New speed camera OK’d on Route 5

[Stew]

A new speed camera will be added in front of Grace Christian Academy in Waldorf effective Nov. 4, the Charles County Sheriff’s Office announced.

The camera will be on the northbound side of Route 5 near Billingsley Road.

Cameras for Thomas Stone High School and General Smallwood Middle School also will be put back into rotation. The camera for Thomas Stone is near the 3700 block of Leonardtown Road, northbound and southbound. The camera for General Smallwood is near the 4900 block of Indian Head Highway, northbound and southbound. All speed enforcement cameras are placed inside school zones, which are identified with signs that the speed limit is photo-enforced, police reported.

Sheriff’s office spokeswoman Diane Richardson said there are a lot of studies and factors that go into determining where the cameras will be placed.

“Speed camera locations are determined by citizen complaints about speed, complaints from school staff and parents, our own observations and any enforcement information we have,” she said. “We look at all that and determine whether a speed camera would be viable in that area.”

The sheriff’s office has three mobile cameras, which are generally rotated every week among school zones at Berry Elementary School, Grace Christian Academy, Dr. James Craik Elementary School, Daniel of St. Thomas Jenifer Elementary School, Malcolm Elementary School, Maurice J. McDonough High School, General Smallwood Middle School, Thomas Stone High School, William B. Wade Elementary School and Westlake High School.

Camera locations are posted weekly on the sheriff’s office Facebook page. Cameras are activated 6 a.m. to 8 p.m. Monday through Friday all year long, with the exception of Wade Elementary, which operates from 7 a.m. until 6 p.m. Citations are issued to the registered owner of the vehicle and only if the speed was 12 mph or more over the posted speed limit. A school zone speed camera violation is a $40 fine with no points.

For more information about automated speed enforcement cameras, go to www.ccso.us.

 

[stgislander]

A new speed camera will be added in front of Grace Christian Academy in Waldorf effective Nov. 4, the Charles County Sheriff’s Office announced.

The camera will be on the northbound side of Route 5 near Billingsley Road.

Great... just great.

 

[tommyjo]

Oh the horror...you can ONLY drive 12mph above the posted speed limit.

 

[blazinlow89]

Oh the horror...you can ONLY drive 12mph above the posted speed limit.

Yet you can go to a lot of other states and the speed limit on roads like 5 and 235 have a speed limit of 65 MPH or higher. Speeding tickets are a nice cash cow for the state.

 

[glhs837]

Oh the horror...you can ONLY drive 12mph above the posted speed limit.

The sad thing is, the analysis never mentions accidents caused by speeding, or people injured, the suposed reason these things were made lawful in the first place. So, why are we putting a camera there? To make money. No child from that school is ever near that roadway, and I'll venture a guess that the likelihood of a fatal pedestrian accident at 62mph vice 50mph is virtually the same. One of the normal arguments is that a pedestrian hit at 25mph has a better chance at survival over one hit at 35. And thats snesible. But I'm pretty sure your chances of living dont increase if I slow down from 62 to 50.

Face it, the whole program serves no purpose other than revenue generation.

 

[Lurk]

Face it, the whole program serves no purpose other than revenue generation.

Well, there is the fact that Chuck County BOE will no longer bus private school kids to school. So in a way sarcasm the county can say they are providing for the kiddies. They now come to school in droves of automobiles that didn't crowd the highway before. They will have a "safer" trip because of the camera.















Plus, there's the fact the Donks who run the county cannot seem to find a way to cut spending so they need another revenue source.

 

[So_what]

It's about money, not safety. :shrug:

 

[Stew]

Face it, the whole program serves no purpose other than revenue generation.

So true. Under the "guise" of safety which is impossible to win an argument against. Sad thing is, when jurisdictions need more money the easy answer will be "add more speed cameras". Wouldn't be surprised if one day they're everywhere! There is one in DC that is located in the middle of this STEEP downward hill. Speed limit is 25mph and in order to avoid a ticket you have to totally ride the brake hard, if you coast down the hill you're screwed... $$$. Nothing but a cash trap.

 

[SG_Player1974]

Put a couple at the intersections of NB and SB 235. Would probably be enough to eliminate county tax!

Don't forget that these cameras also decrease the need for physical enforcement thus, allowing the powers that be to cut funding/personnel in law enforcement.

 

[glhs837]

Put a couple at the intersections of NB and SB 235. Would probably be enough to eliminate county tax!

Don't forget that these cameras also decrease the need for physical enforcement thus, allowing the powers that be to cut funding/personnel in law enforcement.

Dont think I have ever seen a report of that happening. Mostly because the amount of speed enforcement in school zones is limited, and the politicians need the cooperation of law enforcment to sell these. If you cut the police department funding/manning, how long do you think it would be before the Sheriff who helped sell these instead outs them as revenue generators. Takes virtually no effort to show that these are wortless, the only reason they proliferate is mongo lobbying efforts by the industry, greed/desperation to not raise taxes on the part of polticians, and apathy from law enforcement. "Meh, my guys wont get tickets, and they do no harm, so why not". Generally speaking, they get about 5-7 years of profits before folks get fed up and start moving to boot them out.

Oh, lets not a forget a media, that at first anyway, simply regurgitates the PR from the interested parties and ignores critics. "Just a bunch of whiners who dont want to get tickets"

 

[SG_Player1974]

You might be right about that! Its not like traffic enforcement, at least in this area, is of a major concern to LEO beyond speed traps and DUI check points.

I have made multiple posts on here about traffic offenses that occur EVERY day... without fail... on the local roadways and NEVER have I seen LEO enforcing it.

Now... I know some yahoo is gonna jump in here and say "Its not like they don't have better things to do than sit at an intersection and watch for lane abusers and traffic light runners" but, think of it this way....

