“I hate these damn bike lanes. Screw your studies. I’m not reading that”
"Cut gas taxes. I see no reason why I should pay to support public transit"
“Fuck speed limits. I’m proud to break the law”
This sense of entitlement is insane.
I love bike lanes and public transit. But yeah. Fuck the snitch cams.
If you want to hand out pointless tickets you should have a cop set a speed trap. As per long standing tradition.
It doesn’t help that the way these cams are rolled out involves just lowering speeds on roads that have had consistent speeds listed for decades , then dinging people who speed. On the internet you can find extremists of every type. Doing 11 over the speed limit is not in any way equivalent to doing 50 over, nor does lowering the speed limit on existing roads always lead to safety increases or accident reductions. It can sometimes , but the internet would have you believe that it always absolutely works, the 10s of millions cities gain in revenue from this doesn’t affect their deployment decisions of cameras at all, and someone doing 11 over the speed limit (often 9 under the former limit on that road) is a terrible human being.
My theory is that driving a vehicle feels the same as waiting in a line/queue, since you’re not doing anything active. So people try and minimize their time “waiting” as much as possible. Even if they’re already traveling at an extreme speed. Basically cars fuck with our brains.
This is actually a real phenomenon and it’s called velocitization.
That’s what podcasts are for.
Honestly makes a lot of sense
The laws of physics define what are safe driving speeds, not the statist laws of man.
Speed cameras are a money grab and should be abolished because they don’t actually result in safer driving and really is just a revenue generator.
Instead non-highway roads should be narrowed or otherwise calmed (and use that extra space for bike/pedestrian paths), this naturally causes almost all drivers to slow down, which increases safety. (source)
Are speed cameras really effective? There are multiple studies that looked at this.
And the answer is yes, they are:
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1963295/
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3861844/
The car crashes that happen in Ontario cost society far more ressources (police, hospitals, nurses, medication, surgeries) that any of the money raised by speeding tickets.
Road narrowing is a great idea. It can be applied to local streets.
But the people who hate speed cameras are going to absolutely FREAK OUT if you suggest road narrowing as a potential solution.
Nah, I’m someone who hates speed cameras and I’d welcome some narrowing or weaving roads. Lowering the speed on a 60km to 40 km and sticking a speed camera on it makes everyone feel like they’re being micromanaged by some new incompetent manager. If they want to lower speed limits, change the design of the road to match.
If you cant reduce your speed from 60 to 40, you are the one that is incompetent.
It costs millions to redesign and refurbish 1 road while it costs thousands to operate the cameras. We should be working towards building safer roads but ill take enforcement in the meantime, lives are literally at risk if we let speeds remain high on our city streets.
Even if every paving company in ontario worked for free year round we could not bring every unsafe, needlessly wide road to a better standard within a year. Nearly every major road in every city and town would need to be redesigned and repaved.
Speeding isn’t an individual phenomenon, it’s a group phenomenon. Groups of drivers peer pressure each other into speeding. Choosing not to speed can result in aggressive drivers tailgating you and hurling obscenities at you.
Designing streets to be physically impossible to speed on (narrow, winding roads) is the ultimate deterrent for speeding. People respond better to feedback the more immediate it is and there’s nothing more immediate (for a driver) than physical obstacles that threaten to hit your car. Getting a speeding ticket in the mail a week after the incident is such a long feedback cycle that the driver is likely to blame the speed cameras, not their own driving.
There is a sign that says the limit of the road. There is a sign that says there is a speed camera in use. If they keep getting tickets thats their fault as a driver. Blame whatever you want but they weren’t reading the road signs and they weren’t following the limit. Who cares if some asshole gets upset the I’m doing the limit. I stay in the right lane and they can pass me if they want.
If one guy ignores the law it’s his fault. If everybody ignores the law then it’s the law’s fault. If everyone ignores a speed limit sign then the sign is not working. Simple as that!
You should care if some asshole road rages at you and inflicts violence on you, the way a driver did to my dad when he was following a speed limit on a road people routinely speed on (which has seen extensive modifications over many years to try to combat speeding). It’s terrifying and extremely dangerous.
Can’t?
In my city pedestrians are being hit at roundabouts, not on straight 4 lane roads with great visibility on both sides.
A pedestrian was killed about 1 month before a camera was put in place on a straight 4 lane road with good visibility on both sides in my city.
It sucks, and without knowing the circumstances I’d at least partially blame the driver. Someone driving 60km and paying attention should never hit a pedestrian. People should be driving to suit the conditions of the road, and if a person is hanging out near the side of the road cars should reduce their speed. But unfortunately common sense is lacking in some individuals, and I have no good solution for that. At least in your case they implemented the change as a reaction to a real problem.
re: first study
Results. The relative risk (RR) of a road collision occurring on the beltway after (vs before) installation of speed cameras was 0.73 (95% confidence interval [CI]=0.63, 0.85). This protective effect was greater during weekend periods. No differences were observed for arterial roads (RR=0.99; 95% CI=0.90, 1.10). Attributable fraction estimates for the 2 years of the study intervention showed 364 collisions prevented, 507 fewer people injured, and 789 fewer vehicles involved in collisions.
I looked it up, it looks like the Beltway is functionally equivalent to a US interstate. This makes some sense, as speeds on interstates are going to be higher than on arterials (and the arterials in Spain probably aren’t as bad as our stroads in the US).
Maybe we can have both?
Identify problem areas, put up a camera, and use the ticket revenue to help pay for a better designed road there, so that when it’s rebuilt it’s the features of the road dictate the speed limit, and the sign and camera can be removed.
Thank you. You’re exactly right.
OTOH, maybe speed cameras as a money grab is a good thing. We have all sorts of sin taxes - alcohol, tobacco, gambling, etc. Why not a sin tax on speeding?
Automated speeding cams only end up extracting money from working people and worsening wealth inequality.
You can not force people to do daily commutes and expect them to remain stable.
As someone who had their life ruined by a speeding driver who ignored a red light, fuck anyone who speeds.
Fuck people that run reds. As a speeder, even I can agree with you on that. I’m so sorry for what happened to you, no one deserves to be put through that.
The thing with speeding is that you will end up running more reds and yellows just due to the stopping distance. Not every light has the same yellow period. The grading, speed and design of the road factor in. If you are doing 60 in a 40 zone, there is a very good chance you wont be able to stop in time for the yellow.
This is just 1 of the increased risks speeding brings to our roadways.
I have NEVER gone through a red, and yet I routinely substantially speed. There’s no excuse for running reds. If your reaction time is too shitty to stop quick enough, drive slower. But some of us have very fast reaction times indeed.
Have you ever decided you were going too fast to stop for a yellow while speeding?
Running a red ≠ going through a yellow. The latter is legal – that’s the whole point of a yellow, to give warning for folks who are a bit too late to stop.
Being a bit too late to stop is different from speeding and being unable to stop. The yellow is there to account for heavier vehicles, hazardous road conditons, and a little bit of driver distraction. Its all still timed around the limit of the road. If people are routinely speeding, they are pushing the safety margin of that yellow to its limit.
I’m not sure if it’s the same in other parts of the world but in the US the first of the pair of arrows before an intersection are a good indicator of if you can pass through before the light turns red. There are sometimes intersections that don’t have arrows or where they’re not distanced for that, but the majority are like this, I’ve seen.
But also more generally, as long as you are going a consistent speed and the light is actually yellow at all when you last see it it should be safe. Speeding up to make it through is a disaster waiting to happen.
I find that speeders often assume that it is only their driving skill that should define their speed. They don’t acknowledge that they will be driving in traffic or what the roads sight lines might be. They are also often delusional about how good a driver they are. There are many times when following a speeder that has woven through traffic that you can visually see all the cars that swerved or hit the brakes so that the “excellent driver” could get through unscathed.
I have to carpool with my boss on occassion who thinks he is one of the best drivers on the road while everyone else is shit and I am terrified everytime he drives anywhere. It’s insane how unpredictable he is on the road. He even got pulled over going 115 in a construction zone (60 limit) and the cop SHOULD have had his vehicle impounded but decided to give him a warning and not even the double fine for construction zone, just a regular speeding ticket. If only that cop knew how many tickets he gets every year. Warnings and being nice does not teach him anything.
I am not from Ontario but I am guessing it’s not too different here, I am from Quebec and people here have this feeling of rushing things the moment they touch the wheel like they are always in a hurry, and I think it’s probably because of the culture of always needing to do things and want things fast so everyone loses patience and don’t wanna lose any time. I seen people even when not driving putting themselves at risk just to save a few seconds. And if you drive at the speed limit people hate you because they think you’re going too slow.
The number of people who use terms like idiot, loser, beta etc for people who obey the limit is astounding. Ive heard more speeders say that limit followers should have their lisences removed than vice versa.
I’m actually sympathetic to these folks, because there’s a bunch of studies that show that people drive the speed that feels safe. You can’t engineer a road to be safe for 15 mph over the posted speed limit and be shook when folks do the speed that feels safe (the US does this ALL THE TIME). That kind of engineering is all but guaranteeing that an enforcement control is going to be a money printer.
I’ve encountered a few roads in my time driving where the speed limit doesn’t match actual driving conditions at all.
