Speed Camera News Our View: Not a pretty picture for these cameras
Our View: Not a pretty picture for these cameras
December 1, 2011 3:42PM
Reprints Updated: December 1, 2011 3:42PM
The Illinois Legislature reconvened recently for the final days of its veto session with some major issues still unresolved, such as gambling expansion and further tax breaks to keep major employers from leaving the state. Lawmakers promise to come back at the end of January to put their noses to the proverbial grindstone.
The legislative plate was full during the short veto work because during the session that adjourned three weeks ago, lawmakers didn’t accomplish much.
But they did manage to quickly approve Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s plan to install speed enforcement cameras near the city’s schools and parks to protect children.
Who could be against such a safety measure? Well, as it turns out, lots of folks have reservations, including us.
If Chicago gets them, you can rest assured Lake County communities will be standing in line to get the same deal.
We’re dubious about the cameras’ effectiveness in deterring speeders, the main motive of raising gobs of cash through fines and about installing more surveillance cameras in addition to red-light cameras on intersection corner. Where’s the limit on government intrusion into our daily lives?
The Chicago plan would put speed cameras in areas within one-eighth of a mile of a park or school. That covers about half of Chicago. A first ticket would mean a warning, followed by fines of $50 for speeding 6 to 10 mph over and $100 for driving more than 10 mph over the limit.
We agree with enforcing speed limits and protecting pedestrians, but a $100 fine for going 32 mph in a 20-mph zone? Seems pretty stiff to us.
And what about police patrols? Sure, patrol cops have other crime concerns, but isn’t spotting speeders part of their job?
Finally, how effective would speed cameras be in protecting pedestrians? Several studies say most pedestrian-vehicle accidents result not from speeding, but from a failure to yield, with distracted driving or drunken driving as other major causes.
Gov. Pat Quinn shouldn’t sign this bill unless it calls for fewer cameras and lesser fines — say $50 for a 10 mph-plus violation and $100 if it’s 20 mph or more. That’s more reasonable and would help keep Big Brother at bay first in the big city and then up north in the suburbs.
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Articles Menu
Find Info
Latest Comments
Member Login
