You ever get a bill in the mail for doing 42 in a 30? Not a warning, not a conversation with a cop — just a picture of your license plate and a demand for $40. No accident. No victim. Just a robot with a camera and a city hungry for your cash.
Welcome to America’s municipal side hustle — automated speed enforcement, where the goal isn’t public safety. It’s revenue generation.
The Safety Theater of Speed Cameras
Local governments love to say these programs exist to “keep our streets safe.” But the data — and your instincts — say otherwise. These systems ticket people for minor speed deviations (often 5-12 mph over), not reckless driving. And they're conveniently installed in areas where the road design itself encourages faster speeds than what’s posted.
For example, in Frederick, MD, the speed limit was always 45mph on a stretch of highway 40 called The Golden Mile. The SHA (State Highway Administration) lowered it to 35mph in 2024 so that the city could put up speed cameras in highly trafficked areas where people would instinctively drive slightly above 45mph.
Why? Because when the design speed (what the road safely supports) exceeds the posted speed limit, it creates a perfect trap. It is easy to neglect the often artificially low posted limits when the ebb and flow of the road psychologically dictates greater speeds.
Enter the concept of the 85th percentile rule — a cornerstone of traffic engineering.
What Is the 85th Percentile Speed?
It’s a simple, proven idea: most people drive at a speed they feel is safe given the road conditions. Traffic engineers use the speed that 85% of drivers travel at or below as the standard for setting safe speed limits. Why?
Because studies consistently show that this is the speed with the lowest crash rates. It reflects human judgment — and actual safety.
So what happens when cities ignore the 85th percentile and post artificially low limits instead? You criminalize normal behavior. You turn everyday drivers into ATM machines.
But Do Speed Cameras Prevent Crashes?
It depends — and that’s the problem. The evidence is selective, inconsistent, and often politicized.
Some studies show small reductions in crashes in specific contexts (like high-pedestrian school zones). But:
-
These results often can’t be isolated from other changes (like road redesigns or police presence).
-
Other studies show no statistically significant change in overall crash rates.
-
In some cases, rear-end collisions increase because drivers slam on the brakes when they spot a camera.
There’s also a glaring absence of transparency in most municipalities:
-
No public release of crash data before and after enforcement.
-
No justification for speed limits based on engineering standards.
-
No disclosure of revenue generated vs. actual safety improvements.
If safety were the goal, you’d see redesigned intersections, updated signage, and traffic-calming infrastructure. What you see instead is a pole with a camera and a bill in your mailbox.
The Revenue Machine Hiding Behind a Safety Vest
Let’s be real — automated enforcement isn’t just about “behavioral correction.” It’s about easy, scalable revenue.
-
Cameras don’t need salaries, pensions, or breaks.
-
Fines are low enough to discourage contesting but high enough to make millions.
-
In some states, the vendors running these systems take a cut — making them literal bounty hunters.
The math is beautiful, in the most dystopian way possible:
Set a speed limit 10 mph below natural traffic flow. Install a camera. Mail thousands of tickets a week. Repeat.
It’s not public service. It’s a soft racket dressed in municipal branding.
The Bigger Issue: Automation Without Judgment
We’re not arguing that reckless drivers should be let off the hook. But this isn’t about 75 in a school zone. This is about 10-12 mph over on roads engineered for 40+, where no context, no discretion, and no human judgment is applied.
That’s not justice. That’s a vending machine for fines.
A truly free society does not outsource law enforcement to machines and then remove the right to face an accuser, to provide context, or to appeal meaningfully. It doesn’t normalize punishment without process.
And it sure as hell doesn’t call it "safety" when it's really just a low-effort cash grab.
What Can You Do?
-
Demand transparency. Ask your city to release crash data and revenue reports tied to automated enforcement.
-
Push for 85th percentile speed studies to ensure speed limits reflect real safety, not manufactured infractions.
-
Challenge your citations in court and share your story publicly.
-
Vote out revenue tyrants. Support candidates who oppose automated enforcement and advocate for traffic reform.
And if nothing else, make a statement — wear your resistance:
