We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
Samizdata quote of the day Dallas City Hall has idled more than one-fourth of the 62 cameras that monitor busy intersections because many of them are failing to generate enough red-light-running fines to justify their operational costs, according to city documents.
– Dallas Morning News (with thanks to Engadget for picking up on the story)
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
I assume the purpose of this post was to highlight the strange use of one-fourth instead of one-quarter
That’s bizarre, and sounds like sub-system optimization. Isn’t the point decreasing accidents rather than raising revenue, or even better, a total cost-benefit analysis that includes losses to citizens from auto accidents?Given that some recent data shows that the cameras may increase accidents, especially rear-enders, a full cost-benefit analysis might come up with the same answers, but again what strikes me about the story is the confusion of means and ends.
The problem is that cameras such as these are introduced for the ostensible purpose of improving highway safety but as ever there is ‘mission creep’. In the case cited, the bureaucrats involved appear to have lost sight of any purpose other than revenue generation. We then arrive at the bizarre situation where increased infringements are seen as more beneficial than increased safety. So attention is diverted away from real changes to highway layout and design that might improve safety to installing yet more cameras.
My dear Acad,
It is you who are confused about means and ends. The cameras were always a means to generate revenue for the government. This is simply confirmation of that fact.
The Engadget post also notes that the camera service provider charges Dallas city government $3799 per month, per camera.
Engadget comments…That sounds like quite a spendy broadband bill…
As we yanks say, you ain’t just whistlin’ Dixie !
Cameras there to “reduce accidents” not to “raise revenue”.
Acad Ronin – sadly you are mistaken.
Speed cameras increase accidents if anything – as people spend there time looking for the cameras not watching the road.
By the way, in Kettering there was recently a cut off of power to traffic lights.
No surprise that traffic flow was better without the traffic lights.
Have no fear – now the the traffic lights (and the traffic jams) are back.
The question should be “would a private owner do this?” – and the best way to find that out would be to return the main roads (that used to be turnpikes) to private ownership.
Yes Paul is exactly right. Speed cameras cause more not less accidents.
Their purpose and siting in the UK is to generate income not save lives.
I have always advocated paintballing the damn things, and keep on doing it, until like Dallas the cost of maintainence will be prohibitive and the damn things will be decommissioned purely for fiscal reasons.
Slightly OT but only slightly.
An envelope arrived on friday addressed to my wife.
I dont normally open her mail but this one I just had to out of disbelief!
Screaming through the little plastic window was her name and address but it was obvious to even the casual glance what it was.
A UK driving licence.
My wife had picked up a ticket from one of these goddam hi tech cameras and had to send her licence in to be endorsed and pay the fine.She is up to five points now.
And these assholes at the DVLA had sent it back in a window envelope.
They might have well as stuck a label on it say in Steal me and my identity.
I dont know if you all know this, but a UK driving licence contains certain information about you that if you know how to read it can be valuable.
Your date of birth is there for instance. That’s why a traffic cop will ask you for the licence and then ask your date of birth. The wrong answer intensifies the situation.
This Govt wants to introduce ID cards so we can all feel safe in our identities, yet returns important docs in this sloppy fashion.
Heh, and the irony is that the wife, having been caught by digital cameras and processed by computers, has to send her physical licence to Swansea, have it come back in this fashion, and guess what?
The endorsment is written in pen and ink! Not even typed.
They probably charge a heavy flat rate because it’s illegal for them to charge per picture or per ticket.
RAB:
What does “endorsing” the license mean? And why do they need the actual license in hand to do it? Can’t DVLA just keep the points on file?
Sunfish my beauty!
My civilisation is so old
That only physical evidence
and hand written records will do!
Our govt runs on Dickensian
But thinks it is on Broadband.
It understands neither
That’s just a part of the mess we are in!
Very good comment RAB.