- Oct 5, 2012
- Reaction score
At least they have a camera sign right above it.
Lots in the news lately, some posted here.
Legislation needed to control cities using it as cash cow.
Other cities across Canada now trying to jump in while the feasting is good.
Studies showing they are used for revenue not safety are becoming more frequent.
The slow public will eventually catch on, but long after the fact.
That's just dirty, plain wrong.
You know something I don’t?You guys reqlize that Uniden is working hard at fixing the MRCD issue and it will most likely be fixed on the next firmware right?.
I know it is hard to work on maybe but i would bet money on it
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
It’s only catching MRCD traps correctly 35% of the time.ive got a r7 in edmonton and i think it works perfectly fine, it does false sometimes on those k band speed signs thinking its mrcd but it hasnt missed any mrcd. i have noticed tho that the mrcd range seems very low but it still picks up every single one. i usually encouter the mrcd on sask drive and sometimes next to the pressd on yyc trail
Most city’s in U.S. have signs before cameras that say ‘photo enforcement ahead’ which give warning to anyone paying attention. Do they do that up north?I read the full 170 photo enforcement the previous ndp govt of Alberta asked an independent study he done
They never came out and said it’s a “cash cow” but said photo enforcement can be an effective tool used to reduce collisions. But from what they gathered it hasn’t been used at maximize effectiveness at all and locations seems to be chosen at “random”
What’s further condemning is the fact for Edmonton case study for fixed locations between 2009-2016. 41% increase in rear end collisions and 9% increase is side impact collisions where a fixed camera was put in place.
Everything in the report pretty much says Edmonton is deploying ATE (automated traffic enforcement) for revenue vs for safety.
I honestly encourage everyone in Edmonton and Alberta to have a look at that report
Post automatically merged:
That’s exactly it. The box most ppl wouldn’t even have a clue that it’s photo speed trap. But they 1up it even more by hiding it behind a light post.
I keep saying it. This city administration and city council should absolutely been embarrassed and ashamed of themselves. Just a bunch of back door paper napkin dealing clowns.
Yes, for fixed red light camera locations.
I honestly think their silence speaks volumes.You know something I don’t?
Is this some inside information or wishful thinking?
There were here. 3 days of gathering data. It’s been crickets since then.
Post automatically merged:
It’s only catching MRCD traps correctly 35% of the time.
It’s a lot like the R3 on 1.48. Mistaking MRCD as K band.
Ok. Sounds reasonable.I honestly think their silence speaks volumes.
I do think that if they were satisfied with the performance of MRCD on the R7 they would had come out and said it, the fact that we hear crickets means that they do not want to over promise until we get an answer.
I think a big clue here is the silence by the beta testers such as Brain storm and Vortex, I do think that if there was no fix in the immediate future they would had come out and said it, they are not allowed to speak on things they are testing, but I have found that generally speaking they have no problem speaking about what they are not testing.