It's insane the lengths that some people will go to save a few seconds on their commute, while also endangering others.

  • CommodoreSixtyFour_@discuss.tchncs.de
    ·
    11 months ago

    That is a bad take.

    TL;DR: If you do incriminating stuff, you should be incriminated.

    There are rules that every driver has to adhere to. The rules are there for protection of the drivers and the people that rely on the drivers driving safely. But the thing is: without consequences, some people show bad behaviour, one being ignoring the rules which are made to keep people safe. In order to suppress such behaviour, fines and punishment are used.

    I have been driving cars for around 10 years and have gotten a fine three times. The amount I paid for it in total was roughly 10 Euros per year, which is less than 1 Euro per month. And I could have avoided having to pay this by just being mindful and acting according to the rules, which I did not.

    If people feel like they should drive 120 kmh in a 50 kmh zone or even worse, without any proper justification, they do not belong behind the wheel of a car.

    • Awoo [she/her]
      ·
      11 months ago

      TL;DR: If you do incriminating stuff, you should be incriminated.

      Boot tasty.

      • 7bicycles [he/him]
        ·
        11 months ago

        It's a bad TL;DR but they do lay out why it's illegal

        • Awoo [she/her]
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          I couldn't care less. These cameras exist entirely to make councils money. When they actually want traffic slowed they redesign the road properly with traffic islands.

          Destroying these cameras is a good thing. It either fucks over council revenue sources that mainly fuck the poor while affecting the rich not one bit, or it results in getting actual redesigns of the roads properly because they do actually want that road to be safer.

          This method is a little extreme though tbh we usually just chuck paint on them. This one is tall in order to make that less viable it seems.

      • CommodoreSixtyFour_@discuss.tchncs.de
        ·
        11 months ago

        Oh, yeah... so if you do incriminating stuff, say... acting in a way that directly leads to people being hurt, maimed and / or traumatized, you should just get a pat on the back. I will just have to presume that this is what you are saying.

        • Awoo [she/her]
          ·
          11 months ago

          acting in a way that directly leads to people being hurt, maimed and / or traumatized

          If that's your benchmark then 90% of people should be considered criminal.

          Out of interest do you support Israel and/or the continuation of the war in Ukraine or do you support ceasefires?

    • Saff@lemmy.ml
      ·
      11 months ago

      People would be less upset about the cameras if a) we weren’t already the most surveilled western country already. B) the fine for minor speeding was minor. as you mentioned you paid 100 euros for 3 fines. In the uk you can be fined for doing 33 in a 30, and the fine will be 100 euros per time, plus points that makes your insurance go up as well. And c) there weren’t so god slam many of them. I live in Europe now, but went back to the uk to visit friends and family and honestly there have to be about 40-50 times many cameras in the uk than in Germany!

      • 7bicycles [he/him]
        ·
        11 months ago

        Speaking from germany, 33 in a 30 wouldn't even trip the speed cams here. Earliest infraction is basically doing 6mph over on a 30mph road, which would come at 50€ fine. We apparently also have 50 times less speed cameras and it absolutely does not stop people from fucking malding over them. They have to be designed bulletproof here now and even those still get regularly blown up. None of the points you raise change anything about it, because the core issue is people are terminally car brained