If you speed you are driving irresponsibly and dangerously. If you don't want a ticket, don't speed. All of the arguments against cameras are simply arguments for the right to break the law and to put other people in danger.

Why not speed bumps instead Michael?
Actually forces people to slow without the assault on the wallet.
Wouldn't that be more effective in saving lives?
I would be interested in your liberal opinion there sir.
Thank you.

"More than 86% of Baltimore’s land area is within ½ mile of a school" So, So, basically, that means Baltimore has an excuse to put speed cameras on 86 percent of Baltimore streets. Will ANY of the streets in question have their speed limits suddenly dropped ten MPH for a block for a "school zone," with a camera in the middle of said block? Will tickets be issued late at night or at during weekends for a school zone? Will speed cameras operate in work zones even when no one is working?

I'll offer an opinion on behalf of Michael. Speed bumps work great when the goal is limiting speeds to walking speed. However, when the goal is to keep traffic moving at safe speeds albeit faster than walking, speed bumps just won't do.

Also, the assault on the wallet is a good thing. It's how we the body politic punish members of society who break our rules. The other alternative is imprisonment... which probably isn't appropriate for most cases of speeding.

I'm all for being cognizant of the speed limit, but let's face it, the installation of the speed cameras is merely a gimmick to give the city and state mo money.

This is just another way of Maryland to rake in more revenue at the expense of business owners. I own a small car rental company and have already received warnings on cars that my customers have rented. Who has to make sure the fine is paid? The small business owner of course. The state is too lazy to have to collect the fine from the customers. No, they would rather flag the car owners registration and hold that to make sure the fine is paid. Just another Maryland small business rip off.

Thank God I am one of the smart ones and move out from tha low class city, Oh by the way, what is Sheila's under the table cut?

1,462 warnings tell me that the posted speed limit of 30 mph on 33rd St is too low. That's a divided road with a median and 2 lanes in each direction.

86% of the city of Baltimore being within a school zone and the other 14% can be within a work zone if a couple of constructions cones are slapped down. They can put those cameras anywhere but made it sound like it was only in select areas to "protect the children".

@Rental Car Company

When your customers rent your cars don't they give you a credit card? If they got a parking ticket, wouldn't you just charge them for it? Seems like that would work here. I known I've gotten speeding tickets in the mail when I rented from one of the big car companies overseas including a big administrative fee to cover the company's collection costs.

@Ed

The 30mph speed limit is entirely appropriate as the street has short blocks with homes along both sides and on street parking. Many people walk on the sidewalk and cross 33rd street at unmarked intersections. Remember, the street is not just for cars, but buses, pedestrians and bicycle riders too.

Allowing road users to dictate the safe speed on a road makes sense in certain situations like highways where there aren't competing users of the road. However, on the city streets, that just doesn't work.

While I don't mind the 12 mph tolerance, I think implementing many more red light cameras would serve the City better. Going through red lights is more hazardous than than the typical speeding, IMO. Red light cameras also reduce speeding simply by virtue that motorist will not accelerate to go through the light. Many in Baltimore drive fast simply because they want to hit "the wave".

Nate
TRAC

The SHA put up signs to tell motorists about the speed cameras at work zones because: " our goal isn't to 'catch' speeders, but to give citizens an opportunity to change dangerous driving behaviors" ..., said state Highway Administrator Neil J. Pedersen" (Getting There a few days ago)

Did the city put up signs?

Thanks Cullen.
Perhaps I am too jaded, but it seems to be an issue that is revunue driven first and foremost.

It seems to me that the problem here is not with speed cameras themselves, but with ridiculously low speed limits. I've been guilty of violating a speed limit many times, but only once since I've turned 18 (I was reckless in my youth) do I think I was actually driving at an unsafe speed on a road and deserved punishment. Cameras that are placed on roads with ridiculously low limits do nothing but piss off drivers, and they are the reason that cameras in general have so little popular support. We need to rethink our speed limits rather than rally against what, in theory, is a great enforcement tool.

