New, stealthier photo radar trucks?

[MalibuStacy]

Honestly any time I see a blank f 150 or explorer I slow down till I know

[vengie]

Even worse are the new Chevrolet Cargo vans with the ladders on the roof!

Saw it ripping down Deerfoot, followed by two SWAT F350's.

[Mitsu3000gt]

They don't need the roof flashes to stand out, they always park in the same spots and it's always a late model Ford Explorer or F-150. They don't even have more than 2 or 3 colors of vehicles. Anyone paying attention will see them from a mile away, flashes on the roof or not. Most of the time they don't even try to hide and are out in the open like on Memorial, 17th ave West, and Glenmore, so unless you're sleeping you won't get nailed. They are also often parked unsafely, or with their hazards on, which makes them even more obvious.

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

How long does it take for a ticket to get mailed out? A ghost F150 likely snapped a shot of me on Crowchild last night going about 10km over.

If they flash it doesn't automatically mean you got a ticket, and could be from someone around you. Also most are calibrated at 11km/h so if you were really doing 10 over you may not get a ticket. Takes around 2 weeks for it to come in the mail.

[suntan]

On high speed roadways just drive beside someone. The cameras can't zoom into just one lane and be fast enough to take a clear picture.

[ExtraSlow]

The stationary red light cameras have no issue with multiple vehicles in the picture. No idea of the capabilities of the mobile cameras.

[FraserB]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The stationary red light cameras have no issue with multiple vehicles in the picture. No idea of the capabilities of the mobile cameras.

Stationary intersection cameras use induction loops in the road and can segregate lanes. The mobile units can’t and a ticket with multiple vehicles in it would get tossed when they review them prior to sending them out

[JustinL]

I miss the days of easy to spot photo radar vehicles. In Edmonton they use all kinds of vehicles and park them wherever they think they can get the most speeders. They'll tuck behind buildings, sit on overpasses and shoot down, park in a line-up of parked cars. The vehicles are just about anything up here from unmarked red prius, to city trucks. We've accepted that it's not about safety, but collecting maximum revenue. If they wanted people to slow down, the enforcement would be visible.

[zieg]

Drove by the f150 on deerfoot this morning. Definitely more stealthy but I still saw him a mile away.

I think we have it easy compared to Vancouver. When I lived there, they had made ghost cars out of 15 year old minivans etc. Literally anything on the road could be an undercover.

[lilmira]

The ultimate ghost car to write ticket will be a Corolla, Rav4, CRV... not necessarily a Toyota or Honda, you know the type. Now drive it down any main road on the left lane doing the speed limit or below, imagine the chaos you can witness. What budget problem? It will be raining cash.

[suntan]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Stationary intersection cameras use induction loops in the road and can segregate lanes. The mobile units can’t and a ticket with multiple vehicles in it would get tossed when they review them prior to sending them out

Induction loops? Now they're cooking me in my own car??!?

[Shlade]

.

[JRSC00LUDE]

One Police service finally had to admit they've just been all about the revenue. And yet every other City still pretends it's not a thing. Fuck photo radar and every other revenue driven fishing expedition these crooks do.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/montre...lice-1.3768936

The police directors, in order to get bonuses, the cops under them had to reach a certain number of tickets," Nathalie Goulet, the city councillor responsible for public security, said in a recent interview. "The bonuses used to be as high as eight per cent of a director's annual salary.

Francoeur claimed that in order to fulfil their monthly quotas, police were told to ignore all but the most serious calls on some days, and instead focus on handing out fines.

Show me a City that isn't the same, it's all about the money. It's almost like when they say "we don't have a quota system", just like Montreal did forever, we're supposed to believe the lying pricks.

[nismodrifter]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I miss the days of easy to spot photo radar vehicles. In Edmonton they use all kinds of vehicles and park them wherever they think they can get the most speeders. They'll tuck behind buildings, sit on overpasses and shoot down, park in a line-up of parked cars. The vehicles are just about anything up here from unmarked red prius, to city trucks. We've accepted that it's not about safety, but collecting maximum revenue. If they wanted people to slow down, the enforcement would be visible.

Edmonton definitely has it way worse than Calgary. I lived there for just 2 years and was amazed with the SUPER sneaky tactics used. With so many side streets to park on its a gold mine up there.

