In article <Pine.SUN.3.91.960810194513.13080C-100000@tipper.oit.unc.edu>, Simon Spero <ses@tipper.oit.unc.edu> writes:
> In the UK they now use cameras to deter speeding; the cameras are > triggered by vehicles passing by which exceed the speed-limit, so in > theory it's only naughty people who get photographed. Interestingly > enough, there are far more places with camera warning signs than there > are actual cameras; the actual cameras are moved around at random. Even > though most of the time there isn't a camera there, almost everbody > seemed to slow down in the marked areas; probably because there's almost > 100% chance of being caught if there is a camera there. In Ontario, they tried this on some of the major highways. The most interesting thing about it was that it was proved time and time again that the technology was not up to snuff: there was an almost 0% chance of being caught. When the license plate wasn't obscured or unreadable (which it usually was) the computerized mailing system made some stupid mistake that allowed the person to get off if they challenged it. The interesting thing is that the project was scrapped for these reasons when the next government came in, but studies showed that it _succeeded_ in lowering peoples speed limits. I personally drove consistantly about 20-40km over the speed limit while this was in effect, cuz I knew it sucked, but apparently I was in the minorty. -Robin