Judge puts license plate readers in doubt
A municipal judge has cast doubt on police usage of a device that reads license plates in traffic and automates the sending of fines without any human intervention. Photo radar was also suspended for a time by a judge, but the writer doesn’t remind us what happened to change minds on that technology.
mare 10:16 on 2021-01-17 Permalink
AFAIK Photo radar is only allowed with clear signage, and will only catch the stupid. There’s no deterrent, when they aren’t obviously present with lots of tech, you can speed to you heart’s content. I don’t know the reason for this; privacy laws, lack of front plates so you can’t see the driver (speeding tickets might incur demerit points) and you need a set of two photos, and maybe other reasons, like the brotherhood afraid of being replaced by technology.
Ephraim 12:39 on 2021-01-17 Permalink
The photo radar zones just act as speed zones… everyone slows down until they are well past the cameras. It’s like a speed bump on the highway for the most part. The government set up the signs along many streets in Montreal… but there are no cameras. And you need to catch the car from the front (for a picture of the driver) and the back as well. (Why no one drives up to them and spray paints the camera each morning, I don’t understand…. it would end the stupidity.) The speed limit on the highway isn’t based on any scientific fact, really. If driving 120km/h in the middle of nowhere is really less safe than driving 100km/h, then cars should all have limiters. And we should have signs that change based on road conditions (in France they actually have different limits based on weather/road condition.)
Calgary and Edmonton uses this… https://www.getparkplus.com/ and there are other places as well. You don’t get a ticket on your window… they roll by and photo your plate, place and time. Next day they compare photos, times, etc. and remove all the paid parking (pay by plate) and send out the tickets. You pay by plate, like in Westmount.
It’s not really fair, in MOST ways. Now, if they used these to hand out the tickets for standing in a handicapped zone… I’d have no qualms with it.
Blork 13:15 on 2021-01-17 Permalink
I got nailed by photo radar a few years ago on the 15 south near the 20. It’s an autoroute, so I assumed the limit was 100, and I’m generally in the habit of just moving at the same speed as the mob when driving in such places. I saw the “Photo Radar” sign and didn’t think anything of it because I had no idea I was speeding (just try to find a speed limit sign along there… it’s like they expect you JUST KNOW). On that particular day there wasn’t much traffic, and I think I was doing 95 or so. Apparently the (unmarked) limit there, despite it being an autoroute, is 70.
The thing about photo radar is that it can only identify the CAR, not the DRIVER, so they can’t issue demerit points. When that ticket arrived in the mail it came with a notice the owner of the car was being fined for speeding but no demerit points were applied, and it provided an option to identify the driver if in fact it was someone else.
DeWolf 13:42 on 2021-01-17 Permalink
When I was in Melbourne and rented a car to visit a friend’s place outside of the city, I was surprised at just how calm and obedient the traffic was. Almost nobody went over the speed limit. I later found out why: Victoria’s roads are so saturated with photo radar that if you go above the limit you’re always guaranteed a ticket. I later received a $250 ticket in the mail for going 108 in a 100 zone. If I had been using an Australian licence it would have involved some demerit points too.
Long story short, there are only two ways to reduce speeding: redesign the actual roads so it’s physically difficult/unsafe to go too fast or have a very comprehensive regime of speed cameras. As usual, we have a bunch of half-measures that don’t really work, including ineffective speed cameras and nonsensical speed limits that encourage people to break the rules.
Blork 14:40 on 2021-01-17 Permalink
DeWolf, I don’t like your first option (“redesign the actual roads so it’s physically difficult/unsafe to go too fast”) because that will not stop dumbasses from driving too fast, and the result will be carnage.
Kate 16:08 on 2021-01-17 Permalink
The La Presse story Sunday isn’t primarily about photo radar. It mentions a device on police cars that sweeps the license plates of other cars in traffic and sends fines to people late to pay their SAAQ fees. The question of photo radar only comes up at the end when the reporter notes that it too was suspended for a period by a judge.
DeWolf 18:31 on 2021-01-17 Permalink
Blork, I’m talking about traffic calming, the effectiveness of which has been well demonstrated around the world. Think of Duluth Street – it’s practically impossible to go more than 30 km/h because it’s narrow, there are planters and corner bulb-outs and the road surface is bumpy. On larger streets, so-called “road diets” have been shown to be effective at reducing speeds by narrowing lanes, introducing visual complexity and installing physical barriers like pedestrian islands. When people speed, it’s usually because the road is too wide and they feel comfortable going fast. There are tons of resources about this on the internet, including this info sheet from the US Dept. of Transportation: https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/road_diets/guidance/info_guide/ch2.cfm
Of course that’s for streets in an urban/suburban context. In terms of highways, which are built for speed, enforcement is probably the only solution.
Quebec also has a problem with speed limits, which make no sense in too many cases. Just for example, I have no idea why the limit on La Vérendrye is 40km/h when it’s a limited-access boulevard with no pedestrian access on one side.
Phil M 02:31 on 2021-01-18 Permalink
I got popped by a license plate scanner a few years ago for forgetting to renew my registration. But it wasn’t an automated fine sent to my house. I got pulled over and the cop gave me a $400-something dollar ticket. Not fun. Maybe I should have taken it to court on constitutional grounds…