DC Police Chief Says It's 'Cowardly' To Monitor Speed Traps With Your iPhone

from the real-men-prefer-ignorance dept

Jeff Nolan points us to the news that Washington DC's police chief is denouncing users of an iPhone app to monitor speed traps/speed cameras/red light cameras as being "cowardly." Apparently, real men prefer ignorance about where the police are hiding to give them tickets for driving a couple miles per hour over the speed limit. The app actually sounds pretty useful, alerting users if they're near one of the cameras or a known speed trap. The creator of the software makes the most salient point:
"If police come against us, it's going to make them look like they are only [after] revenue"
Indeed. Shouldn't the police be happy that a software product is helping people slow down or avoid running red lights? How could that possibly be seen as a bad thing... or "cowardly"?


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  •  
    icon
    ChurchHatesTucker (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 11:08am

    Wouldn't that be a great app?

    Maybe DC should make a free app that alerts you when traveling too fast, approaching a light about to go red, etc. Wouldn't that be great?

    Of course, revenues might take a dip, but that's not really the point, right? Right?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      nameless, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 11:21am

      Re: Wouldn't that be a great app?

      Yeah, that'd be cool but it'd also get really annoying and would be rather hard to integrate with the cities traffic computers.

      I think that an app that lets you know when you're near known traps is a good thing

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Joerg, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 1:31pm

      Re: Wouldn't that be a great app?

      An app like this is mostly in ALL Navigation devices, TomTom Garmin, you name it. If not when the device does over the counter, but trust me at least a week later it is on. On ANY Nav in Cars and even on Motorbikes.

      It is so common in Europe, that some countries changed the law and can even seize the Navigator device if the police finds out.

      On the other hand, with all the beeping of an speed trap in proximity the driver is usually driving slower than bevor, which is good, cause then they are not slamming in there brakes when (if) they see the trap.

      And running red lights is something of the past, at least at these lights which are in the Navigators Database.

      So whats the fuss about it. It is good to have it. Period.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 2:14pm

      Re: Wouldn't that be a great app?

      ...approaching a light about to go red...

      They've had something that serves this purpose for many years now. Perhaps you've heard of it: it's called a "yellow light".

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 4:02pm

        Re: Re: Wouldn't that be a great app?

        ACTUALLY, just to be a jerk, it's an "amber light".

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 4:26pm

          Re: Re: Re: Wouldn't that be a great app?

          ACTUALLY, just to be a jerk, it's an "amber light".

          Actually, that might depend on what state you're talking about. In Texas, for example, they're called "yellow" by state law (VCS Art. 6701d Sec 29).

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        ChurchHatesTucker (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 5:15pm

        Re: Re: Wouldn't that be a great app?

        "They've had something that serves this purpose for many years now. Perhaps you've heard of it: it's called a "yellow light"."

        Yeah, but an app would presumably not be subject to local governments tinkering with the timing to increase revenue.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 6:00pm

          Re: Re: Re: Wouldn't that be a great app?

          Yeah, but an app would presumably not be subject to local governments tinkering with the timing to increase revenue.

          Why not?

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Jiminy Cricket (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 7:17pm

      Re: Wouldn't that be a great app?

      You mean a speedometer? or a Speed Limit sign? Or a yellow light?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jul 10th, 2009 @ 2:34pm

      Re: Wouldn't that be a great app?

      Of course, revenues might take a dip, but that's not really the point, right? Right?

      Wrong - that is the point - revenue.

      I'm sure this will be gone from the iPhone in short order though.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Dark Helmet (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 11:20am

    Okay

    "Shouldn't the police be happy that a software product is helping people slow down or avoid running red lights?"

    The police, yes, they probably are happy. The government beuracracy that operates to run the police, no. The Police Officers Union, no. The area politicians, DA, etc., no.

    Please stop confusing the police chief with the police. They aren't even close to being the same thing. The chief has to report directly to elected officials and also has to deal with the police union.

    The elected officials, from the Mayor to the DA, needs crimes to respond to. Otherwise, what do they point to as a "win"? If there is no crises to manage, what is their purpose? If Washington DC was a utopia, would there be the need for these elected officials? No. They don't want to stop crime, they want to keep it at a controllable level.

    The union operates from a position of power, the level of which has a direct correlation to the number of officers in the union. Stop crime? Demand for officers goes down, union dues go down, the number of union employees goes down, control diminishes. Why in the world would THEY want crime to go down?

    If anyone can give me one logical reason why the government, police chief, and police union bosses wouldn't LOVE a police state, I'd love to hear it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Brian (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 12:59pm

      Re: Okay

      Oh please... most officers I've interacted with forgot the "to protect and to server" thing looooooooong ago.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        btr1701 (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 1:05pm

        Re: Re: Okay

        > Oh please... most officers I've interacted
        > with forgot the "to protect and to serve" thing
        > looooooooong ago.

        Maybe the reason for that is that the phrase "protect and serve" is just the motto of the LAPD and not law enforcement in general.

        Most citizen I've interacted with have become so Hollywoodized that they think every cop everywhere takes an oath to protect and serve the public.

        My oath said nothing of the sort. I swore to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. The public isn't even mentioned.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          william, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 1:55pm

          Re: Re: Re: Okay

          the constitution comments you to kill... the state enemy.

          Sorry I just couldn't resist. ;-)

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            btr1701 (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 2:56pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Okay

            > the constitution comments you to kill... the state enemy.

