Smile.....

[boywonder]

Taken from the Chicago Sun-Times Website: http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-workzone31.html





Cameras to bust speeders



March 31, 2004



BY SHAMUS TOOMEY Transportation Reporter



Radar-activated cameras would shoot photos of cars speeding through tollway work zones under a proposal from Gov. Blagojevich that also would hike fines for the speeders to as high as $1,000.



Four other states now use the cop-in-a-box technology to catch and ticket speeders, but Illinois would be the first to target highway work zones.



Forty-four people, including five road workers, were killed in Illinois work zones last year, state officials said. Two other highway workers were killed by drivers away from work zones in 2003, making it the deadliest construction season in at least five years.



The deaths launched a state task force and spurred Tuesday's proposals, which need to be approved by the General Assembly to take effect.



As part of the effort, the state on Tuesday unveiled a new "Keep Us Alive Drive 45" safety campaign, which uses bright orange ribbons to honor dead workers and remind people to watch out for the current workers.



"Before you get into your vehicle . . . think about the lives of others, the children who are left behind by reckless drivers, the husbands, the wives," said Anna Johnson. Her older sister, highway worker Tina Ball, was killed by an accused drunken driver last September in an Interstate 57 work zone.



"It just takes one split second to take the life of a hard-working person," Johnson said.



The governor's proposal would launch a pilot program to try out the speed-tracking cameras. Drivers going faster than 45 mph through construction zones when workers are present could activate a camera that photographs the car and license plate.



Similar to Chicago's system of catching red light runners on camera, the state would then mail a ticket to the car's owner. It would not be a moving violation but would carry a fine.



The governor moved to hike those fines Tuesday. Speeding through a work zone currently costs $200 for a first offense and $350 for subsequent tickets.



The new proposal would make the first offense a $500 ticket. Subsequent tickets would shoot to $1,000 apiece -- including $250 to fund more state troopers who would patrol the roads.



"Anybody who doesn't take these laws seriously will understand there are consequences from now on," Transportation Secretary Tim Martin said.



Several work zone changes don't need legislative approval and will take effect soon. They include:



*Placing plainclothes troopers with radar guns in construction vehicles to radio descriptions of speeding cars to troopers ahead.



*Spending $40,000 in grant money on 20 electronic flaggers that tell drivers to slow or stop. Each machine needs a worker to run it but allows the worker to stand several feet from the road.



*Installing large road signs that read "Hit a Worker, $10,000 fine, 14 yrs in jail." Last year's strategy of using children's names and handwriting on warning signs "evidently wasn't enough," said Martin.

 

[Brad B]

Man, that's serious.

 

[former86camaro]

People do fly though with workers present. It would stink, but wake up a lot of people.

 

[thinksnow]

It appears that a "certain" governor has done a poor job and run out of other ways to tax folks.



This is ALWAYS such a dangerous idea. Around DC and Boston, there are areas of highway where 80-90 mph are the norm. Then, you enter a "contruction area" with concrete barriers but never any workers. This section of road is marked 35-45 mph with "increased fines." Locals know the enforcement is bs but passers-by do not. Thus, you have people slamming on their brakes and swerving all over the road. The camera thing is a nice idea on paper, but it can easily be fought in court as there is no way to ensure the driver's identity.

 

[topnotchtouch]

It appears that a "certain" governor has done a poor job and run out of other ways to tax folks.



This is ALWAYS such a dangerous idea. Around DC and Boston, there are areas of highway where 80-90 mph are the norm. Then, you enter a "contruction area" with concrete barriers but never any workers. This section of road is marked 35-45 mph with "increased fines." Locals know the enforcement is bs but passers-by do not. Thus, you have people slamming on their brakes and swerving all over the road. The camera thing is a nice idea on paper, but it can easily be fought in court as there is no way to ensure the driver's identity.

Yeah we certainly wouldn't want to inconvenience the people already going well above the speed limit now would we.



Sad to say but, this kind of attitude appears to be all too common. As far as I am concerned people speeding through construction zones need to have their license suspended in addition to a hefty fine.



I have one brother in construction and lost the other to an automobile accident. Driving is not a right, if you don't have any respect for others on the road you have no business being there.

 

[thinksnow]

If you are a 55 driver in the 65 zone when traffic is flowing at 70-75, then it would be impossible for you to understand the dynamics. The point is not one of inconvenience, but rather one of safety. Marking construction zones at absurdly low speeds (35 mph because of concrete barriers) and then using scare tactics to frighten SOME people down to that speed is entirely unnecessary.

Yeah we certainly wouldn't want to inconvenience the people already going well above the speed limit now would we.

 

[Iconoclast]

Last year's strategy of using children's names and handwriting on warning signs "evidently wasn't enough," said Martin.

