Speed Cameras - Potomac

I pulled over in my car and spoke to a road crew installing the cameras to learn about them. This is what they told me. The engineer working on them said that the the cameras in Maryland ONLY take your picture from behind. You can go over the speed limit in the other direction no problem. Other states DO take pics in both direction but in Maryland the state has only approved the camera to take pics from behind.
The activator is on the pole closest to you as you approach. it shots out a laser beam all the way across the road at a 20 degree angle. The beam is activated once your front bumber hits it and stops taking data once your rear bumber passes the beam. The beam is 5 degrees wide.
The white stripes on the road have nothing to do with the beam. He told me people try to drive around them to beat the camera. That does nothing. The white stipes are there as a reference point for the second picture to demonstrtae how far you travelled so as to corroborate your speed. He also said that that Maryland is giving you the first 10 miles per hour to compensate for mis-calibrated speedometers and good will. So if the limit is 30 MPH it hits at 40 MPH.

If any one has any more info please post so we all can be aware. There are also camers in both directions on Rt 28 and new ones being installed on Rt118 and many other locations. The company that builds them gets a piece of the action.
Thanks

 

I have read that such cameras are the object of vandalism in other countries.

 

Not a bad idea, although I would never support it here

A good rule of thumb to remember when driving in MoCo, is that cameras are usually placed to flank public schools, primarily the elementary schools.

For example, there are two on Dufief Mill Rd and one on Travilah Rd. which surround Travilah Elementary. As Carlos mentioned, two on Rt 28 in Darnestown which surround Darnestown Elementary, two before Potomac Elementary School on River road and perhaps the most obvious, the two right in front of Wootton HS.

I am sure I am missing some other examples but you get the idea.

 

The state has nothing to do with giving "10 mph", the state does not run the cameras. The cameras are owned by local police jurisdictions who have purchased them. Same as red light cameras.. Although there is a quite generous buffer in there the local dept. sets that as they see fit...

 

On my way to Normandy Farms, I was talking, and got nailed by the camera. $40 fine. There was no 10 mph rule in effect there.

 

Camera crew on Rt 28 told me that the camera window has been spray painted with black paint three times now. That is a shame.

 

"That is a shame."

Indeed, an outrage! Bring back the pilliwinks!

 

WWWeeeeeeeeee......Somebody driving my car is such a Speed Demon!

1.) 36 MPH (speed camera) Perhaps there WAS a "10 MPH RULE", but I don't know. My car was clocked at 11 MPH over. Evening hours, no school
2.) 44 MPH (speed camera)
3.) 34 MPH (Cop) The Cop wrote "Actually +40 MPH" on the ticket to let the Judge know that I was 'really traveling!'

Disclaimer: If I state "I" was driving, it is my artistic license to do so, and not an admission of guilt.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Can't you just argue that it wasn't you driving the car? I'm not sure how these stand up in court.

-R

 

I think you need a blacker ink if your gonna block out your address there Mike.....

 

The responsibility lies with the registered owner. Or so the citation I received said. It said on the citation that if another party is responsible that you need to provide their name etc. and they can pay the fine or you can. No points are accessed for this.

I had a guest driver go through one and it was not going real fast but fast enough. My arm was out the passenger side in the photo. I talked to my friend who said no problem he'll pay the ticket. I would have just paid but didn't want any record of it to show up. So I was curious and appealed. They accepted the other party was driving but reminded me that the registered owner is ultimately responsible. Then I paid the late fee when my friend sent his payment in late.

 

And I don't mean the camera lens. This makes me think a little about the stuff that you spray on the plate. My friend says that it will defeat the camera. The image is blurred. I have a hard time understanding why. It doesn't make sense. But then nobody ever tried to explain it to me.

 

The Mythbusters TV show had an episode about potentially defeating speed cameras. Unfortunately the spray failed.
Link is here: http://kwc.org/mythbusters/2007/03/episode_73_beating_the_speed_camera_exploding_patches.html

 

Ha! I see I missed one. Oh, well. It's all among friends here.

 

they put up a camera on tuckerman one or two weeks ago. they put it right next to hoover middle school as you are going towards falls rd

 

Ultimate revenge is stealing/borrowing someones plates for an hour as you haul butt by every speed camara in town at 2am, and blow through every red light camara you find. Not that I would do such a thing.

 

Funny but people in Montgomery County have done that: http://www.autoblog.com/2008/12/24/teens-copying-enemies-license-plates-to-get-revenge-via-speed-c/

 

Also new ones going up south bound on seven locks before bradley.... I used to let it rip a little right there....but no more....

 

I am not sure how these can stand up in court if really pushed. I would imagine burden to prove it was you behind the wheel falls on the state not the registered owner, despite the statement.

Not a lawyer.

-dsd

 

That's what I'm thinking. Plus our nifty Constitution allows us the right to face our accuser, but if that accuser is a digital camera that only takes a pic of our license plate, how are we supposed to get a fair hearing? Not to mention that we're supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. I was at a VW car show a long time ago and overheard some guys talking about my GTI as the one his buds at the dealership were taking out at night with their G-Tech Pro at 120mph through FFX Co. Had there been cameras back then I'd be hosed and would be automatically considered guilty until I was able to prove my innocence.

If that wasn't bad enough, my understanding is that the cameras are owned by contractors who receive a portion of the fine for each ticket issued (at least with the original red light cameras in DC). How that was considered legal is beyond me. Numerous studies showed that the lights at intersections with cameras were adjusted to shorten the yellow time, which increased the number of tickets issued, which of course generated more profit for the contractor. Not a fan.

-R

 

I've been nailed twice on Balt. Ave by Rockville HS, once with the Harley, and once with the 944. I have a lens cover on the 944 to block red light cameras which works very well for the red light camers, but is useless for the speed cameras. [They are also illegal to use in MD, but I've not been hassled by the local cops, however, the BWI cops will ticket you for this and it $200 and 1 point]. For the speed cameras, my valentine 1 does pick up the speed cameras well in advance so you can slow down. Hope this helps.