I have a little pushback to the claim that people are saying, speed cameras target marginalized people… It’s not exactly that, it’s more that the regressive nature of the fines disproportionally cost lower income people more. And due to historical racial injustice, dangerous roads are more likely to be present in neighborhoods with more black and brown people.
That said, the banning of speed cameras is infuriating to me.
There could be ways to make camera finds more equitable… There definitely should be a grace period.
And perhaps the first ticket is just a warning. In some countries, the fine is proportionate to the driver’s income.
Ignores the reports produce by his own transportation department and makes speed cameras illegal!
I've driven many many kilometres over the past five decades (many of them over the speed limit I admit) and I still cannot see any rationale in banning speed cameras. They're used effectively all over the world and the notion that they target already marginalised people is nonsensical, they target people too distracted to see the signs, understand the situation and slow down.
Indeed, for most of the people who say speed cameras target marginalised people, I'd posit this is the only time they ever consider marginalised people!
Every argument about getting people to slow down is that dril tweet "sure drunk driving kills people, but also it helps a lot of people get to work on time, so who's to say if it's good or bad" ad nauseum.
Ohio also makes the use of speed cameras difficult. (My city's charter also includes a ban on their use. Opposition from the NAACP has been a factor in not overturning it.)
I understand Dublin, a Columbus bedroom community, has a workaround: they send violators a letter detailing their infraction and using it as a teachable moment. No fines levied.
From an article about Ohio's latest restrictions, enacted in 2025:
"Ohio counties and townships will no longer be allowed to operate traffic-camera programs, under Senate-added language to the transportation budget.
"It’s state lawmakers’ latest salvo in their years-long effort to rein in the use of traffic cameras, once used by dozens of local governments around the state to catch and ticket motorists for violations such as speeding or running a red light.
"Use of traffic cameras in Ohio has particularly dropped off since the legislature passed a 2015 law forbidding local authorities from issuing traffic-camera tickets unless a law-enforcement officer is stationed near each camera.
"Nine counties deduct money from their share of state funding for local governments to offset revenue from traffic-cameras fines, according to the association: Brown, Columbiana, Cuyahoga, Franklin, Huron, Lucas, Montgomery, Summit, and Trumbull counties. However, counties also have to make such deductions if cities or other local governments within them operate camera programs."
One of the infuriating arguments against safety cameras is "you're targeting historically marginalized communities." As if saving the lives of people who live in marginalized communities is a bad thing.
I have a little pushback to the claim that people are saying, speed cameras target marginalized people… It’s not exactly that, it’s more that the regressive nature of the fines disproportionally cost lower income people more. And due to historical racial injustice, dangerous roads are more likely to be present in neighborhoods with more black and brown people.
That said, the banning of speed cameras is infuriating to me.
There could be ways to make camera finds more equitable… There definitely should be a grace period.
And perhaps the first ticket is just a warning. In some countries, the fine is proportionate to the driver’s income.
And then there's bloody Doug Ford in Ontario!
Ignores the reports produce by his own transportation department and makes speed cameras illegal!
I've driven many many kilometres over the past five decades (many of them over the speed limit I admit) and I still cannot see any rationale in banning speed cameras. They're used effectively all over the world and the notion that they target already marginalised people is nonsensical, they target people too distracted to see the signs, understand the situation and slow down.
Indeed, for most of the people who say speed cameras target marginalised people, I'd posit this is the only time they ever consider marginalised people!
Every argument about getting people to slow down is that dril tweet "sure drunk driving kills people, but also it helps a lot of people get to work on time, so who's to say if it's good or bad" ad nauseum.
Ohio also makes the use of speed cameras difficult. (My city's charter also includes a ban on their use. Opposition from the NAACP has been a factor in not overturning it.)
I understand Dublin, a Columbus bedroom community, has a workaround: they send violators a letter detailing their infraction and using it as a teachable moment. No fines levied.
From an article about Ohio's latest restrictions, enacted in 2025:
"Ohio counties and townships will no longer be allowed to operate traffic-camera programs, under Senate-added language to the transportation budget.
"It’s state lawmakers’ latest salvo in their years-long effort to rein in the use of traffic cameras, once used by dozens of local governments around the state to catch and ticket motorists for violations such as speeding or running a red light.
"Use of traffic cameras in Ohio has particularly dropped off since the legislature passed a 2015 law forbidding local authorities from issuing traffic-camera tickets unless a law-enforcement officer is stationed near each camera.
"Nine counties deduct money from their share of state funding for local governments to offset revenue from traffic-cameras fines, according to the association: Brown, Columbiana, Cuyahoga, Franklin, Huron, Lucas, Montgomery, Summit, and Trumbull counties. However, counties also have to make such deductions if cities or other local governments within them operate camera programs."
One of the infuriating arguments against safety cameras is "you're targeting historically marginalized communities." As if saving the lives of people who live in marginalized communities is a bad thing.