Neither list is kept completely accurate. The confirmed cameras on the routes that I drive are generally physically present, but I’m not convinced that they are all actually operational.
In previous discussions, I’ve brought this forward:
Which is preferable:
you get warned about a camera, and slow down / stop for the red light, but there’s no camera there
you don’t get warned about a camera, and therefore don’t slow down / stop for the red light, but there is a camera there and you get a ticket?
I realise that if there are too many “extra” reports, a person may start ignoring them and result in getting a ticket because they should have slowed down (the whole “cry wolf” situation)… but in general, it’s better to have a few extra than a few not enough.
Not me, I only drive by them during the rush when I couldn’t exceed the speed limit if I was so inclined. In fact, it is usually stop and go so I can take pictures like this one:
I’m not convinced this one actually takes pictures yet.
You’re making all kinds of assumptions here that are not always true in my experience. First, I’ve been ticketed by camera in DC when traveling below the speed limit. Second, waze’s warnings seem somewhat inconsistent even when the cameras are approved on the map.
There was a court case where somebody in either DC or the MD area just outside DC where a business owner proved that the speed camera was wrong. Interestingly, the guy used the photos from the speed camera to prove that it was wrong; way wrong. The private company that was profiting from the speeding tickets had “miscalibrated” the device. The worst part was that the judge ruled that the guy didn’t have to pay the speeding ticket yet didn’t do anything about all the other tickets issued by this proven wrong ticketing machine.
I’ve never actually paid a speeding ticket in DC. I just sent in my appeal stating that the pictures showed I was in stop and go rush hour traffic. I never heard anything further, but the ticket disappeared from the website where you can pay.
What I’ve heard is that the tickets send out by private companies are not considered legal summonses and can therefore safely be ignored. An official summons needs to be issued by the appropriate agency and hand-delivered to have the legal backing that the companies are implying. Since most people pay without questioning, the company makes large profits. Those that challenge are mostly ignored. This is all hearsay on my part, I have never had a chance to test the theory, and hopefully never will.
Mike you are correct as far as I know. When I lived in California, you could safely ignore them since the law there is that the ticket had to be Hand Delivered by an officer of the court to be considered official. This started catching on and news outlets started picking it up some years ago, which is why city by city they are being deactivated and removed. Tax payer dollars well spent…