            > Sorry I just couldn't resist. ;-)

            I have no idea what your comment actually means. It makes no linguistic sense. The Constitution is a document; it can't comment on anything.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      techie_98980, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 1:21pm

      Re: Okay

      No, the police aren't happy. If they don't write tickets, patrol officers don't get court and overtime, which is a big part of their paychecks. The whole system is incentivized to write tickets, not save lives.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      cennis (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 2:38pm

      Re: Okay

      I saw this episode. Isn't this the part where they cordon off an area in the middle of the city and turn a blind eye to the dealers in that area?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      DrGonzo42069, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 3:32pm

      Re: Okay

      If I believed in god I would give you an Amen Brother!

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Irritated, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 3:48pm

      Re: Okay

      You are saying what purpose do the police have if they are not handing out tickets. Well, turn on the news. I don't see reports on speeders. I see killings and drugs. Let us continue to worry about speeding tickets and penalizing hard working Americans. It's a bunch of crap if you ask me.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Dark Helmet (profile), Jul 10th, 2009 @ 6:42am

        Re: Re: Okay

        "You are saying what purpose do the police have if they are not handing out tickets. Well, turn on the news. I don't see reports on speeders. I see killings and drugs."

        Tightining government control through a state of fear much?

        Okay, you probably won't read this, but some quick analysis on the homicides, because I couldn't care less about the mostly victimless crime of drug use.

        -Approx. 14000 homicides in the USA in 2008, including Puerto Rico
        -That's 38 people murdered per day, including 1st/2nd degrees, and negligent
        -34 Cities in the USA with over 500k people, and 107 cities in the USA with over 200k people
        -There are 307 million people in the country total
        -That's an annual inclusive homicide rate of 4.56 e5....or TINY, in other words
        -It's also .35 murders per day per city with a poulation of over 200k

        The point is that the homicide rate in this country is infintismal when compared to how it is presented on the news. You aren't going to die. The gangbangers down the street really don't care all that much about you. People in general aren't homicidal and/or crazy. Get OVER it, we don't need the number of police we employ.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      WarOtter (profile), Jul 10th, 2009 @ 5:48am

      Re: Okay

      'if Washington DC was a utopia'

      LOL. I actually had to find something to start eating, just so I could read that sentence again and choke on it while chortling.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      vastrightwing, Jul 10th, 2009 @ 8:28am

      Re: Okay

      Did I get you right? Crime is essentially an industry and police departments depend on crime to bolster their budgets?

      This makes sense since if crime were to drop significantly, so would the budgets. hummm.......

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Jul 10th, 2009 @ 11:42pm

        Re: Re: Okay

        Did I get you right? Crime is essentially an industry and police departments depend on crime to bolster their budgets?
        This makes sense since if crime were to drop significantly, so would the budgets. hummm.......


        Well, yes, except there's a growing trend to outsource incarcerations to companies outside of the legal and justice system.

        Research CCA (NYSE:CXW) and The Geo Group (NYSE:GGI). Here's a link to get you started on you're search:
        http://rawstory.com/news/afp/Crime_pays_for_US_prison_companies_03092008.html

        Point is, stock valuation of these two examples is tied to the number of people incarcerated.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    monkyyy (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 11:25am

    hmmm interesting they stopped trying to hide their evil/corruption

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Joe, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 11:28am

    No sympathy on this one from me. If the police are using it as a revenue generation tool, dinging people for going slightly over the limit, that's one thing, but this app indiscriminately allows people to drive much greater than the speed limit and avoid any consequence. That's hardly right either.

    The goal of the law is to enforce safe driving, if either side moves away from that goal, for profit or reckless fun, they are in the wrong.

    IMO anything less than 15kph over the limit should get a warning, not a ticket. More than that, and there should be a stiff fine.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      :Lobo Santo (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 11:37am

      Re:

      "The goal of the law is to enforce safe driving"

      HA Ha hA ha HA!!

      Speeding laws have zero effect on road safety...
      (Seriously, look into it.)

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      A Dan, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 11:40am

      Re:

      That's about 9 mph, for those of us who don't speak metric. He's saying 10 mph over the speed limit should be a stiff fine.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 11:47am

      Re:

      But the app doesn't tell you where the police AREN'T. It doesn't say "there are no police in the area" ... it simply says "you are approaching a known speed trap/red light camera/speed camera". It also doesn't say "there is an officer ahead" ... but just that it's a known spot, and a cop is more likely to be there. Speed traps aren't manned 24/7.

      There is nothing stopping the police from:

      (1) not using the same spots for speed traps ... they can move their traps around and create a giant grid of known "traps" where a giant coverage area would be created in the app. Anyone looking to find dead spots of speed traps would instead find that they are continuously hitting known speed trap areas, whether or not there is a cop there. I already knew of spots around Denver where police commonly camp out, and those are reported in the app ... police here pick the same spots and put a man or two there almost daily for a couple hours.

      (2) having police actually travel around and give out speeding tickets outside of a speed trap. If they aren't stationary, there's no way to pinpoint a speed trap spot.

      So, it does not indiscriminately allow anyone to do anything. It actually gives LESS information than a radar/laser detector, which will indiscriminately tell one if a cop is actively looking at speed, at any point. This app only says "cops are known to sit up ahead and tag people" ... not if a cop is there, or a cop is in a non-speed trap area monitoring.

      And with red light cameras, it changes nothing for people, because if there was no camera, then it's the possibility of a cop hiding that may keep people in check, and this app doesn't say "there are no cops at this intersection" ... merely "a stop light camera is known to exist at the intersection ahead" ... so it will only tell people when they should be more diligent about stopping, and gives no new information one way or another about regular intersections. The risk of cop awareness is identical.

