Talk:Traffic enforcement camera

Home Office Type Approval was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 24 June 2023 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Traffic enforcement camera. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

Robotics Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Robotics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Robotics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RoboticsWikipedia:WikiProject RoboticsTemplate:WikiProject RoboticsRobotics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law Enforcement

	Law portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Law Enforcement. Please Join, Create, and Assess.Law EnforcementWikipedia:WikiProject Law EnforcementTemplate:WikiProject Law EnforcementLaw enforcement articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Transport

	Transport portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Transport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TransportWikipedia:WikiProject TransportTemplate:WikiProject TransportTransport articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Archives of past discussion[edit]

Archive 1
Archive 2

Merger proposal[edit]

I propose merging the content of Red light camera into this article. Both articles as they presently stand are fairly solid bases for a good bit of improvement, and merging them will coördinate editors' efforts more efficiently, without duplicative work. —Scheinwerfermann ^T·_C07:34, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Red-light cameras are a subset of this topic.Socrates2008 (Talk) 10:04, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I oppose a merge at this stage. They are different topics. There is nothing in either of those posts (especially the second!), which tells me why they should be merged, apart from some hypothetical ease of editing. To merge two different topics needs better logic than that. HiLo48 (talk) 10:46, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I oppose a merge at this stage. Currently the three main uses for these cameras have their own articles and each article has a good deal of content in its own right. What benefits would a merge bring and how do you propose to stop the merge unbalancing the article? If you can see how to improve the articles then please do so, but please do it as two separate articles. PeterEastern (talk) 15:23, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Initially I was minded to support, however on reflection and considering the RLC article is pretty long and detailed I oppose a merge at this stage. Springnuts (talk) 20:46, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Red light cameras are specific and detailed enough to need its own article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frmorrison (talk • contribs) 14:19, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose While it is a sub-article, the Red-Light Camera Article goes into way more detail, and alot of that would be lost if it was merged into this article. Garrett247 (talk) 09:12, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Red-light cameras are a type of traffic enforcement camera. The boundaries are increasingly artificial with the increase of enforcement cameras that infringe both red-light and speeding offenses. 163.189.7.40 (talk) 05:07, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy section is mostly negative POV. Where's the positive POV?[edit]

I like these cameras. I don't break the law. They discourage others from doing so.

Can I add a section saying that?

I think I know the answer, but isn't this a classic example of the problems of having a Controversy section? Those wanting to complain have been given an outlet by Wikipedia. Those who like these things haven't. That's a total lack of balance. HiLo48 (talk) 21:53, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. I've added a point about the cochrane review in the effectiveness section, and edited the NCHRP Synthesis 310 section to reflect the actual conclusions of the report. I feel like deleting the other points in the section as they are individual towns and / or comments of reliability rather than effectiveness, which are not the same thing. A camera can send entirely false infringements and still reduce casualties or vice-versa. (RobinGrant (talk) 01:55, 11 October 2012 (UTC))[reply]

First use of photo radar in the United States - Traffic Monitoring Technologies[edit]

Regarding "The first speed camera systems in the USA was in Friendswood, Texas in 1986 and La Marque, Texas in 1987.[40] Neither program lasted more than a few months before public pressure forced them to be dropped." and "In 1992 cameras have been rejected by voters in referenda in Batavia, Illinois."

The company involved in these contracts was Traffic Monitoring Technologies. I introduced the two founders of Traffic Monitoring Technologies and was the very first employee.

The only use of photo radar in Friendswood, the location of the offices of Traffic Monitoring Technologies, was for R&D and testing. No contract was ever signed with the city of Friendswood and no citations were ever issued in that jurisdiction.

The first contract was with Galveston County and the radar was operated only on Interstate 45 in the south portion of League City and a little to the south. For what it's worth, I was on location in the inside median southbound on I45 for the first photo radar session in that contract for which citations were issued. That contract lasted for approximately 18 months and was not voted out by voter referendum. To the contrary, the Galveston County Constable involved decided to shut it down. My recollection is that the Galveston County commissioners would have been happy to see it keep going.

The contract with the City of La Marque lasted for less than a year. I don't remember if it was voted out by voters or by the city council.

The third contract was with the City of Paradise Valley, Arizona and the fourth with Pasadena, California.

As for Batavia, Illinois, only a few warnings were issued, no citations at all. There was a non-binding referendum to stop the use of photo radar. Initially, the city council seemed to be ready to disregard the referendum, but then they turned around and voted to cancel the project catching us completely by surprise.

65.68.190.232 (talk) 09:48, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Other potential uses of camera systems, but not necessarily traffic.[edit]

At Traffic Monitoring Technologies, the first American photo radar company, we were approached about other automatic camera systems including some that are already listed in the "Other" section.

Some that aren't listed (and aren't necessarily involved in traffic law enforcement):

1) Weight in motion -- to measure the weight of trucks on the road and issue citations if over the weight limit.

A side issue involved weighing the very large trucks in a strip mine to determine how much ore each truck was carrying. Knowing the density of the ore and the shape of the cargo bed of the truck, we thought about using lasers to measure the height of the ore to determine the volume of the ore and thus the total weight.

2) Front plate citations -- this has been done on a limited scale. In one of the early photo-radar contracts with Traffic Monitoring Technologies, a limited number of citations was issued for vehicles with no front license plates. I don't remember if we did this in Paradise Valley, Arizona or in Peoria, Arizona.

The operation of the photo radar unit took a picture from the front and then waited a period of time based on the observed speed before taking a picture with a camera attached to the front of the vehicle. If there was no front license plate and the back plate was issued by that state, then a citation was issued for no front license plate. Thus, the owner of the vehicle would receive two separate citations in the mail -- speeding and no front license plate. However, this was done with the existing, unmodified unit and incidental to the issue of the speeding citation.

It is very unlikely that there is any record on the Internet about this. It was done prior to the existence of the web and relatively few citations were issued.

3) Airport noise -- to measure the noise of departing aircraft at night for noise abatement.

4) Pollution measurement -- to measure the exhaust of passing vehicles and issue citations to those with excessive emissions.

I don't know if any of these have been fully developed and put into use.

65.68.190.232 (talk) 22:00, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

65.68.190.232 (talk) 23:17, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

History[edit]

German company Telefunken produced traffic enforcement cameras in 1959. 47.64.129.216 (talk) 13:54, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page[edit]

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

http://www.roadtraffic-technology.com/contractors/photo_enforcement/gallery.html
Triggered by \broadtraffic-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 11:02, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 19:18, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Traffic enforcement camera. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:53, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Traffic enforcement camera. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:50, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Senior Seminar[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 9 January 2023 and 28 April 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Paytynlundeen (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Paytynlundeen (talk) 23:34, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New two-way speed cameras[edit]

Suggest including these skinny 2 way cameras in use in West Country ... https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2023/08/23/12/74636151-12436581-image-a-1_1692789677452.jpg

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12436581/Two-way-speed-cameras-catch-drivers-going-directions-rolled-nationwide-3-000-ticketed-two-week-trial.html ?

Duskylane (talk) 20:12, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps, though where this technology fits into this global article is not clear. It might be new in the UK, but is it new on a global scale? And I have concerns about a source that describes an obvious camera on a bright yellow pole as "stealth". Really? HiLo48 (talk) 00:29, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]