I think by now we should have the technology to do statistical analyses on actual road data (currently observed speed vs. speed limit speed) to more accurately assign speed limits that are safe enough that enough people actually follow them.
@Gork @three_trains_in_a_trenchcoat
My understanding is, when they design a road they do calculate the “engineering speed limit”, the safe speed given road geometry and surface and visibility, etc., but then they mostly ignore it and assign an arbitrary limit from the standard list for that type of roadway.
We botched raising the limit for 400-series. We should have gone to 120km/h with actual enforcement, but what we did was 110 and a wink, and now 1 in 3 drivers do 130km/h.
I’m actually sympathetic to these folks, because there’s a bunch of studies that show that people drive the speed that feels safe.
Problem: Driving faster doesn’t make anyone safer, so that’s not true. Studies usually show that people drive at what “feels comfortable” for the design of the road, which is vastly different from what’s safe.
I’ve been driving for decades and never felt compelled to drive at excess speeds of what’s posted. I’ve certainly never had the urge to go 90km/h in a 40km/h or 100km/h in a 60km/h zone.
If people are unfit to drive at the posted speed limits, they should consider taking other forms of transportation.
What you’re describing is what I meant. If you’re driving at a speed that feels uncomfortable, it’s likely because it feels unsafe. I’m glad you’re a human cruise control, because I’m not, I often do vibes based speed control and I’d be very vulnerable to speed traps. I know I’m a bad driver, and I’d much rather take the bus, train, or bike lane if it was realistic to do so; I honestly hate driving.
The studies really show that narrow roads make drivers slow down, while wider roads have them increasing their speed.
Make roads like 3 inches wide.
The studies really show that narrow roads make drivers slow down, while wider roads have them increasing their speed.
Because they are uncomfortable or comfortable depending on the road design, not because they want to drive safer. They don’t want to hit a plastic bollard, but have no problem driving millimetres away from cyclists, for example. 😱
That’s exactly the point… If they drive safer because they don’t want to scratch the paint on their car or because the feel some kind of communion with others, what difference does it make? We often chalk up problems to “personal responsibility” when we should be focusing waaaay more on systems and the built environment.
People use things the way they’re implicitly built to be used.
If they drive safer because they don’t want to scratch the paint on their car or because the feel some kind of communion with others, what difference does it make?
Maybe I didn’t get my point across clearly. People may be worried about the paint on their cars, but that doesn’t mean they are worried about the safety of others.
Of course, driving slower is still driving slower, to the benefit might still be there.
However…
If someone chooses to only drive “safely” because their car would get scratched, rather than drive safely because it could kill a child, that person should be taken off the road. It’s unbelievable that drivers shouldn’t be expected to drive with the safety of other human beings (and animals) in mind.
Instead of hoping people will feel a particular way, would it not be easier to get people to drive safer using measues that directly cause them to drive more safely, irrespective of their feelings in the moment?
It may be a matter of opinion, but if a driver doesn’t have the ability to drive safely (i.e. defensively, with concern for others, etc.) without the use of the guardrails (no pun intended), then they really shouldn’t be driving.
Driving is a skill. If it requires “hacks” or mind games, then we’re doing something terribly wrong.
Some countries that have implemented safe street design also have drivers who know their place on the road.
Safe street design won’t have the same effect in countries where drivers feel entitled and for which their behaviour has no consequences.
For example, we have stop signs and red lights. Everybody who drives should know what they mean.
But we have the majority of drivers rolling through stop signs, and quite a few ignoring red lights. You can’t really design this stupidity out. Roundabouts are not an answer when the attitude of entitlement still exists. We are just shifting the bad behaviours to another part of the road.
And in particular Ontario, where our government would rather build wider roads with fewer safety implements, makes this challenge even more difficult. Drivers need to change their behaviour, and need to, well before we make the roads “safe by design”.
61 in a 50 is 22% over.
61 is almost 49% more kinetic energy than 50.
Their twitter is full of other such wisdumb
What a fuckin’ traitor.
I’m only like 99.9% against Trump wanting to revoke citizenships. But the there’s guys like this and I gotta think “if he’s not going to fuck off himself…”
Are we sure that twitter account isn’t a bot?
Not sure at all. These types of accounts and comments were popping up everywhere at the end of 2024/start of 2025. Suddenly there were lots of pro-51st state “Canadians” all over the internet.
I’m not even sure they aren’t just trolling. It kinda feels like rage bait. Or maybe it’s a meme for those who get the joke, and propaganda for those who don’t.
Wants our government to concede to trump then complains that they nearly need to be threatened to do their job. Pretty sure give up Canadian sovereignty is not listed as the role of our politicians.
Hitting someone at 60km/h vs 50km/h could mean the difference between whether they survive or not. This person should not be driving.