      So, this app only tells people when to slow down or stop. This app does not indiscriminately allow people to drive much greater than the speed limit ... it's an app on a phone, not a super-jet engine.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        zaven (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 12:14pm

        Re: Re:

        Well said. Maybe something like this will encourage cops to actually try and keep the roads safe. Rather than just sitting there handing out tickets on a straight away.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 11:47am

      Re:

      You say no sympathy, and yet allow sometone to go 50mph in a 35 zone?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 11:58am

      Re:

      How does it allow people to drive much greater than the speed limit? That's just stupid. It allows people to drive the same way they always do, except near KNOWN SPEED TRAPS OR RED LIGHT CAMERAS. It doesn't track where all the cops in the US are at any given moment.

      Moron.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      CHIEFOFROADRAGE, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 12:35pm

      Re:

      The limit is about 9 MPH to you?

      Sir, the vigilante group that is the Citizen's Road Justice of America would like to inform you that people driving less than 10 MPH over the speed limit are punished to the fullest extent of the whims of the organization. Be it tailgating, paint swapping, keying, verbal flogging, bird flipping, general abuse committed with a baseball bat, or even stalking for the effect of fear or for the actual shootout.

      We request that your old lady pussy driving attitude stay in whatever country you are from and counter your suggestion with a better one saying that speed limits should be raised 10 MPH or 18 KmPH and then given an additional 5 or so to each of "you get off with a warning" room.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Joe, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 4:12pm

        Re: Re:

        We request that your old lady pussy driving attitude stay in whatever country you are from and counter your suggestion with a better one saying that speed limits should be raised 10 MPH or 18 KmPH and then given an additional 5 or so to each of "you get off with a warning" room. I think a few people have mentioned this and it's actually an interesting point. Both with income and speed limits, people tend to acclimate to the new levels. Remember when you were a kid and made 20 grand a year. If I said, starting tomorrow you'll make 30 grand a year. You would think - fantastic - all my money worries are over and I'll be happy. But soon you get used to that pay level and think - if I made 40 a year, then I'll be truly happy. I think in many ways this is true with speed limits also, though there is certainly an upper limit to this. Raising the speed limit 10-15kph won't eliminate speeding. People will simply acclimate to the new level. Where I live, the speed limit is about 110kph but the fast lane routinely goes at 140kph (roughly 70/85mph I think). The higher speeds are tolerated because the flow of traffic moves well and people can get to where their going safely. If someone zips around at 160kph - they get pulled over pretty fast. This works because it is based not on grabbing revenue for the city or giving drivers a get out of jail free card for speeding but because the city can operate smoothly with it. Nice rant by the way :->

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      JM, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 5:56pm

      Re:

      ...but this app indiscriminately allows people to drive much greater than the speed limit and avoid any consequence.

      The app does nothing of the sort. That logic could be applied just about anything and is just plain ignorant. Perhaps we should blame Halloween costume manufacturers because they indiscriminately allow people to hide their true identity giving them the ability to commit a crime and avoid any consequence.

      The app performs a function. That function is not to blame for how people behave. If someone is going to break the law they're going to do it regardless. Blaming the functionality of the app or the manufacturer for how it is used is absolutely silly.

      I really wish people would learn that it's PEOPLE who are responsible for their actions and not their devices: people kill people not guns. This is pretty basic stuff folks.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        known coward, Jul 10th, 2009 @ 8:35am

        Re: Re:

        yea but a smith and wesson beats a full house EVERY time.

        JM said:
        . . . "I really wish people would learn that it's PEOPLE who are responsible for their actions and not their devices: people kill people not guns. This is pretty basic stuff folks."

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      lordmorgul, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 9:20pm

      Re:

      Don't be stupid. The app does not allow people to drive FASTER, it allows them to know where to drive slower. These are not even remotely the same thing. At any location on any street at ANY time of day a police officer could see you traveling above the speed limit. Knowing an officer is at point A does not mean one is not at point B, it only reduces the likelihood marginally. A risk taker does not change their behavior based on marginal change in risk...

      They choose to set speed traps for three reasons only: 1) high revenue on streets people 'feel safe' speeding on, 2) legitimate effort to increase safety (although misguided, see below), and 3) specific event or high profile purpose (keep traffic smooth near mayor speaking event, etc).

      Speed traps are simply dangerous in some locations because they do not just get people to slow down, they cause ERRATIC driving as people try to change lanes and slow down rapidly.

      The way police should be keeping traffic speeds down is by consistent show of presence... by actually driving around and being seen by the public at many locations in the city. This is costly, and does not provide revenue but would keep the citizens safer.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Alan Shore, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 11:35am

    If memory serves me right, I believe there was a case somewhere, in which a police officer didn't have their parking lights on, and the defendant believed that the police officer's turn signals were stationary reflectors on the side of the road.

    Again, I can't remember the details as the case occurred several years ago, but nonetheless, I vaguely remember that they either hit the police officer's car.

    In any case, this "cowardly" officer of the law was found guilty of "entrapment", and the local jurisdiction was found responsible for damages to the defendant's vehicle, damages resulting from unlawful arrest, and false testimony in a court of law.

    It was an interesting read, I just wish I could find it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Alan Shore, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 11:37am

    About that "Coward" thing...

    If memory serves me right, I believe there was a case somewhere, in which a police officer had a speed trap and also didn't have their parking lights on. The defendant believed that the police officer's turn signals were stationary reflectors on the side of the road.

    Again, I can't remember the details as the case occurred several years ago, but nonetheless, I vaguely remember that they either hit the police officer's car.

    In any case, this "cowardly" officer of the law was found guilty of "entrapment", and the local jurisdiction was found responsible for damages to the defendant's vehicle, damages resulting from unlawful arrest, pain and suffering as well as false testimony in a court of law.

    It was an interesting read, I just wish I could find it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    John Doe, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 11:37am

    Cowardly?

