Juliet Baptista, G11, Psychology 459, Spring 1999
My Oral Presentation #3
S
urveillance on the Roadway
Table of Contents
Summary of Presentation
With the advancement in technology, many methods of surveillance have emerged as well. In "Beyond Traffic Safety" by J. Peter Rothe, Transaction Publishers, 1994, Chapter 13 discusses the advancement of these methods. The first section of the chapter talks about how uses of intervention devices have come a long way since your normal "walking a straight line, balancing on one foot, and touching the nose with the index finger". Other devices have been introduced, like speedometer readings and in 1960, traffic radar. Furthermore, the chapter talks about the pros and cons of radar detectors in various states. A particular focus of the chapter was on a newer device known as the Photo Radar Camera. What it does is simply takes a picture of an oncoming speeding vehicle and driver. A negative is produced and records the speed of the car, the date, and the time. A picture is developed and sent to the owner of the vehicle along with a letter 10-14 days after the event. An important issue to address is that the owner of the vehicle is penalized, whether he/she was driving the vehicle or not. This has been a topic of controversy, as described in a Supreme Court hearing in Paradise Valley, Arizona. The chapter also discusses 5 advantages to the Photo Radar Camera; the first and most important being that it can accurately identify a speeding vehicle.
Questions and Answers
The following questions were asked by students in the class:
I think that is an effective method overall. The pictures must be accurate enough to be able to see a license plate number and the driver?s face. However, I also think that police officers should closely monitor the device to make sure that it is working properly. Sometimes electronic devices malfunction. Also, I?d like to add that I don?t agree with its policy which states that the owner of the vehicle is at fault for the event, even though he may not have been driving his vehicle at the time. I believe in joint responsibility between the owner and driver.
I like what the whole purpose of the photo camera represents. However, I think that it?s best for police officers to present the driver with the ticket on the spot, and not have it sent in the mail. By catching speeding vehicles on sight, drivers are faced with the consequences then and there. The on-the-spot catchings are usually very effective anyway. The camera should just be a back up system.
I honestly don?t mind the increased use of video surveillance, just as long as they?re strictly used in public places. I haven?t seen that movie, but I wouldn?t like the idea of the government misusing cameras and placing them in private places. I?m aware of the video cameras downtown, which I have no problem with, and I?m all for cameras in Waikiki, too. Of all places, Waikiki needs those surveillance cameras. Walking around in Waikiki doesn?t seem as safe like it seemed to me before.
I think the cameras are very reliable. It must be for it to have the capability to log specific information such as time, speed and date, and to be able to accurately identify a license plate number and picture of the driver?s face. One negative thing behind the camera scheme is that it?s possible for it to malfunction like any electronic device. That is why I stated above that police officers should still be on sight in case something like that happens.
?Jayson Nakasone
As accurate and advantageous I feel the camera is at this moment, I?m sure many problems like you mentioned could come up, particularly if the system isn?t maintained. We?re all aware that electronic devices and instruments do decay over time, which is why high maintenance is vital in order to maintain its accuracy.
People have their own reasons behind breaking the speed limit. It could be due to a time factor, emotional disturbances, for fun, or could be because they don?t agree with the designated speed limit and might feel more comfortable driving at a greater speed, within their comfort zone that is. Thinking of "effective" ways to reduce speeding is always difficult to do. Some way or another, drivers still speed, but become more cautious about it (for instance when they know where certain speed traps might be located, and so on). I?m in favor of the photo radar surveillance. It seems to be very accurate.
My Reaction
Many interesting points were brought up after my presentation. One of the major points brought up by Dr. James concerns the amount of responsibility placed on both the owner of the vehicle and the driver at the time of the event. I stated that the driver should be at fault and have to pay the ticket. I understand that the owner has partial responsibility as well for trusting his/her car to someone else. However, I think the fault should be placed solely on the driver of the vehicle. I don?t think that it is right, but that is what the policy states. Others in the class had very good insight and slight differences into the topic as well.
How Do I Compare?
I like the other reports by my fellow classmates. I thought their reports were very well organized. I also like their creative uses of fonts, colors, and backgrounds. My report is plain and simple.
Suggestions for Future Generations
My suggestions to future generations would be to do further research into the Photo Camera surveillance technique. It would be interesting to explore the topic further and find out more about the advantages and disadvantages behind the system. I would also suggest finding more about the Cortright vs. Paradise Valley court case. The chapter didn?t go into depth about the circumstances surrounding the case, but would be interesting to learn more about.
Navigation Table