Phoenix cameras starting on Friday

Where is the updated file located - on the front page? Just want to be sure I'm not using an outdated Phx file. TIA.

Check out the information under the red light cameras tab on the home page. As an active member, you may download the red light cameras file for free. Hope this helps!

I was in Phoenix this past Monday & Tuesday for doctors appts and tests.

I was driving (Eastbound I-10) into Phoenix from Lake Havasu and I started seeing the speed cameras before I even got to Goodyear. Then they're spaced about every 2 miles going into Phoenix.

I had the latest versions of speed cameras & redlight cameras loaded on my Garmin. Most of the cameras that I first encountered were already in the database. By the time I got off I-10 @ 7th Ave, there were about 4 or 5 sets of cameras that weren't in the database.

When I was headed back home (Westbound I-10) I must have encountered 8 sets of cameras that weren't in the database. I just kept my speed down to 5 over, rather than risk getting a ticket.

Any idea when the database will be up to date or when Phx is going to stop adding more of these cameras on I-10, I-17?

It's a long drive between Phx & Havasu and this is making the drive take much longer than previously. I would offer to help but I'm currently going through some medical problems that make noting these locations pretty tough for me.

Thanks, waterskiers2, but the database was initially set up to include the locations of all the cameras. When DPS first announced the spped camera initiative, they published all the locations. Members worked hard, thanks FPichon, to include all locations so that we don't have to try and guess which cameras are coming online and which ones will be delayed two weeks or whatever. So, you may receive alerts in locations where the cmaeras have not been installed yet, but will be within the next year. Also keep in mind that you will get an alert for cameras that are monitoring the other side of the freeway.

This just in...there's finally someone who is going to try and get enough signatures to bring the speed camera issue to a vote in AZ. Look for the 2010 ballot. Now, if only they tell us where to sign up...

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2008/12/04/20081204sp...

I guess this guy is proactive in the fight over speed cameras
http://www.ktar.com/?nid=6&sid=1003133

Anyone who is against the freeway cameras is just simply a worthless person who wants to drive faster than the speed limit with no regard to the other people on the road. There is no "shortened light timer" to declare the ticket a scam. There is no excuse other than they are just plain stupid. In the abc15 story the protester says "Do you know how many times these cameras flash a day? It is ridiculous." He is too stupid to realize his exact point is why the cameras are put up. There are that many people just as stupid as him speeding on the freeways. The cameras do not even take your picture unless you are driving 10 mph over the speed limit. "The department changed the “trigger” speed to 10 mph over the posted speed limit in all locations except for school zones, which will remain at six mph."

Red Light camera opponents at least have a small argument. Speed camera opponents are just worthless people who are too stupid to even realize their own argument against the camera just reinforces the need for them. The cameras need to go because they ticket too people a day. Haha. How stupid can you be?

Let's not talk about who wants to drive fast and who doesn't. One can be against speed cameras without having the need to speed. I am against the idea of speed cameras not because I like to speed, but because of how it alters driving behaviors. My normal driving is to set my cruise at 5 mph over, which is legal in every state I've ever driven in.

In the Phoenix metro area, I've observed two new driving habits that have changed since the cameras have been installed along the interstates. The third thing is merely a cause and effect.

1. Some drivers will go slower (between 50-55) no matter what the speed limit is. I frequently see driver's going 50-55 in speed limit zones that are 55 and 65. I realize that the minimum speed limit on interstates is 45, but in Phoenix, slow drivers do not get over to the right, they are peppered across 4-5 lanes, thus making a slalom course for those who "merely" want to drive the speed limit. Now, you may argue that slow traffic not moving over to the right is not a result of the speed cameras and that is true. However, it has gotten worse since the cameras have been installed. Accidents on the German Autobahn are not as frequent as on the US interstates because in Germany they follow the rules of the road. It makes the roads safer when everyone is respectful of other drivers.

2. Some drivers speed between cameras and then slow down drastically. I agree that it's not right, but it happens. This happens as a direct result of the speed cameras because if the cameras weren't installed, then the speeders wouldn't slow down. As I learned in driver's education many years ago - the safest speed is the speed of other traffic. Speed isn't necessarily the culprit, it's the differential of speed on the highways that is unsafe.

3. The flashes at night go off in other driver's faces and it is only a matter of time before someone has an accident and blames it on the flash. Wait for that in the news - it will happen one day. I've been beside a car that was speeding by a camera and the flash is blinding and very unsafe.

It sounds like you have never gone over the speed limit or ever received a ticket. If that's the case, then good for you, keep it up and be an example for everyone.

But for everyone's sake, if you're going slower than everyone else on the road, please move to the right.

End of diatribe #4163.

ok,

newbie here. how do we download the Phoenix speed camera POI's for our GPS devices?

can we set up how far in advance for our GPS's to alarm us of a coming speed camera?

Do GPS's take direction of travel in when warning about speed camera's?

1. Correct, drivers being slow and inconsiderate has nothing to do with the cameras.

2. "if the cameras weren't installed, then the speeders wouldn't slow down." Precisely why the cameras are there and will expand to cover larger stretches of freeway forcing them to slow down. The drastic change of speed of the person in front of you would not affect you unless you are following right behind him speeding as well. Even if you are not speeding and they slow down just out of fear if you were driving at the proper following distance you would be fine. I am sure they went over that in the driver's education class.

3. "It is only a matter of time" is only speculation. There is more evidence to the contrary though. Since the cameras on the I-10 were installed there have been over 40,000 tickets issued and 0 accidents.

There is no reasonable argument against speed cameras and that is why they will continue to expand the program. The only way to end speed cameras would be if everyone stopped speeding rendering them useless.

Linda Williams (http://www.photoradarlaw.com/) thinks otherwise!

If you want AZ camera question answered, you may want to send an email to Fox 10 in Phoenix and have them ask her. Linda Williams is going to report on photo enforcement on December 8th during the 9:00 p.m. broadcast. http://www.myfoxphoenix.com/myfox/ You just may get an answer you can depend on.

RT

She has no argument against them. She just tries to say how to get out of paying. Her way to get out is just a "hope you don't get served" method. If you do get served you will be paying for the ticket and the cost for the server.

That is not true. Her reasonable argument is "the law, itselve, is breaking the law" by not following the required notification procedures". She wants them to be forced to follow all requirements just as well as the drivers. If they don't, there is no driver requirement. What she said is "Don't pay a ticket that was illegally issued or you are condoning bad practices!" Listen to the broadcast, get the truth straight from her!

RT

Ok, if we are debating the "correctness" or need of the speed cameras let me bring this up.

You can not dispute what the camera says. By law when responding in court to a ticket received from a radar gun in a patrol vehicle you have the right to request verification that the unit has been properly calibrated.

However, you can not verify that the mechanisms that test speed have been calibrated or checked recently in photo radar camera.

having attended court with a friend of mine who recieved on on the Loop 101 in Scottsdale, I cant ell you that the judge stated that we were not entitled to this.

So, is everyone going to tell me that is OK for my actions to be judged by an inanimate object whose "statement" (the ticket) can not be questioned?

That is my objection. Please don't tell me that the machines are infallible, they are not. They are also set up by humans who are also fallible.

If I mess up I have no problem being accountable for my actions, however, I do not like my rights being taken away. Being told "the machine does not make a mistake" is not an acceptable substitute for my denying me the right to verify or challenge the charge against me.

Now I can say that I have notices that traffic in general has slowed down on areas of the loop 101 in the northwest valley due to the cameras. However, on the I-10 I'm almost runover by the traffice even going 5 miles over the limit in the middle lane.

Humans being fallible is eveidenced by the Reflex employee that was given a DUI while driving one of the mobile vans to the next enforcement location. Of course, Redlex fired him immediately.

Yes, I agree, traffic has slowed in general, but there are still many who do not. Those that don't, are not getting tickets, they are speeding to the next location and then slowing down.

First become an active member by either contributing to the forum for 3 weeks straight or paying the fee. Then use the tab at the top right to go to the camera page and download the file.

I use Express Mode setting in POI Loader for what settings you want it to use. Express will calculate the distance for you. I think you can set the distance yourself using manual mode, but Express is recommended.

No, they do not.

Anybody else read that the governor's office recently had a line item in the budget citing income from enforcement cameras? Goes to show you that the State is now officially calling it a revenue stream. I heard that was when the public opposition started.

Also, I haven't checked the POI file, but AZCentral is reporting overall camera numbers here:
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2008/12/07/20081207ca...

With so many mobile speed cameras in use (I read information somewhere that the state purchased 40 vans) it doesn't make sense even trying to drive over the speed limit. If you try, I'm sure your luck isn't gonna last long. You can't drive more than 10 miles without seeing at least one unit on the side of the road. The only good thing is they have to position warning signs 1/2 mile, and 300 feet ahead of the units so if you are watching you'll have time to slow down.

I have seen the mobile cameras a lot more lately, so I wouldn't doubt that there are 40 new vans in circulation.

I heard there were almost 200 new cameras in maricopa county.

Some people at work have suggested taking their license plate off the rear, banging it up, and keeping it in the glove compartment.

If they get pulled over they'll tell the officer it got ripped off the back and they're going to get a new one. Not much that can happen if their registration is current.

The judge told your friend that he wasn't entitled to it because he did not subpoena the records prior to the hearing date. It's a very common mistake that will make you look foolish. If you wait until the day of the hearing, then it is too late. All speed and red light enforcement cameras are tested on a regular basis and these records are required to be kept. They are public record. You are entitled to them under a public records request that you yourself must make. The state has no requirement to prepare YOUR defense. The records will be kept by the agency having jurisdiction over the camera. The only thing the state has to SHOW YOU at the hearing is any evidence they will be submitting to the court. This will usually be only the big glossy photos of your mug and your vehicle.You are correct in noting that the cameras are machines and they can malfunction. If you get a citation, do your homework before the hearing and be prepared with all of YOUR evidence when you go to court. If the machine was malfunctioning, then your court appearance will much more satisfying.

Incidentally, if you you are fighting a radar ticket, the only thing the officer must testify to in reference to the radar units calibration, is that he/she VERIFIED the calibration of the unit with tuning forks prior to and after taking your speed measurement and that it was working properly. He/she does not have to bring the actual calibration test records (done every year or when repaired)to court unless YOU subpoena them.

Good luck. You'll be in for a citation for failing to properly display your registration. Having current registration saves you from a no current registration ticket, but not the failure to display. I'd also think twice about concocting a false story. If the cop is persistent, you are looking at getting arrested for false reporting to a law enforcement officer. Not worth it in my book.

Driving 5 over may or may not be legal in Arizona. It depends on the conditions and whether or not your speed was reasonable and prudent given the conditions that existed at the time. Of course don't try it in a school zone. 1 MPH over is a violation. Most officers won't bother for 5 over unless there is something else they want you for.

Funny that people want to place the blame for their behavior on someone or something else. They never want to take responsibility for their own actions. If you speed and get caught, so be it. If you get away with it, count yourself lucky.

Whether or not people speed is a two sided argument but $165 bucks is ridicules!

http://www.azcentral.com/community/peoria/articles/2008/12/1...

"It was never about slowing down speeders or safety," said [Arizona State Treasurer Dean] Martin, referring to the cameras. "It was only about revenue. For example, someone who's driving 110 m.p.h. through six cameras never actually gets stopped. You don't stop the bad behavior. You just take a picture of it."

Martin thinks the money would be better spent putting more DPS officers on patrol, officers who could arrest drunk drivers, and respond to traffic collisions and other emergencies. That would make the freeways safer, he contends.

Source: http://tinyurl.com/6dr8px

Interesting that slowing down speeders and less accidents is precisely whats occurring. Even if was only about money and no thought to safety was ever discussed why would you complain about an unforeseen effect of slower speeds and less accidents? There are still officers on the road. I see them everyday. It is obvious his opinion is completely biased toward his dislike of cameras. He is just taking his opinion to the extreme to bring attention to his cause. If he seriously thinks it was never about slowing down speeders or safety then he is just plain stupid.

From the link;
"GOPer Martin's been an unflagging opponent of photo enforcement."

I am sure he is speaking from an objective view.

OK, it makes about having to request the info in advance. Thanks.

It still feels like Big Brother is watching though!!

Ummm... yeah.

Now we are starting to see little articles about how the cameras can and will be used for "identifying stolen vehicles". How is that accomplished? I can't think of any other way but to photograph and time stamp the license plate of EVERY passing vehicle. But perhaps there are posters more intelligent that I who can enlighten me. I would be more than happy to hear how this accomplishes anything that justifies trampling the rights of every driver in the clutches of these cameras.

"Those who sacrifice Liberty for Security deserve neither." Benjamin Franklin

Plate readers have been around for several years although it has been in the last 3 that the technology has really matured to where they get over 90% on a scan.

Basically a camera scans a lane of traffic and "reads" the plate as it passes. It then checks what it has read against a database of stolen vehicles and plates. If it gets a hit, the system notifies a dispatcher who alerts the officers in the area of the time and direction of travel.

You are also starting to see cameras in parking enforcement vehicles too. These not only look for stolen cars, but those with outstanding tickets for booting.

The only time the information "read" is retained is when there is a 'hit' against the database being used. At least that's the way it's supposed to work.

The prosecution rests.

Peoria and Phoenix are using mobile plate readers that are attached to patrol cars. Other Agencies are using them, but they are expensive. They are not revenue generators so the department has to foot the bill for them or get a grant (usually from insurance companies trying to reduce their payout bottom line.) They can scan thousands of plates in a shift. They only alert the officer if it runs a stolen or wanted plate/vehicle. The officer verifies the plate to the record and if it is a match then a stop is made. This one is not a big brother setup. Its use is to recover stolen vehicles and there is no invasion of privacy (your plate is not private to begin with.) I'm in favor of them. Having your car stolen sucks and it would be nice to see the bad guy get caught and charged.

You and your vehicle are not private when you are on a public street so how would taking your picture for speeding be an invasion of privacy?

I guess don't see the big problem with checking the plates. I think it would be nice if they could also run the plate to see if you have insurance and if not impound the car.

You won't get in trouble: if you don't steal a car

You won't get in trouble: if you insure your car

You won't get in trouble: if you stop for yellow and not run red

You won't get in trouble: if you drive the posted speed going down the freeways

As long as we break laws they will come up with ways to catch those who cause trouble

The Arizona Republic did a big article on the technology a while back. They said that all data from license plate scanning is kept in a database and the authorities do not know what to do with it since no regulations exist telling them what they have to keep and what they can throw out. One patrol car can scan thousands of plates a shift, so there is a lot of data that is piling up.

I don't think it's an invasion of privacy for a speed camera to take your picture. However, your right to face your accuser is gone with the machine. If for whatever reason, the camera takes your picture and you weren't actually speeding, how do you prove that? By the time you go to court, the incident is well in the past and there were no other eye witnesses to the incident.

In the past, there was an argument for radar detectos saying that if the police had a right to monitor our speed, then drivers have a right to know when it's happening. In the case of speed cameras, that argument goes away since there are two sets of signs posted before the camera locations.

In the case of license plate scanners, we now get to where technology makes it possible for logs to be kept by the government of our whereabouts. Some may argue that it is only Big Brother watching. However, if you are wrongly arrested for something, the license plate scans can provide a good alibi and exonerate you if it was a case of mistaken identity.

One problem I see is that there is too much trust being put into technology. After all, it's programmed by humans, who are prone to err and I'm sure the programming hasn't taken every possible thing into account. Not to mention that the units themselves have to hold up to attacks by pick axes.

Wegasque,

My up close and personal experience with red light cameras (San Diego) and subsequent research found an officer always reviews the photo and data. That peace officer has to sign off on the information before the citation is mailed. The officer is actually your accuser and, should you take the case to court, will be there to answer your defense. He or she will be using the photo/data only as evidence against you. I suspect the same procedure is followed in most, if not all jurisdictions.

Cheers

I'd like to see this trick be successful. As of Jan 1, 2009 a new traffic law is taking effect in Maricopa County which prohibits any portion of the license plate from being covered or visually deceiving. If the plate is obstructed anywhere from the TOP of the word "ARIZONA" all the way on down, an officer will be able to initiate a traffic stop and cite you regardless of whether you violated any other traffic laws or not. If you do go the smashed up route, let me know how long it lasts for.

The law covers ALL the counties in Arizona, not just Maricopa. The law is found at A.R.S. 28-2354(B) which you can see online at:

www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/28/02354.htm&Tit...

The law also specifies that it must be mounted to "prevent the plate from swinging," which got me thinking: The law doesn't say that it can't "oscillate." If I mounted it on springs, and it bounces up and down to create a blurry photo, the law is satisfied but photo cameras are not! Off to the garage for a little engineering.....

I don't think you'd get very far attempting to split that hair.

From the Merriam-Webster online dictionary (emphases added):

Main Entry:
oscillate
Pronunciation:
\ˈä-sə-ˌlāt\
Function:
intransitive verb
Inflected Form(s):
os·cil·lat·ed; os·cil·lat·ing
Etymology:
Latin oscillatus, past participle of oscillare to swing, from oscillum swing
Date:
1726

1a: to swing backward and forward like a pendulum.

I am going to Phoenix in Jan to visit my daughter. I will surely have my Garmin and the POIs on. Thanks for all of the hard work...Thankl goodness we do not have speed cameras in Indy...jkraft

John,

You are absolutely right. The officer reviews the photos and video and signs off on the citation being issued. If you go to court, the officer will be there with the photos (big glossy color ones)and is required to let you examine them. The officer will ID you in court from the photographs and testify to the speed devices accuracy as well as the information specific to your violation. If you cannot be identified in the photos to a reasonable degree, the case against you is done. This usually happens if your vehicle was being driven by another person of the same sex (since the photo is gender matched to the registration) or they can't tell by the name on the registration if the owner is male of female ie. Pat, Chris, etc. They always put a spot on the citation for you to narc out the real driver, but you have no obligation to do this. They have to prove it was you, not the other way around. In criminal speed hearings, the standard is beyond a reasonable doubt since it is a misdemeanor. In a civil speed violation the standard is a preponderance of the evidence (more likely than not that you committed the violation.) It is a lower standard than criminal, but an ID must be made in both. My friend got a scottsdale ticket for speeding when his wife was the only occupant of his truck registered to him only. He went to court, they asked him to narc off his the driver, he didn't. The ticket was dismissed.

I guess I don't understand why the cameras are such a big deal. Since loading the poi's in my garmin, I've found them to be very helpful and accurate.

Not to mention, you usually drive the same bit of highway everyday on your commute. Most people aren't driving across the valley daily to parts of town they've never been before. People need to be more aware of the surroundings.

It sounds like the cameras are generating a good deal of money for the state. I say keep them up and let them keep doing that. If you're stupid enough to blow by one going 90, you should get the ticket.

The only thing that pisses me off about the cameras is the stupid people in the left hand lane that feel the need to go 50mph by each one because they're afraid of the ticket. However, before the cameras were even in place, you still had people driving 50, in the left hand lane, being horrible at driving.

As for the license plate law...its a stupid law, but I bet the dui's in this state are going to double.

Here is a great radio spot locally here in Phoenix with Suzen Kayler Attorney at Law about the red light camera. She talks a lot about the law and what you should know. Very informative.
http://ktar.net/blogs/dankarlo/2008/12/03/protest-the-cams/

This is a POD Cast and you need to start it below the picture.

I've been lucky so far and have not been ticketed but Phoenix is becoming a big photo radar and red light camera capital.

Happy Holidays everyone.

Iggy in the cool part of Arizona......

Thanks for the link.

Phxpilot,

I don't think that the tickets are reviewed by police, or maybe even people for that matter, or at least not in all instances. My friend Henry has received a ticket in the mail when his wife Katie was driving. The truck was registered in his name only and he still got the ticket. So, I can only surmise that the tickets are not gender matched to the registrations. I assume that your friend's name is such that you can't tell his gender. Sounds like from John's experience in San Diego that maybe their cameras might not be run by private companies contracted to the government.

I was told by an attorney that since AZ law requires you to be served in person for a criminal violation, you could possibly ignore the civil violation you get from the speed cameras. Since they mail them and they're not sent certified or anything, who's to say you actually got it? If you do not respond to the civil ticket, then you have 120 days to be served. If you're not served within 120 days, you're done. If you are, then you go to court and face your accuser. The attorney also said that if you respond to the civil ticket, even to say that it wasn't you driving, then it counts as being served.

I agree, thank you to all and I drive all over the valley so If my help is needed please let me know.