    They are the ones with guns both radar and projectile.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 11:38am

    speed sensing pavement would do the trick...then the whole road is a speed-trap...nothing to avoid...and everyone would be aware since it is the road after all.

    Yeah, yeah, pie in the sky...but it might stimulate the development of flying cars as a way to avoid the pavement...hehehe

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Brian (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 1:00pm

      Re:

      That's a solid plan and I endorse it, so long as we get flying cars.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Lohocla, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 3:23pm

      Re: Weird

      Find it odd that even my little Cavlier RS (4 cyl) will get to 110 mph (I know, I've had it that fast :))

      If they were interested in making the roads safer they'd force automakers to stop building cars that exceed the speed limit and make it illegal for anyone to modify their rides to do so.

      So, no, dont think they care about making things safer, just using it as a revenue stream so that they (politico's) can pocket some more change or in the case of the south, send ppl to jail and get $$ per head like cattle .:)

      Loh

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Michael Laukaitis, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 11:39am

    Re: If Cops were smart

    If cops were really smart... they would download the app, I'm guessing it's based off of people entering in speed traps and places where they have either seen speed traps etc... then as police, they should enter in a ton more than what are really there... Then everyone would drive slow all the time... Really! Find an exploit and go to town! Dear Cops.... You're welcome.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Derek Kerton (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 12:03pm

      Re: Re: If Cops were smart

      If cops were really smart... they would also know that (with Phantomalert) each user has a reliability score, and each entry requires validation from more than one user to be accepted. Post bogus data, and your posts stop counting.

      And U don't need to download the app. Just go to the website.

      Back to the drawing board.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      zaven (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 12:16pm

      Re: Re: If Cops were smart

      The app is kinda wiki based. Users can vote on speed traps. So this approach wouldn't really work

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      minijedimaster (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 12:18pm

      Re: Re: If Cops were smart

      No, they (the cops) would go look to see where the known traps were and just stop sitting there and sit about half a mile down the road so when people sped back up they could tag em then.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 1:41pm

        Re: Re: Re: If Cops were smart

        You're assuming this isn't dynamic. Which it is.

        Ever heard people flashing their headlights to tell oncoming drivers about a cop ahead on the road? That's what this app is. Except it tells a lot more people. If the cops move half-a-mile down the road, someone will report that, and (assumedly) the app would reflect the change.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 11:50am

    How about it's "cowardly" to ticket people through a camera? It's "cowardly" to take photos instead of doing real police work!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Derek Kerton (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 12:09pm

      Re:

      You're right. If there's anything cowardly, it's the use of machines to deliver justice.

      Speed cameras and red light cameras remove the ability of the accused to "face their accuser". A right we have had in America up to this point. You could always go to court to argue against the officer that issued your ticket. Not so with camera enforcement. You can't demand to see the person who accuses you, because it is a machine.

      The "cowardly" fundraisers in muni governments have slipped the cameras tickets through the "face your accuser" requirements by calling the violation a civil offense, not a moving violation. Thus the tickets are more like parking bylaw tickets than speeding or red light tickets issued by a cop.

      If camera-based justice doesn't scare you, then you didn't understand Orwell's 1984.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        known coward, Jul 10th, 2009 @ 8:32am

        Re: Re:

        I agree It is cowardly to use a machine to do a Man's job, remember our right to confront our accuser.


        "You're right. If there's anything cowardly, it's the use of machines to deliver justice.

        Speed cameras and red light cameras remove the ability of the accused to "face their accuser". A right we have had in America up to this point. You could always go to court to argue against the officer that issued your ticket. Not so with camera enforcement. You can't demand to see the person who accuses you, because it is a machine.

        The "cowardly" fundraisers in muni governments have slipped the cameras tickets through the "face your accuser" requirements by calling the violation a civil offense, not a moving violation. Thus the tickets are more like parking bylaw tickets than speeding or red light tickets issued by a cop.

        If camera-based justice doesn't scare you, then you didn't understand Orwell's 1984. "

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 11:50am

    In the words of NWA, "fuck the police". Being a Gestapo is cowardly.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      TW Burger (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 2:29pm

      Re:

      The members of NWA would rape you just to see the stupid look on your face you gutless, adolescent, cracker hillbilly.

      The police are not perfect but they do keep mindless, dickless wonders like you in line.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Free Capitalist, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 11:57am

    Oh that's rich

    "Come back hear and speed by me like a man, you over-informed begadgeted geek. Coward!"

    That's some fine police work....

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 12:00pm

    Of course they are only after the money. This app should be downloaded by everyone and they should support it. Anyways who cares what this douchebag police chief says he's the coward, traffic cops are lower human forms of life.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 12:00pm

    Of course they are only after the money. This app should be downloaded by everyone and they should support it. Anyways who cares what this douchebag police chief says he's the coward, traffic cops are lower human forms of life.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Dan, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 12:01pm

    Haha that is hilarious. I guess if it is cowardly to monitor red-light cameras, when I get pulled over for speeding or something, can I tell the officer I was just trying to be "brave"?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    DaveL (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 12:02pm

    Raise the speed limit

    When a majority of citizens are breaking a law, it's the law that's wrong, not the citizens.

    How about raising the speed limit so that 80% of drivers aren't "speeding"?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Glaze, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 12:40pm

      Re: Raise the speed limit

      Proven case, this does not work. MN changed the majority of its speed limits when the federal law changed to allow states to control their speed limits. They raised the limits in certain areas, and what happened... People bumped up their speed 5-10mph over the newly posted speed. people are going to drive fast if they have a lead foot, regardless of what the speed limit is, was or will be.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        The Infamous Joe (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 1:10pm

        Re: Re: Raise the speed limit

        A link would be nice, if you please.