That same analogy could be used like this "I guess the server at your table has better things to do then to than to bring you a drink or to wipe the nasty food off of your table before you sit down to eat!"

 

[Hannibal]

The main point to prove safety vs. cash here is their frequent moves. Let's be honest - they DO in fact work and get people to slow down. I don't like them but I really have no issue with them being placed in school zones. But does the County's concern with safety decrease at random points so they move them away?

I mean, if the true concern is safety, leave them in place and let them do their job. They do get motorists in the habit of slowing down and cruising through the areas in a safe manner. It only takes a matter of a few days to "train" the public. At that point, the VAST majority of people drive slowly and the camera only gets those who haven't "learned" yet.

Mission (of safety) accomplished.

But that doesn't make money. Once the public learns to slow down, the County makes no more money. So it's time to move it to a place where the motorists aren't "trained" yet. Those first couple weeks of use generate tickets at an alarming rate ...... until the public slows down .......... and the County moves it somewhere else.

 

[glhs837]

Sg, I agree, there could be more enforcment. I would like to see it focussed on the sort of behaviors that cause crashes. But that's hard to do, procedurally, and often cause a high number of cases taken to court, which costs money. Speed enforcement, easy to do, large number of citations, few challenges. These remarks concern officer enforcement, not automated enforcement, thats a different issue. I think unmarked cars with cameras could do a lot to enhance traffic safety by mixing it up with traffic and nailing unsafe operators.

Hannibal, the real question is "safer than what". You say have increased safety by getting folks to slow down, right? That satement implies that there was a danger caused by people speeding. Thats one of my basic arguments right there. For lsower to be safer, faster must be proven to be dangerous. And in most places, at least in MD, there are no cases of children being harmed by speeders in school zones. Hell, in one place near Baltimore, the best they could come up with was a 20 year old case of a girl who was hit near a school. Guy was drunk, she crossed nowhere near a crosswalk, but it made the advertisements.

If your whole program is based on a basically bad assumption, your program has no chance of doing good.

 

[crushmymugshot1]

The commissioners voted 3-2 to not fund any raises for any county employees for fiscal 2015. The language of the bill, however, makes the law take effect retroactively.

 

[Hannibal]

Hannibal, the real question is "safer than what". You say have increased safety by getting folks to slow down, right? That satement implies that there was a danger caused by people speeding. Thats one of my basic arguments right there. For lsower to be safer, faster must be proven to be dangerous. And in most places, at least in MD, there are no cases of children being harmed by speeders in school zones. Hell, in one place near Baltimore, the best they could come up with was a 20 year old case of a girl who was hit near a school. Guy was drunk, she crossed nowhere near a crosswalk, but it made the advertisements.

For me, and I am one who is always saying "less control/gov't", I don't have a problem with this type of enforcement in a school zone or even in a neighborhood. The fact is, there is a speed limit in these zones and people ofter exceed them. I am a frequent speeder. On the major highways, I'd say on average, I am running 15 mph over when conditions allow. Heck, I travel 495/I-95 around 5AM each morning and in many stretches, I am doing 80mph (along with pretty much everyone else). But, to me at least, doing 15 mph over the posted 55 mph limit is far less consequential than doing 15 mph over the posted 25 mph limit in a school zone or a neighborhood.

It's all about reaction time and when you do 40 mph in a 25 mph - you are reducing your reaction time and distance SIGNIFICANTLY and the target in your sights is often/likely to be a child. For that reason alone, I am OK with stingently enforcing the posted speed limits. My only point to my earlier post though was that if the County is putting these out to protect the kids as they state - they need to keep them there and stop moving them. Once motorists know they are there and expect them to be there, their driving habits will change and they will slow down. This will acheieve the objective.

What aggrevates me is that once the drivers learn and ultimatley slow down, the revenue stream stops flowing ....... so the County moves them. And once their gone, the drivers know they don't have to slow down (even though they should) and they return to their old habits again. Then back come the camera.

I understand your point saying that these type incidents rarely happen (kids hit in school zones) - but that doesn't change the fact that greater speeds equal greater force and less reaction time. That increases risk. And at the end of the day, the cameras are only ticketing you when you violate the law (by a pretty large factor actually).

Now, I see them occasionally on I-95 and hate this concept. You literally see a wave of break lights infront of you when people discover these things off to the side of the road. And their nailing peple doing 67 in a 55. Traffic at these times in the AM are averaging 75 mph so people are having to nose dive to not get ticketed. I see no benifit and it's simply a money grab.

 

[SG_Player1974]

I realize this is fairly obvious but I figured I would call it out on it's own.....

Doesn't the fact that they MOVE the cameras prove that it is just a cash grab? If they were concerned about patrolling speeders in that particular area then they would just leave them there...

 

[vince77]

If they took the speed cameras away and put a police officer at those locations everyday with signs warning you there was radar ahead, would that be a cash grab too?

 

[SG_Player1974]

If they took the speed cameras away and put a police officer at those locations everyday with signs warning you there was radar ahead, would that be a cash grab too?

Uhhh... YES! Especially when that police car and sign gets reassigned to a different location after ticketing incidents go down due to the public being aware of the presence of the police car posted there. As mentioned before.... it is not about safety. Its about revenue.

 

[vince77]

Are there any examples of speed enforcement that are not a cash grab then? Should speed enforcement be done away with by police?

 

[SG_Player1974]

Are there any examples of speed enforcement that are not a cash grab then? Should speed enforcement be done away with by police?

No one is saying that speed enforcement isn't a necessary evil. What is being said here is that these cameras are being procured and used under the guise of "safety" when moving them from place to place due to revenue falling off is in direct contradiction to that. Hence... the reasoning behind the money grab title.