Building a Traffic Radar System To Catch Reckless Drivers? 483
cbraescu1 writes "I live in a city with a population in the millions (someplace in the Middle East; the country is not important), and I am mad as hell. The car traffic is going from bad to worse, and I'm sick of all the car accidents that keep happening (we have one of the biggest accident and mortality rates per km of road or per 1,000 vehicles). I just witnessed a car accident a few hours ago, and in the last few months I've given first aid at two other car accidents, all happening within 500 meters of each other. Today's victims escaped alive, but the motorcycle driver who was responsible fled and the police weren't equipped to catch him. There are laws, but not much willingness to enforce them, and no traffic lights at all. After speaking with some of my friends, we decided to take the issue into our own hands: build a traffic radar system able to capture a vehicle's speed, install it at our own expense, and share the generated penalties with the city government (all subject of their approval, of course). We want to start on the main avenue (more than 15 km) and to 'roll' the income from the penalties into covering new streets (so that perpetrators will basically finance the system). We're not rich and we will not ask for our money back. We just need to make the system start and we're confident the penalty fees will cover its spread. So, I'm asking Slashdot: what would be a workable way to build such a system? It must withstand drivers claiming the system is cheating, high temperatures, high levels of humidity, and crappy electricity. Any suggestions would be appreciated. This is about technology saving lives — literally."
Um... shouldn't traffic lights come first? (Score:3, Interesting)
So let me get this straight. The goal is to spend your money on catching speeders rather than installing traffic lights? Really?
the better alternative (Score:4, Interesting)
Force them to slow down (Score:5, Interesting)
Speed bumps may be more effective than radar traps.
Misdirected efforts (Score:3, Interesting)
You cannot solve a social problem with technology, or strict laws.
Out Source It (Score:2, Interesting)
Find a country willing to provide
lower quality services for less money -
then when they continue the downward trend,
complain about the cost of returning the
services to the local level to improve the quality.
3) Profit !
Re:Um... shouldn't traffic lights come first? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Um... shouldn't traffic lights come first? (Score:3, Interesting)
What you're saying makes sense, except that it sounds like the asker doesn't work for the government and essentially wants to be a vigilante.
That is to say, he probably doesn't have the authority to install traffic lights, but he might be able to gather data proving someone is breaking the laws.
Not a great solution, but maybe sometimes you see a problem and you want to do what you can.
Re:Force them to slow down (Score:1, Interesting)
install cameras in high accident areas and record the insanity.... this will raise awareness and (might) bring shame to the city (officials) who are not enforcing the laws.... if enough really tragic videos go "viral" maybe a news story will be done about it...
Toll system (Score:2, Interesting)
Whenever I drive on the tollway, I think tolls should be charged based on lane changes. You'd get left lane changes for free. Every left lane change after that would cost. That means you'd be able to get into the left lane once and it would charge anyone who insists on weaving back and forth between lanes to speed themselves up by a few seconds at the cost of slowing everyone down.
Getting passed while in the left lane would put the charge on the person in the left lane if they weren't doing the limit. Those who want to pass to drive 80 in a 55 can just pay extra to drive like madmen.
More fees to be charged for exiting if you weren't in the rightmost lane for the last half-mile.
Re:Average speed cameras (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Traffic Lights? (Score:3, Interesting)
I know it sounds like typical western arrogance to suggest it, but I think the example of major cities in Europe and North America is informative here. You'll see that people will (mostly) honor traffic lights, but they will (mostly) ignore speed limits. It's probably because traffic light violations are (pardon the expression) black and white: either the light was red, or it wasn't, and a simple still camera can prove it one way or the other. By comparison, speed is more difficult to determine and prove (as anyone who has beaten a speeding ticket can confirm). The notion that radar guns and cameras will be effective in convicting perpetrators in a chaotic traffic environment is naive.
Meanwhile, this sounds like a great opportunity to practice some grassroots democratic activity on a subject that you have a chance of getting people behind: genuine public safety. Start educating the public about the traffic injury/fatality rates, and petition the government to do something sensible about it. Like traffic lights. Governments - even corrupt and lazy ones - do respond to public pressure on issues like this: ones with no ideological or political agenda,* which have the potential to make them look good to the masses, and maybe give them an opportunity to impose a little public order (which isn't always a bad thing). In any case, neither approach (traffic controls or speed-radar-vigilantism) will do one damn bit of good if the community doesn't support it. Not passively, but actively supporting it. You need a movement, not tech toys.
*Aside from pissing off any libertarianists in the population, but that's something that both left and right agree on :)
Re:Any suggestions would be appreciated (Score:3, Interesting)
The test to be allowed to pilot a 2-ton metal projectile down a poorly constructed, crowded roadway is among the easiest you'll take in your life. This is not okay.
OP should consider lobbying for stricter driving tests. That would have roughly the same possibility of success (nearing zero), but at least it's a way to solve the problem.
That's what I do for a living. (Score:1, Interesting)
I work for a company that does automated traffic enforcement similar to what you are talking about. Having said that, obviously those systems already exist and making your own would be putting yourself in competition with some big players who are advanced beyond anything you could put together with private funds.
This is not a fun business and you will automatically be super-unpopular just for being associated with it. People don't like getting tickets; they REALLY don't like getting tickets from automated systems. If there is enough public backlash then the politicians or officials involved will feel the heat for it and cut your program. People will dislike your company, too, just for being in the business and offering your services to the government (programs are always set up according to the government's specifications and so government employees actually issue the tickets - we perform the legwork to make everything else possible). They will definitely resent that you make a profit (even if you haven't made one yet).
Now you should start to sense that a huge part of this business is dealing with governments, bureaucracies, legal maters, public opinions, lobbying, etc. It is integral to everything, including the technical aspects your operation. I can tell you that I have seen entire programs die overnight as a result of court rulings.
Once you get a working traffic unit, clear the initial legal hurdles, and establish a program, you can look forward to the operational necessities of the business. These include installing and maintaining traffic sites, processing violations internally, making and maintaining software with which to processes and handle those violations internally and externally (by your clients), running a call center, handling payments, printing and mailing notices, possibly arranging court dates or interfacing with external court systems, and working with various third parties like banks for lockbox accounts, credit card providers, collections agencies, and postal services.
Re:Um... shouldn't traffic lights come first? (Score:2, Interesting)
The goal is to spend your money on catching speeders rather than installing traffic lights?
[Warning: I am the original poster] The goal is to start a "pay for itself" infrastructure of radars (and later on traffic lights) in order to reduce the accidents and the fatalities.
The traffic lights won't be respected (they are virtually unknown, and whenever they are installed nobody cares about them. SO the only practical solution is to have "something" which will make drivers pay if speeding. Sooner or later their own wallets will slow them down.
Re:Can't enforce what is ignored. (Score:2, Interesting)
[Warning: I am the original poster] All I want is to make it easy and FREE for the government to start enforcing the traffic laws. They just do not have the money for these equipments. What I wants it a self-replicating system of such traffic radars, with a revenue sharing system where the government pays nothing, earns part of the generated fines, and our share goes toward installing new radars.
Re:Private technological gizmos (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes, I want to work WITHIN the existing legal framework, by bootstrapping its enforcing. The radars are not some Charles Bronson vigilante tech toys, but should be installed with government consent under a revenue sharing agreement.
speeding vs reckless driving (Score:3, Interesting)
Cameras only catch speeding, and actually encourage reckless driving.
UK police accident stats: TRL323 for example
excessive speed (includes over the limit *and* too great for the conditions; rain/fog etc): Generously, somewhere round 15% of accidents in the UK definitely, probably or even possibly include excessive speed as a component. The largest component by far is inattention ~25%, then comes failure to judge ~20% other road users and looking but not seeing ~20%, all of which are simply reckless driving.
Install speed bumps (you can even buy them on ebay) rather than cameras. Cheap to install and maintain and they do cause people to slow down, but more importantly, they make drivers pay attention to the road or they destroy the vehicle suspension. They also don't require police enforcement or law courts to be effective. If you set them far enough apart, drivers will be able to make reasonable progress, but will be physically incapable of exceeding the limit and will have to pay attention.
It's called traffic calming and it (road design) has a much larger effect on accident rates than cameras.