        Also, I rarely look at the speed limit, I simply drive at a comfortable speed for myself, taking into consideration weather, congestion, area and time of day. Sometimes I find myself driving under the speed limit (40 mph in a residential area is insane, I think) or over it (65 mph on a highway on a sunny day is way too slow, and even if I wanted to drive that slow, I'd be endangering everyone around me who is going a more standard speed)

        Speed limits seem to be set lower than the average person drives (and I've lived all over) and I wouldn't be at all surprised to find that the reason it's not raised is because less people breaking the speed limit = less revenue.

        I have always thought that speed limits should be completely abolished, and the police can simply pull people over for reckless/careless driving if things get too excessive.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          Glaze (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 2:01pm

          Re: Re: Re: Raise the speed limit

          It wasn't really a study by any foundation or organization... just what i've witnessed for myself living in the heart of the twin cities... very rarely do I find myself driving 55 in a 55, its more like 60 or 65 in a 55... and 70-80 in a 65... and i am not going any slower or faster than the rest of traffic around me.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 9:36pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Raise the speed limit

            You do realize that 55 was originally chosen as a federal speed limit when vehicles took 4-5 times as far to stop as current sedans? One of the big issues with the speed limits are that not all vehicles are created equal... my 2006 Nissan Titan is heavier by at least twice, but its brakes are incredible compared to my 1993 GMC Jimmy. My newer, heavier, larger vehicle accelerates faster, performs evasive maneuvers with more agility/control... and it stops MUCH faster.

            The same speed limit is not adequate for all vehicles. This has a much bigger role to play in people driving over the speed limits than you think, because as they buy new cars they realize the speed limit 'feels too slow' (which is legitimately is). Unfortunately, people also tend to follow rather than drive their own car at a safe pace, so those with older vehicles often cruise right along with whoever they are behind (and some idiots always have to be moving faster than the rest no matter how fast that is).

            Not all drivers are equal, certainly not all cars are equal. They shouldn't all be traveling the same maximum speed irregardless of driving conditions! On a congested highway that makes sense, noone can actually move around anyone else there. On an open highway one single speed limit is NOT driven by safety motivations.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              identicon
              Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 10:10pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Raise the speed limit

              You do realize that 55 was originally chosen as a federal speed limit when vehicles took 4-5 times as far to stop as current sedans?

              The national 55 limit was initiated to save fuel and had nothing to do with stopping distances. Furthermore, new vehicles at that time most certainly did not take "4-5 times as far to stop" as vehicles today. Please, stop making stuff up.

              On an open highway one single speed limit is NOT driven by safety motivations.

              Sigh..., there you go again. Studies have shown that speed variance is indeed a major factor in traffic safety.

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    bob, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 12:06pm

    It's All About The Money

    Here in my municipality we go to the judge and say guilt and ask to see the prosecutor who then gives you parking ticket violations. This way the money stays in the town and none of it goes to the state.
    The fine is less, you get no points on your drivers license and your insurance does not go up.
    This is all about the money.
    So screw the chief of police.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Ima Fish (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 12:06pm

    Rather than installing an app that tells you where the traps and cameras are, wouldn't it be easier to simply not speed and to not run red lights?!

    On a side note, I used to live in the Baltimore/DC area. Someone told me of the three car rule. I.e., three cars can run a red light before a cop can issue a ticket. Because it happens so often, I actually believed it for a few seconds before realizing it was a joke.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Derek Kerton (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 12:12pm

      Re:

      "Rather than installing an app that tells you where the traps and cameras are, wouldn't it be easier to simply not speed and to not run red lights?!"

      And in an Orwellian context, wouldn't it be easier just not to commit thought crimes than to piss of Big Brother?!

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      minijedimaster (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 12:26pm

      Re:

      Rather than installing an app that tells you where the traps and cameras are, wouldn't it be easier if the ridiculously low speed limits that are posted for revenue generation and not safety were raised to a more reasonable level?

      There, fixed that for you.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    zaven (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 12:09pm

    The App is called Trapster

    Just to let anyone who cares know. I didn't see it's name mentioned in the original article or this post. The app is called Trapster. It's quite useful, especially if you're on a road trip or in an unfamiliar area.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 12:11pm

    Well gee...

    Back in the day before speed guns and undercover police cars, speeding was a real one-on-one event. But then the police started implementing every well known practical piece of technology they could to start issuing tickets. Sure, speeding may be a problem, but at what point is it a revenue thing? Hell, they even have the traffic cameras that will automatically issue tickets now.

    Besides, if I'm driving 5mph over the limit on a dark street late at night, who is the coward? Me or the cop hidden in the bushes on his impossible-to-spot motorcycle / undercover car, with a radar gun, 300+ feet down the road? Intentionally parked far away from speed limit signs, no less.

    Hell, at least an iPhone app gives a chance to even the playing field a little - and may ultimately help people slow down, which is the point, right?

    ...Heh, it's only a matter of time anyway before all cars are equipped with some kind of wireless broadcaster chip that relays your speed to tiny sensors throughout the freeway/road system and tickets get billed to you automatically. Of course, to start the car you'll need to use a digitized license, so that the tickets get billed to the correct person driving the car. Bah.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Trapster, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 12:15pm

    Trapster

    What is even more cowardly is that apparently the Washington Examiner wrote an article primarily about an iPhone app, but left out the name of the iPhone app, which is Trapster. There are 600,000 + iPhone users using Trapster.

