It’s insane the lengths that some people will go to save a few seconds on their commute, while also endangering others.

  • mondoman712@lemmy.mlOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    They wouldn’t make money if people managed to, you know, just follow the speed limit. If you can’t follow a basic rule of the road you shouldn’t be driving.

    • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      We live in material reality, not a fantasy in your head. Justifying bullshit that specifically fucks over the poor while not really affecting the rich (because fines are just fees you pay to break the law when you’re rich enough for them to be minor inconveniences) with what amounts to Cartman screaming RESPECT MAH AUTHORITAH is bullshit. You want people to actually slow down? Redesign the road.

      This praxis does two things, it prevents the poor being fucked over if these are just there to make council money, or it causes them to give up on the camera and properly redesign the road when it’s actually about real safety concerns.

      Given this has happened before and they only replaced the camera I’m siding with “it’s for council income not actual safety”. If they do it again I feel doubley vindicated in that opinion. If it’s actually about real safety concerns they’ll give up on the camera and add in pedestrian refuge islands to slow traffic instead. Love these badboys

      • mondoman712@lemmy.mlOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        The local community campaigned to get these speed cameras because people were speeding. Redesigning the road would be great, if the council had money to, but I doubt they do.

        Poor people aren’t getting screwed over by this because poor people can’t afford to drive, they’re the ones that have to deal with the unsafe driving of the middle class dada on their German coupes that can’t bare to drive at less that 50mph.

        • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          10 months ago

          It literally says in this article that one of the cameras mentioned has clocked 17,000 people. Of course they have money to do it. Croydon council responded to FOI request stating it costs £2.5-3.5k to install traffic islands. The cost of a speed camera installation is £85,000 according to Bedford Council, with a £5000 annual upkeep cost.

          The cost of physical redesign traffic calming measures is significantly cheaper to install than the cameras, whose cost is justified by councils because of the income they bring in thereafter.

          The insistence on replacing it instead of doing something else is being justified internally because even with these attacks they consider it to be making more than it’s costing them.

          Poor people aren’t getting screwed over by this because poor people can’t afford to drive,

          Mate fuck right off. This statement just screams that you’ve never actually done any organising or volunteering with the poor in the UK. Please volunteer at a food bank for once in your fucking life and learn what kinds of people the 3million people in this country attending them are like. It will surprise you, expand your view of society a bit, and you’ll be doing an actually-good useful thing.

          • 7bicycles [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            10 months ago

            Croydon council responded to FOI request stating it costs £2.5-£3.5k to install traffic islands. The cost of a speed camera installation on the other hand is £85,000 according to Bedford Council, with a £5000 annual upkeep cost.

            Croydon cites average cost for roughly such an action at 2,5k - 3,5k in a denial of the FOI request which means there’s pretty much no way to know how much it actually costs depending on what they calculate the average on and if you have any idea about the cost of public works that number should strike you as very, very oddly low.

            Wiltshire government here cites about 45.000k for a traffic island narrowing a road to one lane, all in all.

            The source you cite for the cameras, however, puts those costs for 2 cameras, so 42,500 a pop / 2500 upkeep annual, albeit with returns via fines obviously.

          • mondoman712@lemmy.mlOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            10 months ago

            The poorest people own the fewest cars, and are the most affected by things like air pollution, and if they do have to own cars they’re the ones most at hurt by car dependency (which is perpetuated by road violence caused by things like speeding).

            And please don’t pretend like you know my life.

            • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              10 months ago

              If you say utterly stupid ass things like poor people don’t own cars I will absolutely assume you don’t interact with the people struggling to survive in this country in any capacity. It’s a bloody stupid thing to say mate.

              I mean what I said, go and volunteer and see for yourself.

              • mondoman712@lemmy.mlOP
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                10 months ago

                I’m sorry I didn’t think I needed to spell it out that much to you. Obviously I don’t think all poor people don’t drive. But the poorest don’t, and statistically poorer people drive a lot less and are more impacted by things like this.

                • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  Ok so you finally agree that some poor people suffer because of this and that there is an alternative that exists where no poor people suffer at all?

                  Doing the alternative is good and taking action that leads to the alternative is good.

                  • mondoman712@lemmy.mlOP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    10 months ago

                    I don’t agree that speeding is ok if poor people do it, and I don’t think the removal of the speed cameras is a step to the better alternative, unless it’s part of removing cars from the road in question entirely.

      • 7bicycles [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        You want people to actually slow down? Redesign the road.

        I’ve posed this question elsewhere in this thread and: what until then? Like what do you do until a good, what, 50 - 90% of road depending on criteria, is redesigned?

        • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          The process and length of time it takes for either option are practically the same. It’s irrelevant. Not to mention a traffic island costs like £3k while a camera costs £85k (guess why they pick the camera despite the price).

          • 7bicycles [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            10 months ago

            The process and length of time it takes for either option are practically the same.

            Sure, but you’re arguing for like instant speed camera abolishment or destruction here, aye?

            Not to mention a traffic island costs like £3k while a camera costs £85k (guess why they pick the camera despite the price).

            Dunno if you got to that one already but I’ve did a reply pointing out where you’re a bit off there

            • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              Sure, but you’re arguing for like instant speed camera abolishment or destruction here, aye?

              As a means of discouraging their construction in the first place and the harm they do to the poor I am defending the person who did this.

              I am not advocating anyone do anything illegal. illegal-to-say

              • 7bicycles [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                10 months ago

                You can just say yes, you don’t have to couch this shit in a good WKUK skit.

                Do they do harm to the poor that are on bicycles, or walking, then?

                • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  10 months ago

                  Having been to court twice for online related stuff I will absolutely couch this shit.

                  I do not see how that question is doing anything but attempting some sort of gotcha or accusation that these people deserve to be fucked over instead of have real designs that don’t result in their lives being made harder. It seems like spite to me.

                  • 7bicycles [he/him]@hexbear.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    10 months ago

                    Having been to court twice for online related stuff I will absolutely couch this shit.

                    Fair, I meant it more on “don’t do it on my accord”

                    I do not see how that question is doing anything but attempting some sort of gotcha or accusation that these people

                    Your these people just seems to have some very oddly drawn lines is the heart of it. It does include poor drivers, to whom speed cameras are a problem and not that much of a solution, it does not seem to include poor people not in a car, who profit from this. My FALGSOC doesn’t have speed cameras in it - who’s would - but it’s a long way from here to there.

                    deserve to be fucked over instead of have real designs that don’t result in their lives being made harder. It seems like spite to me.

                    This is running on the assumption that I think people deserve to be fucked over for speeding, and that’s the main motivation. Sure, some of them, but that’s not the kind of distinction a speed cam could make on account of how it works. I’d very much be open to them not issuing fines but other punishments - as appropiate - to not make them so classist. Loss of driving license, if you really, really fuck up in a sports car that gets impounded or such, but I’ll concede, even that is far out from today, but just to point it out,

                    My point here is that for every one it fucks over, it helps other people not being fucked over, because it does do something against speeding. My line of reasoning for speed cams is not that it fucks people over, it’s that it helps people. You wanna focus on the first part, I’m trying to get you to see the issue is more complex than that, at least if you include people outside of cars in your consideration. They’re not a good solution, by any means, again, I assume our optimal way of solving it is quite similar. For the meantime though, the fuck else do you do? Just abandon all traffic enforcement until all the roads get fixed? So what, 20 years of being vulnerable road users being even more endangered than now?