The Michigan Police Chief admitted that when they’re short on funds, increasing the number of speeding tickets they give out is an easy way to make up the difference. In small towns the number of tickets went up from 440 to 2,500 – 480 percent.
… which equals funny business. Show me a 2 MPH speed limit sign, voted on (how do speed limits get set, I wonder? …) and agreed to by the community, and I’ll gladly pay up.
Comment by Dave Hersam on December 6, 2008 @ 9:51 pm
The point is speeding tickets are for revenue, not safety. Studies have shown that relative speeds, not absolute, cause the most accidents. In other words cars traveling faster or slower than the average speed cause the most accidents.
Granted, perhaps, but therefore what? No speed limits, and let all drivers determine the current safe speed? I think that tickets can be both revenue and safety. What else would be the punishment or speeding or other unsafe driving? I think one example doesn’t prove the case.
Comment by Dave Hersam on December 6, 2008 @ 11:19 pm
I’m with Dan. Too many speed limits are there for the lowest common denominator and aren’t relevant to what a safe speed for most drivers is.
Make speed limits less restrictive and let the police spend more time on serious crime. This isn’t an isolated example. Numerous studies have shown that lower speed limits do not correlate to reduced numbers of accidents. It correlates directly with increased revenue.
And what to do if police departments run out of money and can’t spend more time on anything? Studies may show that lower speed limits don’t mean fewer accidents, but what if reality shows that less restrictive speed limits result in more accidents, or more fatalities in the same number of accidents? I’m all for trying new stuff, and I haven’t done any research on this, but your conclusions seem kinda dismissive of and condescending to police, and don’t seem to include any input from their side of the issue. If it’s a good change to make, I wish you all the best in getting it implemented there in your hometown, and we can follow the results and see if it’s something other cities, states, and the nation should do.
Comment by Dave Hersam on December 8, 2008 @ 10:24 pm
Without any data to back you up, your argument is weak. Try doing some research first, then we’ll talk :)
But unless they’re pulling funny business, now matter how many tickets they give, they can’t git ya if y’ain’t speeding, no?
Speed limit posted: 2MPH
… which equals funny business. Show me a 2 MPH speed limit sign, voted on (how do speed limits get set, I wonder? …) and agreed to by the community, and I’ll gladly pay up.
The point is speeding tickets are for revenue, not safety. Studies have shown that relative speeds, not absolute, cause the most accidents. In other words cars traveling faster or slower than the average speed cause the most accidents.
Granted, perhaps, but therefore what? No speed limits, and let all drivers determine the current safe speed? I think that tickets can be both revenue and safety. What else would be the punishment or speeding or other unsafe driving? I think one example doesn’t prove the case.
I’m with Dan. Too many speed limits are there for the lowest common denominator and aren’t relevant to what a safe speed for most drivers is.
Make speed limits less restrictive and let the police spend more time on serious crime. This isn’t an isolated example. Numerous studies have shown that lower speed limits do not correlate to reduced numbers of accidents. It correlates directly with increased revenue.
And what to do if police departments run out of money and can’t spend more time on anything? Studies may show that lower speed limits don’t mean fewer accidents, but what if reality shows that less restrictive speed limits result in more accidents, or more fatalities in the same number of accidents? I’m all for trying new stuff, and I haven’t done any research on this, but your conclusions seem kinda dismissive of and condescending to police, and don’t seem to include any input from their side of the issue. If it’s a good change to make, I wish you all the best in getting it implemented there in your hometown, and we can follow the results and see if it’s something other cities, states, and the nation should do.
Without any data to back you up, your argument is weak. Try doing some research first, then we’ll talk :)