. Can't blame Nenshi for this one, he's only one vote and he actually voted against it.
Say it isn't so just for the beyonders who don't want to hear this.

[Sugarphreak]

...

[finboy]

Originally posted by Sugarphreak


Any stats on how many pedestrian incidents occur inside the playground or school zones?

i think this is a BIG point to discuss, saying "people speed in playground zones, SAFETY FOR THE KIDS" is an easy point to harp on, but if there are no stats to back a rise in kids getting hit by cars (or even if there is a negative trend, or any collisions focused in these areas), then this whole thing is a waste of time and money. Its an easy sell to say "its ONLY 30 secons of your time" but there are 1200 school/playground zones, many of which are artificailly enlongated, and we are just adding more excuses to ticket. Unfortunately I think the only way it will REALLY change is if albertans stop bitching about a tax increase, pull all ticket revenue away from local police services, and make up the difference out of our own pockets.

As the system works right now, neither government nor police services have any reason to stop pushing through/enforcing laws without any backing. #30forsunnyside is probably having wet dreams about how close their goal is to reality, and sadly I could see it happening within 5 years.