The warnings were given out to people travelling over 42 miles per hour. The fatality rate for a pedestrian hit by a car at 20 mph is 5 percent. The fatality rate rises to 80 percent when vehicle speed is increased to 40 mph.

While the difference in speed may shorten a driver's trip by a couple of minutes, the increase in hazard is dramatic. City streets travel through neighborhoods with children, elderly, and other pedestrians and travel at speeds over 30 mph pose dramatically higher risks.

For more information check out:
http://www.ite.org/library/IntersectionSafety/Pedestrians.pdf

There's no question that many streets need better traffic calming. When you build a street that looks like a freeway people will drive accordingly. That doesn't make it right, and people will (and should) get tickets for it.

Most speed cameras don't give tickets for 1mph over the speed limit. They give it for some amount over that which the city doesn't try to tell people. Why? Because if they advertised 25mph zone, tickets at 35 you'd have people complaining that they got tickets for going 34 and that the cameras are wrong. The key is to stop speeding. If you speed, don't. It's not hard.

Streets are public land and in places where many people live they should be safe for all users. In Germany, many cities are building streets without sidewalks in residential areas so kids can play in the streets and cars can drive through but they have to go expecting children to be in the street. If they hit a child they are at fault.

Great article, by the way. When you drive in a ton of metal/plastic you have an obligation to be responsible.

Baltimore City has been shamelessly creating new school zones which had never previously existed just so that they can install speed cameras. These sites were never marked as school zones previously and in some cases the road they are on does not pass directly by any school. In fact at least one of the cameras went up before the school zones signs according to a report on ABC2 news. Baltimore city never even TRIED other sorts of traffic calming in these alleged school zones, including the bare minimum step to protect children of putting up a sign that says "SCHOOL", at least not until there was a profit motive to do so.

Yes Dresser, the law says the cameras must go "in School Zones" not "within a 1/2 mile radius of a school" and the definition of a school zone is that it must be MARKED AS SUCH. That means Baltimore City is bending or breaking the law. And I haven't even started getting into the preferential treatment ACS has gotten in the no bid contracts it has been winning all over the state. When are you going to learn that corruption and profiteering is inevitable with these devices?

Something Baltimore City does not want to talk about is that Maryland law requires speed cameras to be 'within a school zone', not 'within 1/2 mile of a school'. All roads within 1/2 mile of a school are not school zones, state law requires them to be approved and marked as such with standardized signs. Placing them in a location which is not a school zone would be illegal. In fact Baltimore City has been creating new school zones where none were previously existed. They have conceded in writing that some of their speed camera sites were not previously school zones, and ABCNews 2 recently had a story showing a speed camera going up before any school zone signs.

Why did Baltimore City not consider these sites to be important enough to try other sorts of traffic calming or to take the bare minimum step of installing signs that say 'SCHOOL' in order to protect children's safety until there was a revenue motive for doing so?

Here is ABCNews2's story about the new school zones Baltimore City is creating where none previously existed:
http://www.abc2news.com/news/local/story/Baltimore-Expanding-School-Zones-for-Speed-Cameras/GR1yE5T6YEekg4h5THv-lg.cspx

The streets around my house all have 25 or 30 mph limits, and homes with small children. At least two cars a year run off the roads and into fences, lawns or trees because drivers are speeding or using cell phones. I wish there were speed cameras on all two lane through streets. Only certain fines for speeding, 24 hours a day, will stop the street maniacs.

Not that I want to be morbid or anything, but exactly how many schoolkids have been mowed down in those areas in say, the past ten years?

I have to agree with Patrick McMahon... why is this such an issue? Pedestrians are almost guaranteed to die at if struck by a vehicle moving at a speed over 30 mph. If the drivers of Baltimore City aren't willing to slow down to save lives, then they should be ticketed until their eyes fall out (most of them aren't watching the road anyway, so that shouldn't be too much of a burden on them).