Maybe we should focus on stopping them being on the road to begin with?
I thought that people in Alberta drove bad, and then I had to go to Toronto for work for a week… Kind of changed my perspective on what bad driving is.
But holy shit, the pizza there is sooooo much better.
My impression is that there has been an unspoken compromise between safety advocates and ordinary drivers, with the safety advocates getting to set low speed limits and the drivers getting to ignore those speed limits. Speed cameras are putting an end to that compromise. I wonder if that will generate the political will necessary to increase speed limits - there are, after all, a lot more speeders than safety advocates.
Speed cameras are often implemented in areas where heavy pedestrian traffic exists or a history of car crashes has happened. The goal of the cameras is to reduce speed to prevent crashes and reduces injury and death. The solution is not to raise speed limits just because drivers feel entitled to not follow the limit.
Imagine if we did this for other laws. Well people are still murdering each other even though its illegal so we might as well make murder legal. This may seem like an extreme example but speed is one of the biggest factors in how deadly a crash is, so just increasing the speed limit is basically saying we are okay with more people dying so long as they think traffic is moving faster.
Making something legal because a lot of people are doing it anyway does happen. Consider, for example, the decriminalization of marijuana. I wonder if, in fact, it’s actually the most common mechanism by which something that was once illegal becomes legal. I don’t hear a lot about criminal laws that were strictly enforced being repealed.
The legalization of marijuana came after there was evidence for decades it was mostly harmless. We have had evidence for decades that speed makes things more dangerous on city streets. There are better ways to get you there faster than jeapordizing public safety.
I think you’re right. I wonder where cops fit in that relationship. In Ontario, cops rarely seem to ticket speeding. Is that because of political pressure? Because the police brass don’t value speed limits?
I’m an Ontarian driver. I hate speed traps, and I will purposely go out of my way to avoid them, or otherwise figure out exactly where the device is so that I can slow down for it.
I’m sorry, but for all the folks that want us to drive 40 everywhere in “community safety zones”… you’re living in dreamland. We all have places to be.
Have barriers and well-designed crossings. Fast cars can’t hurt pedestrians if they aren’t on the road to begin with.
we all have places to be
I’d rather be alive instead of being hit by some shit driver like you trying to win a few seconds
People grossly overestimate the time they think they win by going a bit faster.
You probably would’ve saved more time not posting here
Simple. It’s not a few seconds. I can save 20 minutes by doing 15 over, during the day, going the speed limit get caught at every red light. During late night, with no traffic going 15-20 over, I get all the greens. Literally saving me 20min. It’s no estimate. There’s a fucking clock on the dash.
The time saved is due to the green lights and less congestion. The time saved due to the speeding is miniscule in comparison.
Does that mean you want to time lights to be green if you go the proper speed, then? As in, none of this “traffic calming” bullshit.
No i was pointing out that speeding isn’t the main factor speeding them up. Providing alternatives to driving is a better solution to congestion and traffic. Each lane of a road has a shockingly low capacity when compared to other ways of getting around.
The day train travel, or any form of transit, becomes genuinely pleasant in Ontario, I will gladly use it quite often. I’d like to know why it is that in several European countries, seats are rotatable so you don’t have to awkwardly face strangers, but we don’t have that. Or why our trains are painfully slow by comparison.
20 minutes vs a human life. Fucking pathetic to even consider…
There is, sadly, a tradeoff between safety and efficiency. If we truly valued safety above everything, we’d ban cars altogether and return to the 1800s. But we have accepted as a society that a small number of accidents is worth the benefit of rapid transportation.
There are other places that still use cars and have way safer roads than us. We are accepting half assed safety because thats been the status quo in north america for decades.
Fair enough. We could learn quite a bit from Germany, for example.
I measured, actually. On average, I save 20% on my trip length, which is quite significant for someone who drives a lot.
“I have places to be so fuck the safety of children and families”
Maybe we should endeavor to, idk, not have children and families out on the street in non-designated crossings? Just a wild thought. XD
Children and pedestrians are getting hit in crossings. The reduced speed limit is both to give more time for drivers to notice crossing pedestrains and also to reduce the severity of injury in the case of a collison.
Maybe we should endeavor to idk not have massive metal boxes exceeding speed limits next to where children are walking to school.
Crossings can be easily improved to reduce this by adding buttons and flashing lights, and having a delay on the walk sign so cars have plenty of time to stop before anyone goes onto the road. These are not hard problems to solve.
“Massive metal boxes” – ah, so you’re one of those car-hater types. Gotcha.
i’ve had far more close calls in the crosswalk than i’ve had jaywalking. the average driver is much much worse at driving than you all like to think you are.
slow down you fucking maniac.
