this post was submitted on 13 Jul 2023
11 points (100.0% liked)

City Life

2114 readers
1 users here now

All topics urbanism and city related, from urban planning to public transit to municipal interest stuff. Both automobile and FuckCars inclusive.

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
alyaza@beehaw.org
Butterbee@beehaw.org
aponigricon@beehaw.org
remington@beehaw.org
11
Is this the year California OKs speed cameras? (www.latimes.com)
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by omenmis@beehaw.org to c/citylife@beehaw.org
32 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

hoping this catches on, pretty please CA...

i like the fact that the money can only go into maintaining the speed cameras or into making the road safer. those are both things desperately needed, especially in LA.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Pseu@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hasn’t it been shown the cameras actually increase accident rates?

Most studies find that cameras decrease accident rates: https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD004607.pub4/abstract

Theoretically, it might cause drivers to drive more unpredictably, but I'd expect that those are typically rear-end colissions as drivers slam their brakes to try to avoid a ticket. Those are the safest type of traffic incident and I'd happily trade a pedestrian getting hit for a couple rear-endings.

[–] argv_minus_one@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago

I’d happily trade a pedestrian getting hit for a couple rear-endings.

In other words, you're okay with creating more traffic accidents, as long as the victims belong to a group that you find acceptable.