Thankful that YVR does not have photo radar.

[Mitsu3000gt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

We've accepted that it's not about safety, but collecting maximum revenue. If they wanted people to slow down, the enforcement would be visible.

This has always been my main issue with them. Their very existence is an admission that speeding is viewed by the city as no big deal, and generally not unsafe. If it was unsafe, the offender would not be allowed to continue on their merry way, even if it's 100km/h through a school zone - the "operator" who I don't believe is even a cop (I've seen them reading novels) doesn't give a shit. If it was viewed as unsafe, the offender would always be pulled over, their speeding stopped, and that interaction with an officer as well as the immediate ticket/fine is a far greater deterrent than a cheap no-demerit ticket 2 weeks later in the mail which is no deterrent at all (which obviously is done that way to maximize revenue). Annoys me, but at least in Calgary there is no reason anyone should ever get one more than once, since they use the same super obvious vehicles and the same (often unsafe) locations every single time.

[Swank]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If they wanted people to slow down, the enforcement would be visible.

But that would only slow people down where it was visible. Cash grab aside, the point is for people to never know which car on the side of the road will bust them, and parked cars are everywhere, so don't speed anywhere.

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If it was viewed as unsafe, the offender would always be pulled over, their speeding stopped, and that interaction with an officer as well as the immediate ticket/fine is a far greater deterrent than a cheap no-demerit ticket 2 weeks later in the mail which is no deterrent at all.

The only way to have enough resources pulling offenders over to make a difference would be to hire 10x? more officers (plus vehicles and equipment) and jack up our taxes to pay for it. No way I wanna pay for other people's recklessness. I know people who have been pulled over, photo radar'd, lost license due to demerits and still speed, and I know many who have received 1-2 photo tickets and gave up speeding for good (me included). Even if 100% of the people pulled over stopped speeding for good and only 25% of people receiving photo radar tix stopped for good, photo radar still stops way more people. Cash grab or not, it's not going away, it's just another idiot tax like the lottery; you wanna gamble then you're gonna pay.

[Mitsu3000gt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

But that would only slow people down where it was visible. Cash grab aside, the point is for people to never know which car on the side of the road will bust them, and parked cars are everywhere, so don't speed anywhere.


The only way to have enough resources pulling offenders over to make a difference would be to hire 10x? more officers (plus vehicles and equipment) and jack up our taxes to pay for it. No way I wanna pay for other people's recklessness. I know people who have been pulled over, photo radar'd, lost license due to demerits and still speed, and I know many who have received 1-2 photo tickets and gave up speeding for good (me included). Even if 100% of the people pulled over stopped speeding for good and only 25% of people receiving photo radar tix stopped for good, photo radar still stops way more people. Cash grab or not, it's not going away, it's just another idiot tax like the lottery; you wanna gamble then you're gonna pay.

They only have a small handful of photo radar trucks out at any given time - it's not like they have hundreds out there. Flipping those over to manned vehicles would be a minor change staff-wise, and it would have a much greater effect on slowing people down (which is not their goal). They would get the exact same enforcement with minimal manpower increase - the problem is revenue would go down, so they would never even consider it.

It's so easy to create revenue generators under the guise of "public safety" that nothing will ever change.

[Swank]

But how many photo radar tix can you snap in the time it takes to pull one person over and give them one? Gotta be at least 15-20.

[JRSC00LUDE]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

But how many photo radar tix can you snap in the time it takes to pull one person over and give them one? Gotta be at least 15-20.

Thank you for proving the point it's purely about revenue collection, not "safety".

[Mitsu3000gt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

But how many photo radar tix can you snap in the time it takes to pull one person over and give them one? Gotta be at least 15-20.

Yes you are exactly right, but that just proves without a doubt that it has nothing at all to do with safety. The city argues it's for safety. They are actively allowing speeders to continue offended for the sole purpose of maximizing ticket revenue. They cannot do this and at the same time claim the enforcement is for safety, but it's a moot point anyway because nothing will ever change there.

[Swank]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Thank you for proving the point it's purely about revenue collection, not "safety".

I don't think so. Even if 100% of the people pulled over stopped speeding for good and only 25% of people receiving photo radar tix stopped for good, photo radar still stops way more people from speeding. Doesn't stopping people from speeding have something to do with safety?