    PhantomAlert is just a POI download service for Garmins etc. ... they don't even have a iPhone app or any other mobile app.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      zaven (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 12:18pm

      Re: Trapster

      Just posted this. Wouldn't expect the examiner to mention the app. It's not exactly what I'd call a decent paper (they send free ones to the house every now and then). It's kinda annoying.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Lar, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 12:33pm

    What a load

    "but this app indiscriminately allows people to drive much greater than the speed limit and avoid any consequence" is not only untrue but just plain silly. How long have radar detectors been around? Those are acutally more likely to allow someone to drive faster than this app. If anything, this app would make things safer by having people slow down more. Talk about not thinking outside the box. That poster is right up there with the chief in being just plain wrong.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Chris, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 12:48pm

    Break the law a little

    I guess I don't see COPS writing tickets as bad. Getting revenue (tickets, etc.) from people will keep taxes down and allow municipalities to provide services. I don't have an issue with them looking at it as revenue, only if they start giving out tickets to people who are not breaking the law to generate revenue.

    Sorry, "driving a couple miles per hour over the speed limit" is against the law. You can't break the law a little, either you do it or you don't. If you are worried about it, then drive a couple miles per hour under the limit and you should be fine. Would you drive a couple miles per hour over the limit if the punishment for doing so was execution? Castration?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 1:41pm

      Re: Break the law a little

      There are laws about driving too slow, because you are not driving at the expected speed you are becoming a liability on the road.

      It's best to drive EXACTLY at the speed limit at all times. And stop on a dime when you see a red light. THEN you should be fine. Otherwise, you are a criminal and need to be punished to the full extend of the law.

      And while you're at it, you need to make sure that if you are a woman in Virginia, you have a man walking in front of your car telling everyone a woman is driving the car. Or else you should end up in prison for not obeying the LAW!

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        romeosidvicious (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 5:04pm

        Re: Re: Break the law a little

        Your logic is as bad as your spelling and grammar. The laws about driving to slow, in general, are based on traveling X mph under the posted speed limit. In Texas it is 15 mph under the speed limit so in a 65 mph zone you can drive between 50 and 65 mph legally and in a 35 mph zone you drive between 20 and 35 mph legally. Your hyperbole shows that you have no understanding of the laws you are arguing against.

        The "weird law" to which you refer is not even from Virginia. It is from Tennessee and it is no longer on the books. You can't believe everything you read when you search Google for weird traffic laws to back up your hyperbole.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 6:01pm

          Re: Re: Re: Break the law a little

          In Texas it is 15 mph under the speed limit...

          Citation, please.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 10:41pm

          Re: Re: Re: Break the law a little

          The laws about driving to slow, in general, are based on traveling X mph under the posted speed limit. In Texas it is 15 mph under the speed limit so in a 65 mph zone you can drive between 50 and 65 mph legally and in a 35 mph zone you drive between 20 and 35 mph legally.
          That's not what the law says in Texas:
          "An operator may not drive so slowly as to impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic, except when reduced speed is necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law." http://law.onecle.com/texas/transportation/545.363.00.html
          So legally speaking in Texas, you could be ticketed for driving any speed under the limit if you are impeding someone behind you from going the limit. And legally you can also be ticketed for going any speed over. So the only completely legal option in some cases would be to maintain your speed at exactly the limit, which is of course physically impossible.

          Now another tricky part is where speed limits change as it is also physically impossible to instantaneously change your speed. In this case though I think the "necessary for safe operation" bit would probably excuse the operator from attempting to do so.

          Bottom line: if a cop *really* wants to find something to give you a ticket for, he can.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Jul 10th, 2009 @ 1:35pm

          Re: Re: Re: Break the law a little

          I'm just curious for you to point out my bad spelling? Because obviously your spelling is poor if you think mine is.

          There was a law in a Virginian town. It may have been taken off the books, recently. As a previous Virginian, I didn't need to do a Google search to look up information.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      minijedimaster (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 2:37pm

      Re: Break the law a little

      Must be nice to be perfect and to NEVER break the law, even when that means never going over the speed limit by even 1mph. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone...

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Chris, Jul 10th, 2009 @ 9:17am

        Re: Re: Break the law a little

        I read my post over and over to see where I said I never have gone over the speed limit. I am just stating, either you are speeding or you are not. I have gotten a speeding ticket before, but I didn't complain about it. I paid my fine and moved on. I didn't get angry that it was "only a few mph over the limit." Read it again and maybe you will get my point that I am not against COPS writing tickets for those who go over the speed limit.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 12:49pm

    Oh man...

    Just drive the speed limit or under and don't run any red lights, you won't have any problems. Limit is exactly that: a 'limit'. Not a suggestion.

    If it's wrong to speed or run a red light, you're an idiot. Tough it up and pay the fine and quit b*tching or blaming something or someone else. Intelligence should tell you not to speed as it's dangerous... so if you speed, you're not using your intelligence. Hence, you're an idiot.

    It's like speeding through 15mph school zones. They're 15mph for a reason: to ensure the safety and security of children. If someone speeds through it, they're interfering with the safety and security of children. According to Dictionary.com, the first definition of 'molest' is "to bother, interfere with, or annoy". So by a matter of deductive logic, speeding through a school zone means that person is molesting children of their safety and security (hence, the 'interfering with').

    Intent doesn't matter. If it happens, it's done. Not paying attention is no excuse. Put away the mobile phones, put down the make up, stop screwing with the radio, and just PAY ATTENTION. It's not that hard.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 1:00pm

      Re: Oh man...

      You know your speedometer is inaccurate by +/-5%? So unless you drive 5% under the speed limit you can't reasonably be certain to aren't an evil speeding criminal molestor nazi. Oh, and watch out for another fun ticket: "impeding the flow of traffic" while driving under the speed limit.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 1:33pm

        Re: Re: Oh man...

        And do you realize that tickets are not given if you are a reasonable amount above or below the limit, exactly for this reason?

        If you can't stay within 5mph of the speed limit, you're a terrible driver. Frankly, if you can't stay within 2mph of the speed limit you're not a very good driver.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 2:54pm

          Re: Re: Re: Oh man...

          And do you realize that tickets are not given if you are a reasonable amount above or below the limit, exactly for this reason?

          Would you care to cite a state law for that?

          Yeah, I didn't think so.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 3:59pm

          Re: Re: Re: Oh man...

          But, they COULD be given. The "reasonable amount" is not written into the law. Frankly, if you can't stay EXACTLY at the speed limit, you're a horrific driver, kill babies, support terrorism, and should go directly to jail without passing Go.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      minijedimaster (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 2:41pm

      Re: Oh man...

      LMAO.. it's for the children! Idiot.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 2:52pm

      Re: Oh man...

      Intelligence should tell you not to speed as it's dangerous...

      I remember the last speeding ticket I got, for doing 62 in a 55 passing through a little speed trap town. The cop had a really belligerent attitude and gave me a bawling out about how dangerous 62 MPH was. And the thing was, most of the other cars were actually going a little faster than I was. (Maybe the others were locals) Anyway, I went ahead and mailed in my payment to their local court. About a month after that I was passing back through and guess what? The state had raised the speed limit on that same stretch to 70 MPH (as a result of the Federal gov't lifting the 55 national limit thing). I bet that really ticked off that little town.

      So 62 was dangerous? Dangerous my ass, I really should have been going a little bit faster even. No, speed traps are more about shaking people down than promoting safety.

      Hence, you're an idiot.

      I think the idiot might be the one who believes that speed limits are more for "safety" than "revenue".

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Sailingmaster (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 1:02pm

    LOL

    Oh this is rich, now we have the DC police department complaining about how technology is wrecking their "business model."

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    No Imagination (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 1:16pm

    "I have always thought that speed limits should be completely abolished, and the police can simply pull people over for reckless/careless driving if things get too excessive."

    I REALLY like this idea. At first I thought to myself, 'that would just lead to insane police misconduct and arbitrary enforcement of the law(s', then I realized, that it precisely what we have going on right now anyway

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 1:30pm

    Missing the problem

    "Indeed. Shouldn't the police be happy that a software product is helping people slow down or avoid running red lights? How could that possibly be seen as a bad thing... or "cowardly"? "

    The police aren't unhappy that people are slowing down or stopping at their speed traps. They're unhappy because the app allows speeding and red-light running everywhere else. How would you feel as a traffic cop, knowing that dangerous driving is going to happen everywhere that you aren't?

    Added to that, many speed traps occur at the most problematic areas. If you know that 1/3 times you drive through an area there will be a cop, then more likely than not you will drive through there safely 3/3 times. Now that you can be explicitly told when a cop is there, the problem drivers will now be driving dangerously 2/3 times.

    Sorry Mike, I can't agree with your stance here in the slightest. The point of law enforcement isn't to catch criminals, it's to deter crime from happening in the first place. Knowing when and where laws will not be enforced COMPLETELY DESTROYS THE LAW.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 1:44pm

      Re: Missing the problem

      THE APP DOESN'T TELL YOU WHERE COPS ARE AND AREN'T!!!

      It tells you where to stop or slow, not where to speed up. That's idiotic. There is equal chance a cop can be in a non speed-trap area with or without this app, so it doesn't tell anyone where it's "ok" to speed, because a cop could be there just as likely as a cop could be there at any other time or any other place.

      If cops in your area are ONLY sitting around speed traps tagging speeders, then that's sad, and a fine example of tax dollars at work!

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 1:57pm

        Re: Re: Missing the problem

        From what I understand, the app takes user submitted information and sends it out (with a system to reflect reliability of the user).

        Given the speed that unreviewed, user generated content is updated, it's not that hard to believe that the app can and will effectively tell you exactly where a cop has stopped his car.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 2:58pm

          Re: Re: Re: Missing the problem

          You're daft if you think it will tell you were all cops are all of the time.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 3:50pm

          Re: Re: Re: Missing the problem

          1. It requires more than one person following a cop around tagging the cop every time he stops at a stop sign. Otherwise, you'd only have those Family Circus Billy dashed lines all over the city.

          2. That data needs to be updated, and then downloaded and propagated to all the people with the iPhone app. But then data doesn't instantly disappear, so then someone will need to go back through and wait for the data to die and then the old location information to be removed from the system and blah blah blah ...

          So, no, you do not understand the app, and no, it will not effectively tell you exactly where cops are and aren't at that moment.

          You can believe what you want. I've used the app. And I would agree with you, but then we'd both be wrong.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      minijedimaster (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 2:48pm

      Re: Missing the problem

      ...knowing that dangerous driving is going to happen...

      Driving over the speed limit != Dangerous driving. I can't tell you how many roads I've been on that have artificially LOW speed limits like 25 or 35mph when they could easily be 40 or 50mph and still be safe. They're only that low to allow for revenue, NOT SAFETY.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      btr1701 (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 3:08pm

      Re: Missing the problem

      > Sorry Mike, I can't agree with your stance here in the slightest.

      Well, the Supreme Court of Texas disagrees with you. They ruled over a decade ago that stuff like this is protected speech.

      Back in the early '90s when I was in college in Austin, there was a well-known speed trap where the state troopers loved to sit and pick off speeders north of town on I-35. Well, one weekend a couple of college kids got ticked off after getting a ticket there and went and made up a bunch of signs that said SPEED TRAP AHEAD! SLOW DOWN! They stood on the side of the road about a half-mile up-traffic from the speed trap and warned all the cars on the highway. It didn't take long before they were caught and arrested for "obstruction of justice".

      Their case wound its way through the court system until the state supreme court heard it and ruled that it's protected speech under the 1st Amendment and the Texas Constitution and it can never be considered obstruction for one citizen to encourage another to obey the law.

      Now DC ain't Texas but we all live under the same 1st Amendment and it's unlikely that another court would rule differently.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 4:13pm

        Re: Re: Missing the problem

        Well, the Supreme Court of Texas disagrees with you. They ruled over a decade ago that stuff like this is protected speech.

        The Texas Supreme Court only handles civil cases. I doubt they'd be ruling on what constitutes protected speech.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Fiercedeity (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 6:33pm

      Re: Missing the problem

      "Added to that, many speed traps occur at the most problematic areas."

      So this app is making people slow down at the most problematic intersecions 100% of the time (because the app can't tell you *when* a cop is there)... and that's a bad thing?

      Wow.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 1:42pm

    The "Justice System" has absolutely nothing to do with Justice. It nothing more than a money making business.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    gavin mcnulty, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 1:49pm

    iphone speed apps

    Thank god for apple. The police should be pleased that this is happening if their genuine reasons are for slowing people down....however cant help but thinking the police only have money in mind.its a very good cash cow is fining people for very minor mistakes. They disgust me.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    gavin mcnulty, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 1:49pm

    iphone speed apps

    Thank god for apple. The police should be pleased that this is happening if their genuine reasons are for slowing people down....however cant help but thinking the police only have money in mind.its a very good cash cow is fining people for very minor mistakes. They disgust me.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 2:18pm

    Lol, the only thing this app is useful for is so speeders will slow down and stop only at those red lights and speed traps and the moment they are past them the zip right back up to 10+ miles over the speed limit.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 2:56pm

    @ A Dan

    Now thats called embracing technology. Most people arent too keen on that.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Kevin Carson, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 3:06pm

    Hypocrites

    They're also prone to arresting people with video cameras for "interfering with police work." Whatever happened to their favorite slogan: "Only the guilty need fear?" Maybe they should have a new slogan: "Cockroaches don't like you turning on the kitchen light."

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 3:35pm

    Live free or die. This is the American way. You set up a barrier and someone else builds a mousetrap around your barrier. I thank God that I live here. If you don't like the IPHONE app, we have a court system and a legal process, and it is well within your right to file a lawsuit on behalf of your police department.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    AZ, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 3:49pm

    action... reaction

    it's not cowardly to do what you can to avoid getting a ticket... i have a gps angel speed cam detector - works great... got it for $99 and i'm not ashamed or sorry that i did. www.gpsangel.com

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    teknosapien (profile), Jul 9th, 2009 @ 4:45pm

    maybe the cops

    should give up the radio and radar gun
    using the tech makes them just as much a pussy

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 4:46pm

    Actually I'd prefer if there were just chips in every car that read the current speed limit via RFID and capped your car's speed at that limit. Then there'd be no more speeding tickets, cities would be out millions and cops would be laid off en masse. Sounds like exactly what they deserve.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2009 @ 6:41pm

    Is it cowardly to measure and report yellow light times which are less than the lawful standard ?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Gerie, Jul 10th, 2009 @ 12:18am

    Works fine in Holland

    In the Netherlands "surprise" speedtraps on interstates are announced on the radio alongside traffic information. Less tickets are given, but more people adhere to the speedlimit, resulting in safer roads. Road safety is achieved easier by informing many people beforehand and make them adhere, than to punish a few after they already were speeding. Works like a charm.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    PT (profile), Jul 10th, 2009 @ 2:49am

    It's a legitimate tool

    It has nothing to do with the morality of speeding. Cops are public employees. I am a member of the public that employs them. When I employ someone, I have a right to know where they are and what they're doing at all times. This app provides (some of) that information, so it's just a management tool, like a Barracuda filter that tracks internet usage at work.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Dark Helmet (profile), Jul 10th, 2009 @ 6:51am

      Re: It's a legitimate tool

      "It has nothing to do with the morality of speeding. Cops are public employees. I am a member of the public that employs them. When I employ someone, I have a right to know where they are and what they're doing at all times."

      The CIA, NSA, FBI, US Military, under cover police units, and FEMA would all like a word with you, please.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Jul 10th, 2009 @ 2:35pm

        Re: Re: It's a legitimate tool

        The CIA, NSA, FBI, US Military, under cover police units, and FEMA would all like a word with you, please.

        So that they can further ram home to notion that they - not 'the people' are in charge.

        Like it's supposed to be...



        In a tyranny anyway.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    David, Jul 10th, 2009 @ 1:08pm

    Revenue

    Of course it's all about revenue. We've known that here in the UK for years, despite strenuous denials from the police. They call 'em "safety cameras" to add a different spin. They go to great lengths to park their speed-trap vans where they are bound to catch a few "miscreants", such as a few hundred yards past a fixed speed camera on an up-hill stretch of road near me. There is a showground about a mile further on and it is sheer coincidence, of course, that the speed van seems to make an appearance when something is happening there and, unusually, stays there all day. The cynics amongst us might possibly suggest that they are out to catch all the visiting strangers who might not be aware of their fiendish little scheme.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Arthur Hubbard, Aug 11th, 2009 @ 7:33am

    There is no speed limt

    I have help over 10,000 drivers get out of speeding tickets by just asking the police over one question. Officer Sam please point out in the speed stautue that applyies to me.Guess what it usually says commercial vehicle for hire or transportation of goods. The officers is force to drop his case in disbelief. When they see my customers with that paper work in hand they will probably just go ahead and say we don't want to proceed you honor.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This