Bloomberg Wants Surveillance Cameras in Bus-Only Lanes
by Judd WileyMay 15th, 2008, 5:58 pm
Mayor Bloomberg wants to create a network of surveillance cameras in New York to nab drivers “illegally” using bus-only lanes.
Some cameras would be permanent, some would be mobile, and some would be mounted on the buses themselves. They would operate during “peak hours” on weekdays between 7 AM and 7 PM. The city would issue a summons to owners of any cars caught on film. They would all have to pay a hefty fine.
Is this what the Founding Fathers had in mind? A network of taxpayer-funded spy cameras … designed, developed, and operated by dim-witted, triple-chinned, balding bureaucrats in white socks and short-sleeved shirts … who sit at their cubicles all day long downloading porn and playing bingo … one eye on the videoscreen … watching for rulebreakers … the whole purpose of which is to suck more tax money out of the bank accounts of hard-working professionals whose commutes will become even more miserable because of this stupidity.
Michelle Goldstein, New York’s chief lobbyist (the city has its own lobbyist!), wrote in a memo to lawmakers,
The enactment of this legislation will ensure that the city is successful in providing more efficient and effective bus service to the people and visitors of the City of New York. … This will, in turn, attract new ridership, helping to meet the city’s mobility, environmental and public health goals.
Question: How do surveillance cameras contribute to the “public health” of New York City? Especially when they will likely cause already apoplectic drivers to seethe with even more uncontrollable fury, beat their wives and children, and possibly go on dark murderous rampages.
The Mayor also wants to expand the number of government agents who can ticket motorists for blocking intersections. Yeah, that’s what we need. An army of mobile tax collectors roaming all over the city, clearing the path for riff-raff filled buses, and earning overtime, benefits, and taxpayer-funded pensions.
If I was a millionaire, I’d park my SUV in the bus-only lane, leave the engine running, and vacate the premises. I’d place a large sign on the dashboard with the following message written in large red letters: “CALL THE POLICE.”
Related Posts
- Red Light Cameras: More Money, More Accidents
- More On Chicago Bus-Only Lanes
- Chicago: Bus Only Lanes, Adjustable Rate Parking Meters
Posted in Bus-Only Lane Cameras, Bus-Only Lanes, Buses, Tickets, Traffic Congestion |
i’m guessing taxis will be exempt from this?
A network of taxpayer-funded spy cameras … designed, developed, and operated by dim-witted, triple-chinned, balding bureaucrats in white socks and short-sleeved shirts … who sit at their cubicles all day long downloading porn and playing bingo … one eye on the videoscreen … watching for rulebreakers …
———————————————————————————————
I am appalled at your viscious and unfair assault on the government employees that is evident not only in this post but throughout this site. Sure, some government employees are wasteful but no more than employees in the private sector.
Calling the people who receive unusually low pay to repair roads, police our borders, ensure tax revenues (IRS), and yes, ensure bus-only lanes are not being violated ‘tripple-chinned, balding bureacrats’ is mean spirited and short sighted. Where would you send your children to school without these government bureacrats? How about clean drinking water? (Say goodbye to that!)
We are governed by the people and for the people. These ’slimy bureacrats’ that you malign on a daily basis are representatives of the people and generally public servants beyond reproach.
Shame on you,
Dark Meaver
Dear Government Bureaucrat,
I’m amazed that you pulled yourself away from the doughnut box long enough to read a post and write a response. I hope you didn’t get powdered sugar on your keyboard.
The government by the people and for the people that you mention refers to our elected officials in the legislative and executive branches. It doesn’t refer to you because I have no say in whether or not you are hired, which is a good thing because I would probably fire most of you.
I understand that there are some dedicated public servants out there, but this country existed for a long time without the bloated garbage on the Potomac that we currently have, and we got along pretty well.
All of the “services” you mention are perfect examples of things the government doesn’t do well currently and are perfect candidates for the chopping block. Taxes would be better under either the fair or flat tax schemes, the army should police our borders, drinking water isn’t exactly “clean” now, and the roads and bus only lanes are exactly what this site is about - commuter outrage.
Your failure to realize that fact after visiting the site makes me doubt the value of the public education that you laud.
But if you feel our critique is unfair, feel free to stop snoring at your desk and actually do something productive.
Mr. Meaver, you wrote your comment at 10:22 AM on a Friday.
Were you sitting at a government cubicle?
If so, what were you doing surfing the Internet?
Get back to work!
Judd,
You asked the following question: “How do surveillance cameras contribute to the ‘public health’ of New York City?” Allow me to answer it for you.
Private automobiles emit a lot of pollution. Tailpipe emissions can cause athsma, cancer, and even heart disease. These emissions are concentrated in any environment where you have lots of cars in a small space, and New York’s CBD (central business district) certainly counts.
Private automobiles also hurt people another way: They run into pedestrians and kill them. In NYC, this happens so often it’s not even news; on average, there’s more than one pedestrian death every single day in the NY area. Indeed, these accidents are viewed as so unpreventable that there are rarely, if ever, any legal consequences to vehicular homicide so long as the driver does not flee the scene and is not drunk.
Given these facts, I think you’d agree that reducing the degree to which automobiles are driven in the central business district will in fact improve public health.
So what does this have to do with surveillance? Well, a more effective public transportation system enables more people to ditch their car. How this works should be clear: The decision to drive or to ride the bus is based on the relative merits of each, and raising the merits of one option will ensure that more people choose it. Bus lanes allow buses to run faster and more reliably. And keeping cars out of bus lanes means there is less space for them, which also provides a disincentive to drive. But bus lanes are totally useless without enforcement, and it happens that surveillance is the most effective type of enforcement in NYC.
