Driving has long been considered the main mode of transportation in California, a product of the great chasms and mountains that disconnect its large cities. Globally, traffic related injuries are considered the eighth leading cause of death. Meanwhile, California ranks 2nd in total traffic deaths and a study by TRIP, a national transportation research nonprofit, found that in the years 2019-2022, these fatalities have increased by 22% while total driving miles have decreased by 3%, showing just how dire the situation has become. For decades, the government has watched this statistic increase and relied on the often ineffective police to tame this rising phenomenon. Thankfully, after thousands of ignored campaigns on “speeding kills” and hundreds of studies, the state of California is springing into action at last.
Approved by Gov. Gavin Newsom in Oct. 2023 and effective Monday, Jan. 1, Assembly Bill 645 reserves the right for certain cities to institute speeding cameras at selected intersections to monitor traffic and distribute speeding violations to drivers clocking in over 11 miles per-hour (mph) over speed limit — attempting to taper down the fatality rate and equalize speeding-related arrests for disproportionately affected communities. While this may inconvenience and frustrate drivers, the government may finally be able to slow down the countless unnecessary and often premature casualties.
The speeding cameras will be designated to the cities of Los Angeles, Glendale, Long Beach, San Jose, the city of San Francisco and San Francisco county. These large districts have a long history of pushing the speedometer, and so it’s comforting to know that punishments can’t be avoided by slowing down in front of police. This might also prevent future police chases, a horrifying prospect for people who enjoy watching cars weave through traffic in the news on the TV, but a necessary one for the betterment of California.
Furthermore, these cameras would be implemented in high-traffic areas, namely school zones, injury-prone intersections and known street racing roads. Although there might be concerns about possible expansion to less pertinent roads, the currently planned locations should have been monitored since the beginning. Additionally, resulting from its pilot program status, the bill will be a trial for future traffic-control legislation that should stretch to even more cities and counties.
As the bill stands, if a driver is going more than 11 mph over the speed limit, the fee increases from anywhere from $50 to $500 depending on how egregious the speeding was. A fine of $500 will be issued if the driver is going over 100 mph. That’s far too little, considering that one’s risk of sustaining fatal injuries doubles for every increase of 10 mph. Furthermore, the appeals process customarily charges $25 to challenge a ticket, even though there is no excuse for going 10-15 mph over in a city street other than the most dire of circumstances.
As a pilot program, the chief objective of this law is to collect data on the efficacy of speeding cameras in reducing traffic fatalities. As a result, other information that could be collected from these devices is kept confidential and destroyed, including photographic evidence and administrative evidence not integral to the study. Disregarding the concerns of Big Brother, storing data even temporarily can still leave it susceptible to data breaches. Still, Gavin Newsom has not been shy about implementing surveillance at non-government facilities in churches, retail and even through other people’s home cameras. Photographic and other forms of information are already stored through many government-sanctioned programs. In comparison, although a potential data leak from speeding cameras is a slight burden to many, it should be well worth diminishing the thousands of crashes that occur in California each year.
The state is far behind, with 18 other states already enabling the use of speed cameras. Hopefully, the data from this experiment will catalyze growth in California’s legislation to combat the destructiveness of excessive speed.
However, avoiding speeding tickets demands little from the drivers, and there are simple, effective methods to maintain a safe and compliant speed. Cruise control is a great method for controlling one’s speed in constant traffic. In cases where cruise control does not work, stay within the speed limit and follow traffic flow, be vigilant of high-density areas such as school zones and avoid disturbances such as loud music or distracting passengers. Ideally, it should be the duty of each person to maintain the correct speed to avoid collisions and end these wasteful accidents.
