16 thoughts on “De Blasio’s Vision Zero Appears to Have Dented Traffic Deaths

    • If the city wanted money your, it wouldn’t need an elaborate scheme.

      Speed enforcement cameras are primarily designed to reduce speeding where implemented. Fines discourage speeding, and revenue is a bonus for the city.

      • Speed cameras CAUSE crashes and ticket safe drivers. They make many errors, as was seen in Baltimore. What is needed is correct traffic engineering, which will not occur. Vision Zero is designed to bring in money.

        • Speed cameras do not cause an increase in crashes because regular traffic quickly becomes aware of their presence and maintains the speed limit as a result (in comparison to driving in excess). Lower speeds improve reaction time and braking.

          Speeding is not safe. A speeding driver is not a safe driver. If you are traveling over 35 MPH on the local streets where these cameras have been implemented, you are driving recklessly.

          • Lower speed limits gum up traffic and create speed variances, which is unsafe. The cams cause people to slam the brakes or drive artificially slowly, which creates rolling roadblocks. There have been many studies showing that where speed cams were put in, crashes went up, including a UK one showing a 55% rise! There is video of a crash in Saudi Arabia with a speed camera, so this is a worldwide issue.

            The correct way to post speed limits is at the 85th percentile free-flowing traffic speed. Underposting limits is very dangerous. Safety people know this, but again this is about revenue and controlling people, so they do not tell you their true motives.

            Again, federal data from NHTSA, as well as diverse entities like the Michigan State Police support proper speed limits. I doubt they are all wrong.

          • Lower speed limits do not make a difference on travel times within cities because drivers do not average the speed limit throughout their trip. In NYC, drivers average less than 15 MPH citywide (lower in the CBD).

            Faster traffic, the vehicles quickly accelerating between traffic control devices, are most responsible for the worst traffic when they crash. Other traffic in NYC is caused by blockages, like double parked automobiles and construction.

  1. It’s pretty clear the article is a propaganda piece. To take a more objective look at the data, you’d have to know how much the number of crashes and fatalities vary from year to year, and how the numbers correspond to traffic volumes. Chances are that the numbers are within the typical year-to-year variation. Had the fatality numbers gone up slightly, the response would not be to end the program. The lack of this complete picture almost proves the intent of this article to be solely to support the mayor and his programs and to try to disguise the intent of the program which is to MAKE MONEY.

    • What is it with you people and the insistence that you get to do whatever you want, speed however you want and drive however you want, like maniacs? Do you know driver killing is the #1 killer of children under 13 after disease and personal injury? Sorry, you don’t get to control a 2 ton vehicle however you desire without control. If you do, build your own city and roads in the mountains.

  2. Public health must be prioritized. The impact these safety modifications have on the flow of traffic is miniscule. Average automotive speeds in NYC were already lower than the existing 25 MPH speed limit.

  3. Vision Zero is a money generator. Using incorrect traffic engineering, combined with predatory enforcement is dangerous and it tickets safe drivers. What about all the errors with the cameras? Most of the US is going the other way. Simply using 85th percentile speed limits and longer yellow lights will cause crashes to plummet.

    I suggest you visit the National Motorists Association for unbiased info. This article was NOT written to be objective, that is for sure.

    • The “National Motorists Association” for unbiased info?

      Please tell me that’s a joke.

      I suppose you also rely on multinational oil and gas corporations for pollution and climate change “research.”

      You’re wrong on all accounts. Traffic enforcement cameras improve safety because they reduce the prevalence of violations. Drivers avoid fines by obeying regulations.

      • As a person who has done traffic studies and worked at an ENR 500 engineering firm, I beg to differ. I can prove that CORRECT traffic engineering creates safety. Cameras do not work correctly, as there are tons of errors. So we have poor traffic engineering and predatory enforcement, which leads to more crashes, and tickets to safe drivers. This is factual, not my opinion. Before you rip the NMA apart, did you check out their website and take time to read anything? I doubt it. The data they use comes from federal agencies like NHTSA. If you feel the feds are right on global warming, surely you must think the feds are correct on traffic issues, right?

        • Traffic camera enforcement technology is extremely dependable in regards to existing uses at this time.

          If you are not speeding, you won’t be getting a ticket. There’s even a 10 MPH buffer in NYC.

          And yes, I have read though that website in the past as it is a commonly posted resource by those opposing safety improvements. The statistics that are the most accurate time and time again come from municipal governments, collected crash data from before and after installation. In the case of NYC and other municipalities, they have been working with great success.

          The trend is going to be more traffic camera enforcement in this city.

          Most of the traffic traveling along any route is regular traffic, people who become familiar with the route. When a camera is installed, drivers do adjust their habits and drive at slower speeds to avoid a fine. This has been proven time and time again. The more camera enforcement within a city, the greater the impact on the culture of driving.

  4. Another problem is the running of red lights. This illegal activity has become the norm at all too many intersections. Always at least one or two more vehicles slips through after the light turns red.

  5. If the city actually wanted people to slow down in the school zones, they would put HUGE signs and obvious warnings to drivers. They don’t. The signs are barely visible, and the pavement markings are usually fading. Ticketing a driver means that the drivers still sped through the intersection…and if someone was injured, the ticket would not magically make that person uninjured. This is about revenue, revenue, revenue, thinly disguised as for public safety. If they actually wanted to make a difference, they should work or PREVENTING the speeding by marking the speed zones WELL, not sneakily installing cameras and teaching by punishment.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *