Shower thought: Rather than traffic speed signs telling drivers how fast they are going, they should post what the consequence is for their current speed.
It might be more effective for the sign to read "4 points + $280 fine" instead of "80km/h" when you're in a 40km/h zone, no?
Build roads with traffic calming. Narrow lanes with solid bollards on either side with a rough tiled surface will slow down cars much more effectively than any sign, traffic stop, or camera.
The problem is building wide, smooth, and straight roads and then trying to force drivers to drive slower than the road is designed for. That is not possible. Build slow roads and streets and drivers will have no choice to drive safely.
with a rough tiled surface
Bring back cobbles!
Rough tiled surfaces are noisy though. It would be pretty annoying if you live next to such a road if there is more than a homeopathic amount of car traffic.
That's not to say having a 4-lane highway in front of your door would be any better. Just that rough tiling isn't ideal for noise (even when adjusted to the lowered speed).
That's literally the code in the Netherlands. Its a non issue when the streets are built properly. Any street directly next to houses are low speed, and low volume.
Speed bumps are a really efficient way of controlling speed. No driver in their right minds would approach one faster than 25kmh
unlike speed cams they can't be vandalized and if you ignore them you're physically sanctioned there and then
No driver in their right minds would approach one faster than 25kmh
You've clearly never met NYC drivers
Here in The Netherlands we have speed bumps.on 60kmh roads you can cross fine doing that speed. However, you can also jump them at 70 and not be much worse off.
I agree. And I'd have them ahead of every stop sign if I could!
At the very least, speed bumps should be on all roadways that are designated bike routes.
Of course, NIMBYs fight hard against speed bumps.
Raised pedestrian crossings are great at intersections and mid-block crosswalks.
I think they're a little more difficult for car suspensions to dampen since they're wider/longer, so even American-sized SUVs and trucks have to slow down.
And you can control how fast people allowed to go by adjusting the height of the bump. Double bump for maximum carnage, not sure if it's legal though.
Too many dummies are basically illiterate and you want them extra distracted trying to read and comprehend while going 80 km/h?
"Go fast enough to ignore traffic signs. CHECKMATE!" /s
I hear you. I'm just so frustrated by drivers ignoring those YOUR SPEED signs. Maybe a dose of "You're going fast enough to get a $400 ticket!" might just get their attention. But probably not... 😫
There was this study (not car related) on how well fines work, turns out if they are an absolute value (like in most cases) that is relatively low to ones wealth, a lot of people stop caring. Also, people are much more likely to break the law if they believe there is a high chance of getting away with it. So just having a sign might fix nothing, if the people to do not fear the penalty enough
I was imagining more of one of those big traffic signs playing a long marquee lol
Those speeders would be really mad if they could read
We have these on the Ontariobhan. They do nothing
Why does the increment get smaller as you increase your illegal speed?
This offends my sense of natural harmony.
Agreed. Given how speed affects crash energy and stopping distances this is completely backwards.
Yeah, should be exponential or something.
They do nothing
Disappointed, but not surprised.
Some drivers on Ontario highways drive a minimum 140km/h... 😞
I mean, look at the signs, it's the best value for speeding!
Because you need to be actively enforcing this. Speed cam is much more effective at highway speed.
Speed cams do more than this -- they apply the penalty. (A fine, at least)
...they mostly get vandalized.
What we really need (at least where I live) is CONSISTENT ENFORCEMENT.
Speed cams are a great way to do this in theory. Police can't be bothered to stop every speeder, and they have the discretion to decide who actually gets ticketed...which they may be using too much of, tbh.
We have a few speed and red light cameras, and they do work!
But we have even more signs that simply tell a driver what their speed is, then strobe when they go over. It does nothing but tell them what they already know (their speed!).
And to add to the frustration, none of the municipalities in my area will charge a driver based on photo/or video (like they do in the UK). So, the faster you can go, the more likely you won't get caught. I had a guy going 90km/h in a 40km/h the other day (according to my bike radar), and he moved so fast that my camera couldn't pick up his plates. Not that I could have reported him anyway, but that's not the point 😮💨
I’d rather they just put some resources towards fucking enforcement.
Not much point in a $400 fine if there’s never anybody there to write the ticket. The cops in my area will only enforce speeding at a couple of locations around town because it’s convenient for them to nab people there.
I wish they’d move their asses to school zones and actually patrol around catching people actively doing dangerous things. Giving a speeding ticket to someone going 60 in a 50 zone in an area with no sidewalks or cross streets isn’t making anything safer.
I’d rather they just put some resources towards fucking enforcement.
Story of my life. Believe me, I'd rather they just enforce the rules, but after having witnessed too many drivers ignore those "YOUR SPEED" signs, I wonder if taking a different approach would work.
I'd personally want to have automated speed enforcement and actual traffic-calming measures, but there must be something low cost that drivers would be responsive to.
Pro-active law enforcement seems to have disappeared in the sourthern interior of BC for over a decade. The police either enforce the law in highly-publicized campaigns (it's Christmas, so we're going to pull you over...) or respond to calls from the public.
Impact energy and estimated chance of death in a collision
and estimated chance of death in a collision
For them or others? I don't think most reckless drivers are worried about hurting others, or themselves, for that matter. 🫢
The fine should be three days salary, per km/h you're over. On open country, that is. In a school zone, it should be five dayfines per kilometer over the limit.
Most rich people don't get the majority of their income from salary.
I'd also make it so that 5% of your net worth is added to your annual pay for calculations.
No, i am currently learning driving and that would confuse me so much that i would either drive very slow everywhere (and i life on the countryside) or i would be faster tired which is very bad too
It would be better to use ad campaings for that
No, i am currently learning driving and that would confuse me so much
For clarity, the idea is that the sign would not turn on unless you were speeding. So there should be no confusion, and it would be no different from the current "YOUR SPEED IS" signs (except, that those are always on and tend to strobe when people go over the limit).
My thought is that someone might not be bothered by being told what speed they are going. After all, they SHOULD ALREADY KNOW! But if they are told what the consequences are for speeding in real time, perhaps it might deter some drivers or bring attention to those who are unaware?*
*Some are just assholes who will speed no matter what. And then run from the police when they are spotted. You can't really deter those drivers with a sign, or laws...
Ohhh, you meant it that way oops, thats embrassing
somehow i was thinking it was like a round shield with a 30 or 50 or something on it
And was like: do i have to do math to convert the potential fine to the speed limit
Which would make no sense
I am sorry for being rude
I think this could be nice 10m behind "your speed is" signs as another number "xxx.xx€ fine"
Behind so they have a bit more time before its away
But could be stoopid that way
You need to design your streets appropriately and the speed limit will be followed. If you design stroads like a race track, people will speed on it like a race track
If your streets are narrower, has curves, chicanes and trees, it naturally forces drivers to reduce speed without needing speed bumps / radars / giant speed signs (the faster you go, bigger signage is required)
I absolutely know what should be done, but it's extremely difficult to convince planners and decision makers to do it.
Hell, I was told by a city planner that the only way they could put painted lines on some bike routes was if they kept on-street parking (NIMBYs did not want safe roads).
So, now have bike routes with painted "bike lanes", but people just use it as a parking lane, making it more dangerous for cyclists... maddening, and unnecessarily frustrating.
And in other areas, we have bollards to slow down traffic, but guess what? Assholes park in a way that makes it dangerous for cyclists!
Like this guy:
Or this guy:
Not really sure how to say this in english, but this case i'd say the problem in not only at the front-side (bad design) but also on the back-side (enforcing the rules). Rules that aren't enforced are merely suggestions.