Did you know? Driving without a proper license in Ontario can lead to fines ranging from $200 to $1,000, with novice drivers facing license suspension if they breach any requirements of the Graduated Drivers License Program. Get your free quote from Street Justice and call us at 1.877.274.4353. 💼👨‍⚖️ https://streetjustice.ca

Industrial Zones Video Analytics

AvidBeam Technologies offers advanced video AI analytics solutions that are designed to provide actionable insights and enhance safety across a wide range of industries.

Industrial Zones Video Analytics

Into the Abyss: The Nightmare of Driving Without a License

Driving without a license may appear minor, but it can lead to dire consequences. Many individuals take this risk due to convenience or ignorance, unaware of the potential dangers and legal penalties. However, accidents, legal troubles, and societal impacts await those who drive without proper documentation. Repeat offenders face escalating punishments, affecting their daily lives. Ultimately, Prioritising safety and compliance with thelaw is crucial to avoid the nightmare scenarios that can result from unlicensed driving, contributing to safer roads for everyone. See More...

Traffic violations in ​Virginia can lead to fines, points on your ​license, license suspension, higher ​insurance rates, and even impact your ​employment. Reckless driving, including excessive speeding, racing, and failing to yield, can result in jail time and hefty fines.

A Rant: No Turn on Red (NoTOR) State Pre-Emption

TLDR: The State of Indiana has continuously targeted Indianapolis with state pre-emption policies, especially around transportation. No Turn on Red Policies are good when implemented correctly. This policy will have adverse impacts on living breathing humans as well as society as a whole. Hopefully this will push Indy to implement for significant solutions to solving the pedestrian crash crisis in the city.

Indiana Got Me Big Mad

Today, I had a two-hour period of intense frustration and anger over the usual song and dance that happens here in Indianapolis. To my dismay, I discovered that a state senator had surreptitiously inserted an amendment into Indiana House Bill 1050. The main body of the bill has various legislative changes to policies around cars (defining "alternative fuel", changing vehicle tax policies, etc.). The offending Senate Amendment #5, displayed in big, bold letters:

"A CONSOLIDATED CITY MAY NOT ADOPT AN ORDINANCE REQUIRING THE INSTALLATION OF A SIGNPROHIBITNG A TURN DESCRIBED IN [reference to subsection defined earlier in the amendment that says drivers can turn right on a steady red]."

There are a few interesting things of note here:

The policy applies only to "Consolidated Cities". Indianapolis is (I believe) the only consolidated city in the state. This rule would not apply to any other jurisdiction.

This was a response by the senator to the Indianapolis City-County Council's proposal to post signs restricting right turn on red in Downtown Indy, specifically on roads that are designed to move cars quickly. This is a bare-bones pedestrian safety solution, and because the roads cross through downtown and near a major university campus (IUPUI), it's one of the few places in this city that has people walking around.

The State Senator that submitted this amendment is named Aaron Freeman, the representative from Indiana Senate District 32. This district comprises of the southeast corner of Indianapolis (arguably the most rural quadrant of the city) and parts of suburban Greenwood and unincorporated lands south of the city. It is one of, if not the most conservative part of Indianapolis, and (this is just my speculation) provides legitimacy for the State Legislature to impose conservative state pre-emption on a mostly Democrat-represented city. Is this a punishment for the city because of how they vote? Who can say.

Aaron has become something of a transportation villain here in Indy. Before his crusade to preserve the sanctity of the ability to turn right on red (only in Indianapolis), he has also consistently fought against one of IndyGo's proposed Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) line - the Blue Line. He has done this every legislative session since at least 2019. His main gripe? The Blue Line would have dedicated lanes, removing one or two lanes from the currently SEVEN lane-wide East Washington Street. Dedicated lanes are integral for BRT to operate effectively; transit is not rapid if it's sitting in traffic (generally). But dedicated lanes are Communism; they control the means of production of those lanes for the masses and removes them from the enjoyment of F-150-driving, red blooded, meat-eating, gun-toting traditional families. And for that reason, Aaron cannot allow this injustice to happen quietly. Thankfully for the urbanites of Indy, every strategy Aaron has tried so far has failed to be passed into law. Hopefully it stays that way.

This is not the first case of the State of Indiana pre-empting Indianapolis in a way that relates to transportation, safety, and the built environment. The state passed a ban on funding light rail projects in 2014. A couple sessions ago, they tried to take away zoning control from the City of Indianapolis and give the power to townships; for some reason the township governments still exist in Indiana even though their land is incorporated by a city. It's very dumb way to operate local government, and this was a very dumb proposal, which is why it wasn't adopted. The state has also pre-empted the city from creating its own gun laws, local minimum wage, rent control, paid sick leave requirements, and plastic bag fees.

There are more examples of the atrocious pre-emption Indiana has done, but I want to move onto why this made me so mad; what is No Turn on Red and why is it important?

NoTOR is the Bare Minimum

Not Turn on Red (NoTOR) is a traffic control method that restricts drivers from turning right at red lights. A lot of drivers may find this annoying, but it is an important, easy, and affordable way to reduce pedestrians being hit by cars turning right on red. According to a five-year study examining crashes in Downtown Indy, over half of pedestrian-related crashes were the result of vehicles not yielding to pedestrians at signalized intersections. source. Anecdotally, pedestrian crashes across Indy have continued to rise year-over-year for the past five years. It is truly a crisis.

There is a provision in the amendment that says a driver must stop at a steady red light for 120 seconds before turning right on red. Theoretically, this means drivers should be completely stopped for a period of time that would allow them to see someone crossing on their right. This is also an ignorant safeguard. You might as well tell people not to speed on the highway. Very few people follow this (even the Federal Highway Administration say so) and it is rarely enforced.

The reason so many pedestrians are struck by vehicles turning right on red is a combination of factors:

The design of the intersection. Larger curb radii can allow for cars to take turns faster; lack of crosswalk markings doesn't remind drivers to check for pedestrians; having stop bars too close to where pedestrians cross reduces the amount of time a driver has to look right while crossing.

Driver behavior. On top of a general increase in distracted driving, there is a documented increase in reckless driving from the pandemic, however pedestrian deaths had been increasing even before this. In addition to this recent development, FHWA outlined how drivers really behave when turning right on red: "Motorists are so intent on looking for traffic approaching on their left that they may not be alert to pedestrians on their right. In addition motorists usually pull up into the crosswalk to wait for a gap in traffic, blocking pedestrian crossing movements. In some instances, motorists simply do not come to a full stop."

Vehicles have become larger, placing drivers higher. This obstructs their view, especially of people that may be below their sight lines (like children and people in wheelchairs). It also extends their vehicle's hoods and their bodies, which can inadvertently hit pedestrians, especially on tight urban streets.

Lack of Enforcement. I will be the first to admit that traffic enforcement can be tricky; traffic stops can lead to tragedy very quickly. That being said, the response should not be just not enforcing traffic laws. Two options stand out in my mind: better training for officers around traffic stops and remote enforcement. In a 2021 survey of police analyzed by the Rand Corporation, 42% of responding officers said their department has never provided traffic stop training, and only 6% strongly agree that they have received adequate training for traffic stops involving noncompliant drivers. Remote enforcement is not without its flaws, and requires a deeper dive in another post. In short; red light cameras work as a safety improvement. They reduce more fatal crashes between both vehicles and pedestrians. They can also cause an increase rear-ending by more aggressive drivers and other less life-threatening crashes. But if we have to pick one method over another, we should pick the one where less people are killed or gravely injured. There are issues with equitable placement of cameras, as well as the matter of ticketing drivers for using a roadway in the manner it was designed, rather than what a sign says. If the design of a street network is oriented to the fast movement of vehicles instead of pedestrian safety, drivers are more likely to drive over the posted speed limit and turn right on red without stopping, because that's how the road was designed to be used. Red light cameras have been legislatively prohibited in seven states, and are de facto prohibited in Indiana. Have those entities repealed or prohibited them out of some sort of duty to the low-income drivers that could be adversely affected by remote enforcement? No, it's mostly because drivers complain about having to obey traffic laws to the letter and look at it as a cash grab for cities to generate income (which, honestly, could be partially true). However, repealing red light cameras has been shown to increase traffic deaths, and the selfishness and entitlement of drivers is entirely to blame for that.

Implementation

The Federal Highway Administration has a very helpful page on how to effectively implement NoTOR. Restricting right turns on red is implemented through installing signage, sometimes in combination with a Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI), which gives pedestrians a few-second head start to enter the crosswalk before vehicles are given a green light. This is a measure that reduces pedestrians being hit by vehicles that impatiently want to turn right on green. Siting NoTORs appropriately is important. FHWA explicitly says that they should be present in areas with high pedestrian activity (however it does not define what that threshold is, leaving the interpretation open to state and local DOTs). In the case of the Downtown Indianapolis proposal, these signs would have implemented NoTOR on arterial roadways with high traffic volumes in the most pedestrian active region in the city (if not the state). It is more than appropriate to implement this policy. Anecdotally, I have seen NoTOR work. I recently visited Philadelphia and spent pretty much all of my time in Center City, where NoTOR is implemented at almost every intersection. As a pedestrian, it made me feel far safer than I ever did walking around in Downtown Indy.

The Human Cost of NoTOR Prohibition

The prohibition of NoTOR has a devastating impact on human life, as evidenced by the research indicating an increase in serious injury and death when NoTOR is not restricted. But the human toll extends far beyond physical harm. Those who are seriously injured face an array of financial burdens, including medical debt, lost income, and potential job loss. The emotional trauma of a traffic accident can be just as damaging, leaving lasting effects on mental health and quality of life.

The human cost doesn't stop there; being seriously injured can mean being saddled with medical debt, missed work from recovery, losing a job because of recovery or inability to do the work required, loss of income, and permanent changes in health and quality of life. This is on top of the mental trauma of being seriously injured or losing a loved one to a traffic accident.

There were over 3,400 pedestrian deaths in the United States in 2022. In 2021, over 60,000 pedestrians were injured by drivers. Each one of these individuals had a life, a family, and a community that cared about them. Their sudden and violent deaths or injuries leave a permanent scar on the lives of those who knew and loved them. And yet, all of this suffering is caused by a refusal to inconvenience drivers for a few minutes. The State of Indiana and Aaron Freeman seem to place little value on the safety and well-being of pedestrians, prioritizing the convenience of drivers over the lives and health of their fellow citizens. The cost of this callous disregard for human life is simply too high to bear.

At least according to the State of Indiana and Aaron Freeman.

How to Get Around the NoTOR Ban

There are ways that the City of Indianapolis can get around the NoTOR Ban, and it is primarily through intersection and street design improvements.

There are soft infrastructure changes like setting back where cars stop with signs and paint, painting more visible crosswalks, painting street murals, and implementing Leading Pedestrian Intervals signal timing.

There are also hard infrastructure changes like reducing curb radii so drivers have to significantly slow down before turning right. Reducing roadway lanes or lane widths and implementing streetscape improvements like street trees have also been shown to subconsciously cause drives to drive slower because it increases their awareness of other vehicles and obstacles around them.

Zooming out to a network-level view, considerations should be given to more unique approaches to improving pedestrian safety. Implementing mid-block crossings can provide a safer crossing for pedestrians because it reduces the potential points of conflict; drivers won't be pre-occupied with looking left while turning right and pedestrians don't have to look over their shoulders when crossing. All they have to worry about is oncoming traffic. There should also be consideration given to completely eliminating private vehicle traffic entirely from certain portions of downtown.

Conclusion

Although the pre-emption legislation may be exasperating and expected to prolong the unsafe conditions in Indianapolis' busiest pedestrian zones, there is a possibility that it could prompt much-needed infrastructure improvements to enhance pedestrian safety. Over the last three decades, Indianapolis has made significant strides from its former downtown one-way traffic nightmare. However, there is still much more progress to be made in creating a more livable city, and this legislative decision might serve as a motivating force to achieve this goal.

2:33 on.soundcloud.com/gjUub Violence Reaction: A steep spike in Oakland, California car killings after the pandemic and the loss of the city's pandemic-era slow streets spurred the formation of The Traffic Violence Rapid Response Team. Seamus Garrity interviews George Spies and Carter Lavin, volunteers with the Team.

21:59 on.soundcloud.com/nW5By Lives Above All Else: Columbus, Ohio is on board for safer streets. Taylor Nichols interviews Maria Cantrell, Vision Zero Coordinator for Columbus, Ohio, Emma Kogge, Transportation Planner for the City, and Angie Shmitt, a transportation writer and planner based in Cleveland.

39:10 on.soundcloud.com/EjebM No Place Like Home: We look to places like the Netherlands for examples of safe biking infrastructure, but Inlander editor Nick Deshais has written an article that places Spokane, Washington among the great biking cities of the world. www.inlander.com/culture/the-futu…spokane-24647156 By Taylor Nichols.

