The state’s legislature is considering allowing speed cameras in Michigan. Dubbed by some as “speed ticket cameras,” the traffic monitoring devices would be allowed in work zones. The Michigan Senate Transportation, Mobility and Infrastructure Committee met recently to consider legislation already approved in the House. That legislation would authorize automated speed enforcement in work zones.
Green light for automated enforcement
Two bills would allow speed ticket cameras for enforcing vehicle speeds in work zones on a highway or street. Specifically, HB4132 and HB4133 would give the Michigan State Police and the Michigan Department of Transportation the green light to use automated enforcement at sites that don’t have guard rails or other barriers.
At present, there are no speed cameras in Michigan, nor red-light cameras. Under current Wolverine State law, a law enforcement officer must witness violations for a ticket to stick.
If the bills make it through the legislature and are approved by the governor, things could get sticky for speeders. Vehicle owners would get violation notices mailed to them if their rigs are spotted traveling at least 10 mph above the posted speed limit. First-time offenders would get a written warning. Repeat offenders, those with violations within three years, could get fined up to $150. Additional offenses within the same time frame would net fines up to $300.
A revenue generator?
While some would suggest speed cameras in Michigan would simply be a revenue generator, others disagree. Speed camera use has been pushed by the U.S. Department of Transportation as one tool to aid in reducing traffic fatalities. The agency stated that “automated speed enforcement, if deployed equitably and applied appropriately to roads with the greatest risk of harm due to speeding, can provide significant safety benefits and save lives.”
##RVT1131b
I travelled some of the construction areas on I-75 in Michigan this past summer. Most drivers were reasonably well mannered. But I have to tell you, there were plenty that blew your doors off going by and worse, scraped the chrome off your front bumper cutting back into traffic. The speed cameras shouldn’t raise much revenue in comparison to the cost, but they sure could potentially save both lives and reduce vehicle damage!
I’m wholeheartedly in favor of speed cams everywhere! I’m in Portland, OR. I do not drive a lot but frequently see a “fatality” sign when I’m driving City streets. Portland puts a big flashing sign beside where a traffic fatality occurred. It’s left there for at least a month. Just the fact that I don’t drive much (out during the day maybe 6 x month) but see a different sign in a different location at least once a month every time I’m out is a staggering number of traffic fatalities in a City our size.
Traffic cams are democratic, they don’t choose who they catch, everyone who speeds is fair game. Great they are a revenue producer. In Portland, the “victims” are given the option
I see no problem with speed cameras. We have a a major highway that leads to a big city. The speed limit is 55-65mph. I may travel 5mph over the speed limit and see cars that are doing well over 75 and weaving in and out of traffic.
And In fact, they are useful for other reasons also. A hit and run incident, finding a suspect that committed a crime, drug dealing, a stolen vehicle and one of the most important is reducing the number of high speed chases. We had a rash of break ins in our neighborhood. I have cameras on my house and the local police wanted a copy of my videos. These helped the police nab the thieves. They also had videos of the car that was used.
While the article did not specify, I am not sure traffic citation cameras work like surveillance cameras. A traffic citation camera generally only captures a vehicle breaking the law for which they are designated to capture. It appears the registered vehicle owner will be the one fined regardless of who was driving as speed cameras are also planned in California cities.
That’s a good thought to consider, thanks
continued from my below post
…of paying a reduced fine and attending one time “traffic safety class” to have no record of the offense. Only applies to first offense. People will eventually get in the habit of minding the speed limit if they have enough discomfort associated with speeding. Kind of like teaching kids what they should or should not do. LOL1
Thank you R & T for this report.
I don’t mind the cameras a bit, and think they’re probably a good thing..
It’s a go fast tax
Thank you, Russ and Tina! Speeding seems to be extremely widespread, so I am unopposed to adding cameras in strategic spots along roadways. Work zones seem especially appropriate spots, given how defenseless against vehicles workers are (and how necessary road repair and maintenance is). However, I also can easily imagine some thinking this merely the first step on a path ending with big brother government watching every move of everyone. I do not share that opinion even though I have read “Brave New World,” “1984,” and “Animal Farm.”
love these. It’s about keeping everyone safe and having some order.
They have them in Pa, revenue generators is all they are. They claim they are for workers safety, but they don’t care how they set the area up for drivers safety. They’re sometimes so confusing and no uniform speed limit thru construction zones. Avoid Pa as much as possible, too much daily pop up construction zones that hinder traffic movement and cause accidents. They keep approving warehouses, which are roads cant support the traffic.
Red light cameras were a big issue in Albuquerque years ago, it seems they caused more accidents than they prevented due to people slamming on their brakes in fear of getting photographed and fined. Then there’s this little thing about facing one’s accuser in court. The city eventually dropped the program.
More 1984 Big Brother is watching. Should change Michigan State Police to Michigan Police State.