To summarize, the answer to your question is as follows: Surveillance cameras -> Effective bus lanes -> Better public transit -> Fewer cars -> Less pollution/crashes -> Improved public health.
Any questions?
Ian, Think about the basic math of what you’re saying.
Let’s say for argument’s sake that each street in New York has 5 lanes. In the past when there were no bus-only lanes, the entire driving population (cars, taxis, buses) had access to all 5 lanes, or 100% of the road.
According to NYCvisit.com, the total number of buses in NYC is 6,200 (from 2006). According to US News & World Report, US News & World Report, more than 800,000 cars and trucks enter Manhattan south of 60th street every day (2008). In other words, buses are at best less than 1% of the driving population in NYC (which is a very generous estimate). The real percentage is probably far less.
If you take one lane (20% of the capacity) and give it to buses only, this means that the other 99% of the driving population (the total number of which has not decreased) is forced onto the other 4 lanes, or 80% of the road.
99% of the traffic on 80% of the roads. Unless 19% of cars magically disappear, this causes greater (not less) traffic congestion. What is the result? More vehicles idling, spewing toxic fumes into the air, and contributing to “athsma, cancer, and even heart disease” that you correctly mention above.
Surveillance cameras make the problem even worse. Now less drivers are willing to risk getting a ticket for driving in the bus-only lanes, which would have alleviated the congestion. 99% of traffic on 80% of the roads. The math does not add up, Ian.
Also, your statement that “on average, there’s more than one pedestrian death every single day in the NY area.” Well, unless this is due to cars running red lights, making illegal turns, going above the speed limit, driving on the sidewalks, or anything else that is against the law, the fault lies with the pedestrian who wasn’t paying attention. I’ve been to NY many times, and I know what little regard pedestrians have for crosswalk signals.
Any questions?
Judd,
You have a number of misconceptions about New York’s road network, which is understandable because it’s radically different from any other American city. Allow me to explain.
The most important thing to understand is that the single biggest disincentive to drive in the New York CBD is congestion itself. This is an important thing to understand, because it means that no matter how much road space you make available, you get the same density of cars on it. Widen roads? The extra space is taken up by additional vehicles. Road diet? Fewer vehicles drive, keeping congestion constant. You don’t have 99% of the traffic on 80% of the road, you have 80% of the traffic on 80% of the road. This is important because it means that taking space away from cars doesn’t actually result in any more fumes, idling, etc. It results in less.
Besides this fundamental concern, which essentially negates your analysis, there are other problems in the details. Your analysis is on vehicles overall, but buses are driven all day where few other vehicles are. A single bus can also carry 80 people — shouldn’t it be considered 80 times more important than an SUV carrying just one? Bus lanes are only an issue in the most congested places and at the most congested times of day. Otherwise they are open to all traffic.
Finally, your attempts to blame the victims of car-on-pedestrian crashes can only be described as somewhere between thoughtless and sociopathic. An automobile has the ability to kill, and its driver has a concomitant responsibility not to. It doesn’t really matter if a pedestrian were to walk out into traffic, cross against the light, etc: Unless someone actually runs into moving traffic without warning, the impetus is on the driver to avoid a crash. It has to be that way, because they have the power; you will never hear about a pedestrian colliding with a car and killing the driver.
As far as who causes traffic, I’m not aware of any public data source that identifies the situation behind pedestrian fatalities in New York. But I do know that most that make the paper have a pedestrian crossing with the light getting run down by a right-turning vehicle. If the driver stays at the scene, he or she usually claims not to have seen the pedestrian and is released without even a ticket. I can provide numerous anecdotes of this situation if you’d like.
Look, if a pedestrian doesn’t obey the laws of the crosswalk and then gets hit and killed by a car, it’s his own fault. The driver, of course, should do his utmost not to kill the pedestrian, but this just isn’t possible all the time.
You mention power. Just as drivers have the power to try to stop their cars before hitting pedestrians, pedestrians also have the power to obey the laws of the crosswalk and not put themselves at risk.
Isn’t it thoughtless and sociopathic for pedestrians who disobey these laws to put drivers (who don’t want to hit them and try their best not to but wind up doing so anyway) into these horrible situations beyond their control?
I don’t like to operate in the anecdotal space, but every time I visit New York (and I’m there a half dozen times a year) I see pedestrians acting in reckless and irresponsible manners all over the place. Walking when the light is red. Crossing the street at mid-avenue. Stepping out into the middle of a lane trying to hail a taxi.
I have a close friend who lives in New York and engages in this type of reckless behavior all the time and then tells me, “That’s what we do in New York.”
What is your opinion on issuing tickets to pedestrians who break the law in this regard? I realize that it’s impractical, but in theory what do you think?
More to come on your other points …
Yes, definitely provide some of the anecdotes you mention above, if you don’t mind. I’d be interested in reading them. Thanks.
Judd,
I like the way that you totally disregarded the main thrust of this article and of my argument to focus on this question of blame.
That said, I do think that pedestrians who break the law should be ticketed, just as autos that break the law should be ticketed. But I also know that erring pedestrians never kill drivers (at least not by accident), only the other way around.
Your links, as requested. For purposes of laze, I am only reporting links from streetsblog’s weekly carnage. Unfortunately, most pedestrian fatalities are never even reported (not newsworthy enough at 500-600 per year in NYC area), and most of the links from past carnages have expired. This is what I could find:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Ian,
I just saw this comment, because the stupid spam filter we used blocked it.
Thanks for providing the links. I’ll take a look.