Editing by Kevin Burton. Closing Song, "Bike," by Mal Webb. Interstitial music, "Just Moving," by Don Ward. Visit BikeTalk.org to be involved.

Average 2024 Queer Group Chat:

shadowsgayhighlights: guys another job rejected me im going to scream

garden-hoe: NOOOOOOOO

Animeguyshugetitties: fr what the fuck. smh.

shadowsgayhighlights: i need a job to get an apartment and leave this shithole so bad

purplepiss: move in with me

shadowsgayhighlights: you live in another country

purplepiss: MOVE. IN. WITH. ME 🔪🔪🔪

sick_ballshot_420: insurance denied my meds again

garden-hoe: should i mail you my extras from when i was on that a year ago

trafficviolation (Mod): guys no drug deal in chat, take it to DM's

weEvil: i'll deadass marry you for health insurance Balls

Animeguyshugetitties: ok but did you see the new episode?

purplepiss: YES

trafficviolation (Mod): YES

sick_ballshot_420: YES

Video analytics

AvidBeam Technologies is a leading video AI analytics provider that enables businesses to avail computer vision for enhanced video processing and surveillance.

Video analytics

Comedian Jim Davidson Goes Solo at Court: Will His Plea for Half of his 12-Month Driving Ban Catch Traction on Social Media?

Comedian Jim Davidson Goes Solo at Court: Will His Plea for Half of his 12-Month Driving Ban Catch Traction on Social Media? Comedian Jim Davidson Goes Solo at Court: Will His Plea for Half of his 12-Month Driving Ban Catch Traction on Social Media? #JimDavidson #DrivingBan #Comedian #SocialMedia #LegalIssue #TrafficViolation #UKLaws Introduction Jim Davidson, the renowned British comedian and actor, recently went solo at court in an attempt to challenge his 12-month driving ban. He pleaded to the judge for a reduction in his ban period by half, asking for six months instead of the full 12-month period. His move has drawn a great deal of attention from social media users who are showing mixed reactions to his plea. The Background of Davidson's Driving Ban Jim Davidson's driving ban came as a result of accumulating too many demerit points on his driving license. Under UK law, when a driver accumulates 12 or more demerit points, they will face an automatic driving ban for a period of 6-12 months, depending on the severity of the violation. In Davidson's case, he accumulated 12 points within a short period of time, which led to his driving ban. The Importance of Social Media in Davidson's Case The use of social media has grown in recent years and has become an integral part of our daily lives. Social media has played a significant role in Davidson's case because it has provided a platform for people to share their opinions, reactions, and feelings about his plea. Some social media users are supporting Davidson, while others are against him and believe that he should accept his punishment. The Impact of Davidson's Case on the Entertainment Industry Davidson's driving ban has generated a lot of media attention, and it has sparked debates about the role of celebrities in society. The entertainment industry is known for promoting a luxurious lifestyle that includes fast cars, private jets, and expensive vacation destinations. However, it has also faced criticism from some quarters for fostering a culture of entitlement and privilege, leading to actors and comedians getting away with breaking the law. The Verdict and Social Media Reactions The verdict on Davidson's plea for a reduction in his driving ban is yet to be announced. Many social media users are showing support for Jim Davidson while others are taking a stand against him. Some social media users believe that he should be punished like any other UK citizen, while others are in support of his plea, stating that he is a UK personality, and he deserves a second chance. Summary The British comedian Jim Davidson recently went solo in court, challenging his 12-month driving ban. He pleaded with the judge for half of his ban, which has caught the attention of social media users who have shared their reactions, feelings, and opinions. The importance of social media in Davidson's case has highlighted the role of celebrities in society and has sparked debates about the entertainment industry's values and standards. The verdict is yet to be announced, and social media awaits Davidson's fate with eagerness. #ENTERTAINMENT Read the full article

RLVD System: A Game-Changing Technology

The RLVD System is a game-changing technology that monitors intersections using AI cameras and detects red light violations to promote safer roads.

Its benefits are:

Improved Road Safety: RLVD cameras discourage drivers from running red lights, leading to fewer accidents and injuries.

Increased Revenue: RLVD systems help increase the revenue of the authorities by fining violators and reducing the number of red-light violations.