I hate those signs. You know the ones with some backwards letters (in what I like to call dyslexic font) that say "slow down my mommy works here". Are we to believe that all construction workers children are dyslexic? :wavey



Like thinksnow said many times "construction" zones are just overpriced speed traps. Some discretion should be used in lowering speed limits and doubling fines in work zones. For example, many long term work zones on our turnpike use JERSEY BARRIERS with workers no where near the road. How am I going to hit a worker through a friggin jersey barrier? These are usually the ones with the speed traps too.



On the other hand sometimes there are workers inches from the road with only a few cones around them. These are the times when speed should be monitored. BUT with a visible cop car with lights flashing; NOT an unmarked car out of view with a radar gun or worse yet those automated camera speed traps. Which do you think is more effective at reducing accident risk?

 

[topnotchtouch]

If you are a 55 driver in the 65 zone when traffic is flowing at 70-75, then it would be impossible for you to understand the dynamics. The point is not one of inconvenience, but rather one of safety. Marking construction zones at absurdly low speeds (35 mph because of concrete barriers) and then using scare tactics to frighten SOME people down to that speed is entirely unnecessary.

That is contadictory to your previous post. You stated slowing down for a construction zone was hazardous for people doing 80-90 which is well above any posted speed limit in this country.



Don't assume I am on the opposite spectrum. I drive the limit and if the situation warrants it at most 5 over.



Sure slowing down from 90 to 35 is not safe but, there is absolutely no reason for anyone to be doing 90 on the highway. Just because that is the flow doesn't make it right.



I don't know about your state but, every state I have lived in and driven through gives plenty of warning of a construction site coming up.

 

[thinksnow]

Sad to say but, this kind of attitude appears to be all too common. As far as I am concerned people speeding through construction zones need to have their license suspended in addition to a hefty fine.

In Newport News, VA, a section of I-64 has been under construction since 1991 (no, don't get me started on small-town corruption). It is 5 lanes wide with concrete barriers on the median side. There are NEVER construction workers anywhere near the work to be done. This is marked as a construction zone with increased fines. 1991-2004=13 years of incompetence.



I'm sorry for your loss of your brother, but it is, indeed, more dangerous with the hidden tactics. As Iconoclast noted, if safety was the goal instead of fund-raising, a well-marked patroller with lights blazing would slow drivers down and weed out excessively dangerous drivers.

 

[topnotchtouch]

As Iconoclast noted, if safety was the goal instead of fund-raising, a well-marked patroller with lights blazing would slow drivers down and weed out excessively dangerous drivers.

If they did that the roads would probably be pretty empty. 42,850 people died on US roads last year. The highest number in 12 years. Is getting there just a few minutes faster worth yours, a family member's or someone elses life? Most people tend to not give it a second thought until it affects them directly.

 

[jinxxycat]

In Newport News, VA, a section of I-64 has been under construction since 1991 (no, don't get me started on small-town corruption). It is 5 lanes wide with concrete barriers on the median side. There are NEVER construction workers anywhere near the work to be done. This is marked as a construction zone with increased fines. 1991-2004=13 years of incompetence.

Man I HATE that stretch of 64! And you're right---NEVER any workers there, just a bunch of rebar on an unpaved highway...



I do believe people need to be woken up but unfortunately people have been conditioned to ignore the signs b/c they sit there for years w/o any improvements being made. Just my $.02

 

[thinksnow]

You are a better driver than most on the road. I have come to understand that so there is no need to reinforce the idea further.



Please also research the increase in the number of cars and licensed drivers on the road and provide that increase along with your death statistics.

If they did that the roads would probably be pretty empty. 42,850 people died on US roads last year. The highest number in 12 years.

 

[imported_Macgirl1]

I'm just as guilty as the next person of speeding, but I surely don't speed at the excessive amount of 80-90 mph! I hope those fools aren't going that fast with children in the car with them! That kind of driving should be done on a closed course or track, where construction areas don't exist; then you don't have to worry about slamming on the brakes for the poor passer-by who doesnt' know any better.



Seriously, would you make statements like these to the families of those who lost their loved-ones in these accidents? 45 seems like a high number of fatalities in one year to me. IF we as drivers with a responsibility don't think enough of our fellow man to slow down when they are working on the side of the road, then we should be fined EXCESSIVELY.



Also, some of those reduced speed limits are for the drivers safety. Wouldn't want to hit a bump in the road and have a wreck.

 

[topnotchtouch]

You are a better driver than most on the road. I have come to understand that so there is no need to reinforce the idea further.



Please also research the increase in the number of cars and licensed drivers on the road and provide that increase along with your death statistics.

A monkey can drive better than most drivers on the road.



I just don't follow the herd mentallity that since the flow is going well over the limit, I should too. That is one of the reasons the death toll in the US is so high. Too many people are willing to put their lives and the lives of others at risk in order to save a minute or two.



