High Accident Rates at Certain Sites, But Where's the Enforcement?

Monday, October 24, 2005 03:59 AM

Every year ICBC publishes a report on the accident sites in any city.

Every year it seems to be buried in dust when it comes to trying to make our streets and highways safer.

Think about it, when was the last time you saw a police cruiser picking off drivers who run the red lights at Highway 16 and Domano? That after all is the intersection that has the most accidents in this city in recent years.

How about Highway 16 and 97 another hot spot, or again 5th Ave and The By pass?

Perhaps I don’t understand traffic enforcement, but is seems rather ludicrous to me that you set up a radar for example on Foothills as a means of trying to prevent accidents on Domano.

Does the fact that someone is written a speeding ticket somehow instill in the driver not to run amber and red lights? Maybe somneone can explain the connection.

Lets say you get a speeding ticket on Queensway, how does that stop you from crashing a light at 5th and the by pass?

Or is the matter of traffic enforcement simply a means to raise some money for the government and there by justify the existence of the traffic section?

ICBC knows full well where the problem areas are, they pay out insurance claims on a regular basis. On the other hand, do the police check with those same police agencies across the province to try and pin point the hot spots on a monthly basis and then act?

ICBC can’t be faulted for trying to reduce accidents in this province all they need is a bit of help from everyone.

I’m Meisner and that’s one man’s opinion.

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Monday, October 24, 2005 03:59 AM in Views by 250 News

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: supertech on October 24 2005 6:36 PM

I saw a column in the paper today stating the cops get a cut of the money from tickets now. The author seemed to think that would help in controlling speeding etc, but wouldn't do much for big crime as there would be no monetary reward for the RCMP.

Posted by: palomino on October 24 2005 11:13 PM

I remeber when the NDP brought in photo radar to help boost the sagging provincial coffers, and we were told that it would only be set up in "high accident" areas.

Well, that lasted about as long as it took for the cops to get back from New Zealand where they "had" to go to learn to use the equipment --- because they knew how to do it there. ( Apparently the Company who sold us this stuff must not have known how to use it )??

I can't recall ever seeing photo radar in the sites you mentioned Ben, but I saw it it many places where I never heard of an accident happening.

Go figure !!

Posted by: Marty on October 25 2005 7:54 AM

Seems to me you only see the speed traps on sunny days as well.... would it not be better to set them up on rainy and snowy days, when a cars grip is less, thus requiring lower speeds?
Or would that be interupting the police officers inside days.
I bet the owners of timmy's do not like my idea, as it would surely hurt their revenues.

And i like how the police stand on the side of the road with their radar guns, and see a speeder....now logic should say , that this person is driving too fast to be safe, hence why we will ticket them , am i correct?
yet the officer walks out onto the hwy right in front of the vehicle to wave it over....hmmm
If a driver is going to fast ! but the officer still has time to get its speed, and then walk casually away from his radar gun, and out in front of the vehicle and the driver does not run him over....was he ever going to fast too start with?
It would seem to me they were driving at a safe speed and are aware of their surroundings. If not the officer would have ben run down for walking out in front of said driver, correct.
So should logic not say this driver is let go without a ticket.....but if the officer has to jump into the ditch at risk of being run down as the driver was going to fast....then say another 500 yards down the road a group is set up to finally stop this menace and ticket them.
As clearly they were driving too fast!

One more mans opinion.

I am Marty

Posted by: SpeakingOut on October 25 2005 3:27 PM

I definitely believe they should set up more traps at the danger zones, but they would have to give chase via vehicle as the numbskulls who blast through those lights ARE doing dangerous speeds and one would NOT want to step out in front of them in an effort to wave them over.

I guess the fear of having a high speed chase ensue is detrimental to the purpose. Too bad, eventually someone pays for these drivers' stupidy with their lives. Whatever happened to "driving" being a priviledge, not a right.

Posted by: SpeakingOut on October 25 2005 3:39 PM

One more thing, what difference does it make who gets the money from the tickets? Let's keep the focus on the stupidity of the drivers who are getting the tickets. If you speed, you should be caught and made to pay the price, end of story. The law applies to all of us and no one has the right to feel they are exempt just because they are in a hurry. Like the sign says, all those who hate speeding tickets - raise your right foot!

Posted by: Chester on October 25 2005 9:36 PM

Raising revenue on the last sunny Sunday of the month does look suspicious, doesn't it?

I wonder who it is that determines where and when the officers will set up their radar?

If ICBC is truly interested in reducing the accidents at problem intersections, why is it that they don't visibly do something about it where the problems are?

I have lost any confidence I had in ICBC years ago. They are just another money grabbing level of government who is out to s---w us out of our money.

On top of that, try to collect on a claim. Their lawyers are the worst at minimalizing the rights and entitlements of victims.

I pay them the minimum and resent every cent I am forced to pay them.

The perceived relationship between ICBC and the RCMP does smell to me. I would be disappointed if they had a working arrangement. Chester

Posted by: fedup on October 26 2005 5:07 PM

safty always seems to be about how much is it going to cost or how much can we make.I drive for a living and let me tell you thier is a lot of nutty drivers out thier,but I think we have to look at our roads.For one thier is to much traffic for the hyways around here seems thier is always a hugh line of traffic and people trying to pass when its not safe.Its cheaper to hand out tickets then add passing lanes? Next these bad intersections around town if you notice the worst is the hyways through town they are not set up to move traffic they seem to be setup to trap you in town or something.I can get through Edmonton faster then I can get through P.G. And some warning when a light is going to change would be nice most of the lights are set to turn when traffic approches so you can't use the old stale green trick.