BetterTraffic Management: RLVD systems help authorities manage traffic more efficiently by detecting and penalizing red light violations.

At Intozi, we specialize in providing advanced traffic solutions, including RLVD systems. Our RLVD cameras are equipped with high-resolution sensors and advanced image processing software to provide accurate and reliable results. With our RLVD system, traffic authorities can ensure safer roads and more efficient traffic management.

#RLVDSolution #RoadSafety #TrafficManagement #TrafficSolution #SafeDriving #IntersectionSafety #DriveResponsibly #RedLightCameras #TrafficEnforcement #AccidentPrevention #StopOnRed #TrafficSafetyTech #AdvancedTrafficSolutions #TrafficViolations #StopRedLightRunning #TrafficAwareness #SaferRoads #AutomatedTrafficEnforcement #IntersectionMonitoring #RoadSafetyFirst #TrafficFines #EnforcementCameras #RoadSafetyTips #SafeTraffic #PublicSafety #Intozi #Intozitechnology #Intoziai

"Inside the Chase: A Closer Look at Police Pursuits"

In this gripping expose, we delve into the adrenaline-fueled world of police pursuits. Through interviews with law enforcement experts and firsthand accounts from officers on the front lines, discover the tactics, risks, and challenges involved in apprehending fleeing suspects. From narrow escapes to dramatic takedowns, this article offers a riveting glimpse into the high-stakes world of chasing down criminals.see more...

there are written laws regulating the operation of motor vehicles. Some of those laws address administrative or equipment issues, such as parking tickets or fines for defective turn signals or lights. The more serious offenses involving motor vehicles are commonly referred to as “moving violations.”

Expert Local Lawyers

Find trusted, free legal information, tips, and access to local lawyers at ExpertLocalLawyers.com Expert Local Lawyers’ mission is to make the law understandable and accessible for all. ExpertLocalLawyers.com offers easy-to-understand legal information and tips. Our website also has a growing online directory of local lawyers that are experts. We hope to help connect those that find themselves…

View On WordPress

A mother, a father, and a grandmother of young people killed by cars have used their experience to organize for safer streets.

Lizi Raman, Beverly Shelton, and Dr. Frank Cruz speak with Bike Talk hosts Lindsay Sturman and Galen Mook.

Lizi got a bike lane installed on the infamous "Boulevard of Death," Queens Boulevard in NYC. Lizi worked to transform Queens Boulevard into a "Boulevard of Life" after her son Asif was killed on his bike there. p2a.co/hHWt2A4

5 year old Zachary was killed by a car in a crosswalk in Berkeley, California. "Grandma" Beverly Shelton founded Families for Safe Streets Southern California, and her son, Dr. Frank Cruz, founded The Zachary Michael Cruz Foundation. www.facebook.com/zmcfoundation/?ref=page_internal

48:35-Lindsay's interview with Dutch traffic engineer Dick Van Veen www.dickvanveen.nl/en/

Edited by Kevin Burton

Last night in Brooklyn my Lyft driver, a very kind black man, got pulled over by the NYPD. He was driving fine, so we were both baffled. Two white cops converged on the car, shining flashlights through the driver’s side and passenger side window. Since it was just a short walk from where were stopped to where I was headed, I asked the cop if I could get out while they were checking the driver’s license etc. I didn’t wanna bail on the driver, but hey, I had a party to get to :)) The cop gruffly responded by telling me they were doing a car search and that getting out while that was going on would be a bad idea, given that “we have guns”. WTF? Obnoxious and disrespectful. Needless to say, I stayed put while the cops went back to the squad car to run a check of the driver’s license. At this point we still had no idea why we were pulled over. When the cop returned 5 minutes later, we found out why - the car had tinted windows. Say what? Makes no sense. A car won’t pass inspection if the windows are tinted to an extent not allowed by law. And this vehicle had a valid inspection or else the cops would have cited the driver for that too. So how could the windows been out of compliance with the law? Even if they were, wouldn’t a warning have sufficed instead ticketing the driver and making him go to court. It’s bullshit. Can’t help but wonder if the outcome would have been different if it was a white guy behind the wheel. #bullshit #profiling #nypd #pulledover #tintedwindows #makingtheirquota #brooklyn #ridiculous #slownight #nyc #nycprimeshot #newyorkcity #newyork #bias #racialbias # #trafficstop #trafficviolation (at Red Hook)