Yep, a few times. Mostly in DT and North city for me, but it's definitely become more of a problem of late.beer city wrote: ↑Nov 03, 2021Three times this year I have had someone drive around me at a red light and go through it - I have seen people go through stop signs without slowing for years but have never seen any thing like this. Anyone else experience the same?
Yes, I have been passed on Lafayette only to see the driver run right through the stop sign at Grand / Virginia exit. I have seen terrible driving on Gravois including what appeared to be a race with two cars who ran red lights. I have been passed on Gravois with them using the turn lanes. I live in 63104 and I use Gravois a lot, and that is where I see the worst.beer city wrote: ↑Nov 03, 2021Three times this year I have had someone drive around me at a red light and go through it - I have seen people go through stop signs without slowing for years but have never seen any thing like this. Anyone else experience the same?
Yes, but this has been happening for years. I saw this happen at Delmar & Goodfellow back in 2017, with a SLMPD car a few dozen yards away, and the officer couldn't have cared less. Within the last 3 months I've witnessed this occur at Tower Grove Ave / Vandeventer, TGA / Manchester, and FPP / Sinker. Drive very carefully out there, because people are doing this at major intersections in the middle of the day.beer city wrote: ↑Nov 03, 2021Three times this year I have had someone drive around me at a red light and go through it - I have seen people go through stop signs without slowing for years but have never seen any thing like this. Anyone else experience the same?
^ Maps included at the link:Between Oct. 18 and Oct. 31, St. Louis police issued nearly 360 traffic tickets for moving violations, with 93% of those citations related to speeding.
Police filed approximately 625 accident/crash-related reports during that two-week stretch.
The department shared several maps of data points showing where traffic stops were conducted in specific parts of the city.
You know if it will deter folks from blasting through intersections for fear of being ticketed then stick it on a billboard at every one of those intersections for all I care. TBH deterrence is preferable to punishing after the fact.bwcrow1s wrote: ↑Nov 04, 2021Why are they telling the public where they are going to enforce?
About as hot of a tactic as telling the news where they are going to hot spot police.
That is a fantastic article!rbeedee wrote: ↑Nov 04, 2021There's a Slow Boring article from today making the case for more automated enforcement: https://www.slowboring.com/p/traffic-enforcement
They do more or less exactly that in the UK: they use automatic enforcement, tell you they're doing it with large and obvious signs, and generally build better roads. The net result being far fewer people die per mile there, and far far far fewer per passenger mile. It's almost bloody magic.rbb wrote:You know if it will deter folks from blasting through intersections for fear of being ticketed then stick it on a billboard at every one of those intersections for all I care. TBH deterrence is preferable to punishing after the fact.
-RBB
It doesn't go much into how to avoid some of the negative consequences like cities manipulating speed limits, light timing, etc. to maximize revenue (for the city or private operators) rather than safety, but I think there are ways to address them, like transparent records, directing the revenue stream to safe street improvements (bump outs, crosswalks, etc). It just seems like a good way to let us redirect some policing resources, save money, reduce the risk of negative interactions between police and citizens over trivial issues, and improve enforcement of genuinely important safety laws. I also like the idea of more enforcement paired with lower fines.symphonicpoet wrote: ↑Nov 05, 2021That is a fantastic article!rbeedee wrote: ↑Nov 04, 2021There's a Slow Boring article from today making the case for more automated enforcement: https://www.slowboring.com/p/traffic-enforcement
Even if you can still manipulate something to maximize revenue, at least with automated enforcement you should reduce bias somewhat, and that's still a good thing. I recall studies that suggested red light cameras caused more accidents at intersections where they were installed, but those accidents were less serious. If you get fewer serious injuries in the deal that's a trade worth making. Fewer dead pedestrians and cyclists. Fewer tense interactions between drivers and police. I got a couple automated tickets in the UK. (For driving through a pair of bus gates. I was following the car's sat-nav at the time and never even saw one of them. The other was a pure moment of navigation frustration for which I paid handsomely.) But you know what? I can scream at a letter all day and nobody gets hurt. (Well, maybe me if I pop an artery. So maybe if the cop has remarkably good first aid training, but in general I think screaming at the letter is probably safer.)rbeedee wrote: ↑Nov 05, 2021It doesn't go much into how to avoid some of the negative consequences like cities manipulating speed limits, light timing, etc. to maximize revenue (for the city or private operators) rather than safety, but I think there are ways to address them, like transparent records, directing the revenue stream to safe street improvements (bump outs, crosswalks, etc). It just seems like a good way to let us redirect some policing resources, save money, reduce the risk of negative interactions between police and citizens over trivial issues, and improve enforcement of genuinely important safety laws. I also like the idea of more enforcement paired with lower fines.symphonicpoet wrote: ↑Nov 05, 2021That is a fantastic article!rbeedee wrote: ↑Nov 04, 2021There's a Slow Boring article from today making the case for more automated enforcement: https://www.slowboring.com/p/traffic-enforcement
