Speeders get a second chance
Public whining over speed cameras appears to have, at least momentarily, softened hearts at the Maryland State Highway Administration. The SHA has decided that motorists shouldn't have to pay a $40 fine for driving too fast in construction zones for another two weeks.
While that's great for scofflaws, it would seem to thwart the original purpose of the measure: to make work zones safer for both construction crews and motorists. The law has been in effect since Oct. 1, but so far 900 warnings have been sent to violators.
Under the law, motorists only face a fine when they drive at least 12 mph over the speed limit, a generous standard to be sure.
Last year, 11 people lost their lives in work zone crashes in Maryland. Nationwide, there were 720 fatalities. Speeding and driver inattention are considered to be leading factors involved in these accidents.
SHA officials say the delay was necessary chiefly because the first violations weren't mailed out until Oct. 14, so extending the warning period to a full month would seem to be in the spirit of the original 30-day reprieve. On the other hand, that the contractor has employed only two specially equipped SUVs for the job and has recorded so many violations in so short a period of time suggests the need for enforcement is substantial.
Nothing gets a driver's attention quite like a speeding ticket. One can only hope that a warning has as positive an effect.







Comments
Public whining?
BS Peter.
It is recognizing what speed cameras are-
another LIBERAL ANNAPOLIS TAX!
As the 4th highest taxed state in the country when does the asault on the taxpayer's wallet end?
Posted by: jay | November 3, 2009 1:30 PM
I just don't understand people who believe that speeding in an automobile and endangering others is somehow a constitutional right.
Posted by: Sean Tully | November 3, 2009 2:38 PM
Ironically, work zones are one of the few road situations where speed cameras can be justified. It is all the other places where the counties propose to use them under the guise of safety that are the problem.
For those late to the party:
Speed cameras are entirely about revenue; safety is a smoke screen.
Safety can be much more effectively achieved in most locations by other much less expensive methods (eg traffic calming).
Posted by: MrRational | November 3, 2009 2:54 PM
The police Chief in DC made a comment regarding speed cameras that PROVED the fact they are for revenue and not safety.
She was very upset and wanted legislation to prohibit the new GPS based location program that will warn you of the cameras. She was incensed!
But look at it IF it was safety in mind. Who would care if your GPS would warn you? Would you not slow down? Is that not the point? Why not put BIG HUGE SIGNS warning of a speed camera coming up? That would slow you down wouldn't it? What if there were signs and FAKE cameras? No one would know and they WOULD slow to the speed limit.
But we all know it is revenue not safety as Lanier has admitted.
Posted by: Fed Up | November 3, 2009 3:32 PM
"endangering others is somehow a constitutional right"
Well, actually the constitution has very clear rights enumerated: due process, trial by jury, and facing one's accuser in court. All these are denied so that a kangaroo court can be set up to process the $40 Annapolis tax as quickly as possible.
This is also about lazy journalism that lazily repeats whatever "safety" canards that the speed camera P.R. agency feeds them. Meanwhile, the legislators responsible for this pocket massive donations from the company (ACS) that is going to be making millions off this deal. Hint to Mr. Jensen: not everyone appreciates your denigrating everyone who opposes this scam as a "speeder."
Posted by: AntiLazyJournalist | November 3, 2009 5:59 PM
i give it a month per camera before they are neutralized by some renegade citizens.
Posted by: bill | November 3, 2009 8:26 PM
OK, what''s the definition of a "construction zone" per the legislation? Guess what? I bet the Legislature screwed-up with the bill's wording and the State will have no legal standing in court.
Posted by: mdr | November 4, 2009 5:32 AM
don't speed and there is no problem
(Exactly so. In the future, I'll try to characterize opponents of speed cameras as speeders AND speeder-apologists to satisfy my critics despite the fact it requires these lazy fingers to deal with more key strokes. - PJ)
Posted by: larry g | November 4, 2009 10:45 AM
I've been a speeder all my driving years. Got plenty of tickets and fines to prove it. I'm in favor of speed cameras. When I know there is a camera in a certain place, I don't speed. Simple as that. They do what they are supposed to do...keep people from speeding. Works for me.
Posted by: Blackberry82 | November 4, 2009 11:25 AM
One thing to remember, should you get a speed camera ticket in a work zone, do the following: More than 20 days prior to the trial, request the presence of the WORK ZONE SPEED CONTROL SYSTEM OPERATOR at the trial. Should the WORK ZONE SPEED CONTROL SYSTEM
OPERATOR not show up, case dismissed? Also, the cost of the WORK ZONE SPEED CONTROL SYSTEM OPERATOR will be borne by the contractor, cost taken directly from profits. Eliminate the profit motive, eliminate the program.
(2) IF A PERSON WHO RECEIVED A CITATION UNDER SUBSECTION
(D) OF THIS SECTION DESIRES A WORK ZONE SPEED CONTROL SYSTEM
OPERATOR TO BE PRESENT AND TESTIFY AT TRIAL, THE PERSON SHALL NOTIFY
THE COURT AND THE POLICE DEPARTMENT THAT ISSUED THE CITATION IN
WRITING NO LATER THAN 20 DAYS BEFORE TRIAL.
Posted by: mdr | November 4, 2009 1:09 PM
(Exactly so. In the future, I'll try to characterize opponents of speed cameras as speeders AND speeder-apologists to satisfy my critics despite the fact it requires these lazy fingers to deal with more key strokes. - PJ)
2 points:
a-you can't argue with a machine
b-have you ever met a tax enacted by your tax and spend liberals in Annapolis that you were not against? Peter, as a resident of Baltimore city I am tapped out paying these astronomical taxes imposed both by Murdermore and by the People's Republic of Maryland.
When does it end?
When does this city and state stop spending and become fiscally responsible with our money-our money the citizens of Maryland. Riddle me that Liberal!
Posted by: jay | November 4, 2009 1:09 PM