Ontario Speed Cameras to be deactivated/removed.

Cool

should be reinstated if the Leafs win the Cup, so everyone should be pretty confident not gonna happen. At least not within the next 50 years.

It's interesting when what we consider to be an advanced society, goes backwards lol

Despite Ontario’s ban, the speed cameras are still watching you

Speed cameras may not be issuing tickets, but some communities are looking at continuing to use them to monitor how fast people are driving.

Toronto Star
Updated Nov. 19, 2025 at 5:14 p.m.
Nov. 19, 2025

Such a weird decision from Doug. He is trying to appeal to people on paper (pouring the crown royal, saying he eats chapman's every day...) but making these kinds of changes encourages even more bad driving. Nobody should be complaining about speed cameras because they aren't an issue for you if you just don't.... y'know, speed...

love them, and I really don't love stop arm cams. But down here, 11 mph leeway is "reasonable." I get it. Sometimes we do 50 in a 25, we've all done it. But is it the right thing to do, just because our time is valuable? Last time I drove in NYC, it seemed slow. Everyone doing the speed limit because whats the sense an alert isn't needed, just assume the entire city is covered.

At any rate, anybody who is the least bit curious what happens if folks can drive with complete impunity as if they were an A1 with DOJ (no reggie, no license, no insurance, no inspection, limo tints--cannot be stopped by law, and if so, allowed to drive away from an accident), come to Phila. If that's what you want for your city, then start removing enforcement of traffic laws.

Do they still have cops riding in buses in Toronto, looking for hands free violations? I would think speed and red light is more important than that.

Good decision by the Ontario government. These cameras were cash grabs for all cities. These cameras were giving out tickets for going over 5 kilometres or 7 kilometres over the speed limit. So rediculous. These cameras were not for safety but to gouge people. Now, I think we will property tax hikes to make up for this money loss for the cities.

what you've said, as soon as we see "money grab," we think, bad!

My relatives only had 1 mil to spend on a house, and they had to increase their budget to 1.5 mil, to live in the GTA. They are 49 km from downtown Toronto. A normal dunno 2400 sq ft 4 bed house, not even a mcmansion by our standards. One can barely even squeeze in between their house the the neighbors they are so packed together.

So now you say the flip side is increased property taxes lol maybe the cams ain't so bad

Then I think about the exchange rate and that 1.5 is really 2.1 mil USD, what's anyone gonna do. Govt needs money period, maybe forcing lawbreakers to pay is a tough reality

The last foolishness I saw in Ontario, was being forced to recycle vegetable scraps or else. Again, wouldn't speed cams be better than recycling vegetable scraps (it's not foolish if we were living by ourselves and sustaining that--what I mean is that govt has better things to worry about)

Good going. They say it is in the name of safety but the truth is it is in the name of cash. Just think, if the maintenance costs were so high that they lost money every year, would they have them?

You remember your Neil Young? "You pay for this but they give you that."

Who pays, lawbreakers, or, everyone? Sometimes, maybe lawbreakers should pay. Maybe other times, everyone. It's easy for all of us to simply choose what doesn't affect us. I don't speed nor run red lights, so I interject philosophy into modern society.

I'm not for speed cams necessarily, but with an 11 mph leeway, it's not something to overly worry about. I have them where I live. I'm more worried about immediate things, like how am I gonna sell 20 raffle tix by tomorrow.

For discussion's sake, let us consider the pro camera point of view.

This point of view claims that the average speed in (insert favorite camera site) has decreased "x" mph(kph) because of how effective these cameras are.

If this is so, is it not reasonable to expect that the number of tickets/citations issued would gradually drop off to a minimum number?

Along with the revenue generated?

And yet, the number of tickets generated, with the associated revenue, keeps climbing?

Some of these sites were issuing thousands of tickets per week depending on the site.

The pro-camera crowd (municipalities, towns, cities, etc) have now wailed about safety, what about the children, yada yada.

And in the next breath; "who is going to replace all of this revenue that we now won't receive?"

If these cameras were truly an effective program; the revenue should be dropping to a minimal amount over time.

I'd say, for discussions sake, that there are two separate lines of inquiry and if the first has a positive result then go on to the second.

First the abstract question, are red light or speed cameras a good idea. Will they save lives, minimize cashes, etc.?

Second, and separate, are the cameras implemented properly? Are they located reasonably, are the amber lights of adequate duration, etc.?

My view is that they are a wonderful idea but implementations vary.

thing that may be different about how I look at it, is it is NOT all about me. There are times a road has a 25 mph speed limit when in CA it would be 55. So maybe 11 mph leeway I'd still get caught. If I am aware, then I would not be caught because I would be following the limit +5.

I don't think that the fact that I could accidentally speed, and get a fine, is enough to say it's a bad idea.

School stop arm cams, my hesitation is they are activated by a human. And the fine is severe, where I live, $300. That has to have some more review, such as, did lights go from none to red? How long were the yellows in place?

But with speed and rlcs, these are handled by inanimate objects who have no feelings nor are they biased.

The pro is that lawbreakers are penalized, as opposed to running around buck wild. my .02 ymmv

Good

I think the public view toward speed limits has moved quite a lot in the last half-century. Now also it seems to vary quite a lot from place to place. People pay a lot more attention to what speed other drivers are using than to what the signs say. That is partly because there is so very little enforcement that it doesn't play its role in building the public perception of acceptable behavior adequately.

By contrast there are locations in Europe were the density of automated speed detection enforcement is high enough that people pay serious attention to the posted limits.

I favor the installation of automated speed enforcement at high enough density to actually move public behavior.

imho NYC is such. I asked 15 years ago, who here walks into a Walmart or Target and shoplifts? Who did that in 1975? There comes a time when the risk far exceeds the reward, and behavior changes.

What I've learned over the years here, is, that people make their judgement often detached from the scenario at hand. Those who live in the Phila area, how many say, let's get rid of enforcement? There is barely any today as I type. You may want that, if you don't live here.

Even the wild west had rules to gunfighting. You couldn't just simply shoot someone who didn't even draw. Ask Marty Robbins, I've learned so much from him.