Frankly I don't give a rats behind about how many new drivers there are each year, 42,850 deaths is unacceptable.

 

[topnotchtouch]

How am I going to hit a worker through a friggin jersey barrier? These are usually the ones with the speed traps too.

Something you might not have thought of is the fact if you do hit the barrier at speed you might swerve into the other lanes? The reason for the low limits is because there is no room to maneuver with those barriers.

 

[thinksnow]

I'm just as guilty as the next person of speeding, but I surely don't speed at the excessive amount of 80-90 mph!

That was poorly worded, and I apologize. Most of the traffic on I-95 (esp. through Ct. and just south of DC) is traveling 80 in the right and middle lanes, and UP TO 90 in the left lane. Upon entering construction areas, everyone reduces their speed but there are a select few who slam on the brakes to obey the 35 (and in some cases, 25) mph signs.

 

[topnotchtouch]

That was poorly worded, and I apologize. Most of the traffic on I-95 (esp. through Ct. and just south of DC) is traveling 80 in the right and middle lanes, and UP TO 90 in the left lane. Upon entering construction areas, everyone reduces their speed but there are a select few who slam on the brakes to obey the 35 (and in some cases, 25) mph signs.

Having driven I-95 many many many times over the past 20 years the problem is no one slows down when they see the first signs warning of construction. They typically lock up the brakes when they run into the bottleneck entering the construction site itself. This is probably typical for most highways. I-95 seems to be worse though, much more so that I usually use 75 and 85 instead between South Carolina and Florida which I travel frequently.

 

[Iconoclast]

Please also research the increase in the number of cars and licensed drivers on the road and provide that increase along with your death statistics.

You want the accident rate "per capita" or per liscenced driver.



Actually, (and I used this example before) Germany has fewer highway accidents per capita than the U.S. including their autobahn, much of which doesn't have speed limits. Rather than blindly inforce a speed limit, germans enforce a style of driving that is safer and make getting a drivers liscences more difficult. For example, you can get (and are more likely to) a ticket for driving too slow in the left lane.



So taken from broader perspective, understand the statement "speeding kills" is ridiculous. Granted, the faster you go, the more likely you are to die in an auto accident. But most US roads speed limits are set too low. Speed should be a factor of the driving conditions, vehicle size and traffic, not low speed limits set for fundraising.



PS. I take the turnpike everyday to work. One day I passed four speed traps on a 12 mile stretch of road, all eastbound. phiff.

 

[topnotchtouch]

You want the accident rate "per capita" or per liscenced driver.



Actually, (and I used this example before) Germany has fewer highway accidents per capita than the U.S. including their autobahn, much of which doesn't have speed limits. Rather than blindly inforce a speed limit, germans enforce a style of driving that is safer and make getting a drivers liscences more difficult. For example, you can get (and are more likely to) a ticket for driving too slow in the left lane.



So taken from broader perspective, understand the statement "speeding kills" is ridiculous. Granted, the faster you go, the more likely you are to die in an auto accident. But most US roads speed limits are set too low. Speed should be a factor of the driving conditions, vehicle size and traffic, not low speed limits set for fundraising.



PS. I take the turnpike everyday to work. One day I passed four speed traps on a 12 mile stretch of road, all eastbound. phiff.

It is a common mistake to think that there are no speed limits on the Autobahn. There are speed limits posted on a good bit of it and in general the limit is 130KM (81MPH) but, it is not enforced. That may soon change as the German government is looking at limiting the speed on the autobahn.



http://www.dw-world.de/english/0,3367,1432_A_1119405,00.html



So you are advocating that our speed limits should be raised or removed and that will lower the death tolls on US roads? Frankly that is recidulous.



Just once sit down and calculate how much time you actually save by speeding. A 100 mile trip with a speed limit of 70 takes about 1 hour 26 minutes, by going 90 rather than 70 you save about 19 minutes. Is the 19 minutes really that important?



Another thing to consider is that for a number of years in the US people buy as many if not more trucks and SUVs than cars. That is not the case in Germany. The majority of their cars are designed for those conditions and drivers are trained for them as well. Your suggestion that speed limits in the US be set by conditions vehicle weight and traffic is all well and good but, in reallity people in SUVs will be hauling butt just as if they were driving a Corvette while talking on a cell phone and eating a cheeseburger. All in an effort to save 5 minutes on their commute.

 

[EricZ]

I just don't follow the herd mentallity that since the flow is going well over the limit, I should too.

Making yourself an obstacle is not the answer. People seem to think they're on some higher moral ground if they're causing traffic around them to slow down. Statistics aside, this is common sense. Forcing faster-moving traffic to slow down, then accelerate again and change lanes is NOT safe, and in my opinion it's more likely to cause an accident than simply going above 65. There's my $.02.