New iPhone Apps Help Drivers Beat Speed Traps

Ponca City, We love you writes "Two mobile applications, NMobile and Trapster, are providing drivers with up-to-date maps of speed-enforcement zones with live police traps, speed cameras or red-light cameras. Each application pulls up a map pinpointing the locations of speed traps within driving distance and an audio alert will sound as vehicles approach an area tagged as harboring a speed trap. Both applications rely on the wisdom of the crowds for their data with users reporting camera-rigged stop lights and areas heavily populated with radar-toting police officers via the iPhone or their web-based application, creating the ultimate speed trap repository available to you when you need it most — while you're driving. To thwart false alarms and eliminate inaccuracies, Trapster enlists its community of nearly 200,000 members to rank speed traps on their accuracy. NMobile founder Shannon Atkinson declined to provide detailed data, though he did estimate that 'well over 1,000' users had downloaded the application since it became available last week. The company insists they've received only positive feedback from law enforcement officials and police officers regarding their products. 'If the application gets people to slow down, I think it's generally considered to be a good thing,' said Atkinson."

Comments

Too Many Traps

[iamhigh]

The problem I have seen with most attempts to list speed traps, is that eventually damn near every street in a city, or every few miles on a highway could end up on there.

But maybe it will result in some speeders slowing down all the time.

Re:Too Many Traps

[TheRealMindChild]

This is just a misunderstanding of the system. Truly, a cop can grab you for speeding anywhere. However, a system like this should be for "speed traps". That is, a consistent place where cameras/cops can almost always expect to be found. I possibly might even take it a step further and classify a speed trap to be a place where you would never think of being nailed, like when the speed limit drops from 55 to 35 at the bottom of a 70 degree slope.

Re:Too Many Traps

[repvik]

Not that I support the tactics, but you should be driving so that you are prepared for anything around the next corner, be it a speed limit drop or a mad cow.

Re:Too Many Traps

[WillDraven]

While I agree that you should be prepared for anything that may be obstructing the roadway, that white sign halfway hidden behind a bush as you turn a corner is exactly where your attention should NOT be. If you're having to look away from your vehicles path of travel while making a turn and then rapidly decelerate, you're being dangerously distracted from the much more important task of making sure you're not going to run into anything.

The original purpose of speed limits was to protect people on and around the roadways. Then someone got the bright idea to regulate them to try and reduce fuel consumption. Now they've become so perverted that they seem to only exist in many places as a revenue source for local towns, and in causing drivers to spend more time looking at signs on the side of the road and their speedometer, they actually cause the roads to be LESS safe.

More driver distraction

[clang_jangle]

Like the streets aren't dangerous enough without every iPhone user fiddling with their toy trying to "beat the system" while piloting a two ton juggernaut on public streets.

Re:More driver distraction

[clang_jangle]

Yeah because speech alerts are really distracting. Did you even read the articles?

I really did actually, and I noticed that voice alerts are a feature. However, voice alerts != voice control. And I've seen plenty of people start plotting their trip several minutes after they leave the house while driving.

Ha

[clarkkent09]

'If the application gets people to slow down, I think it's generally considered to be a good thing,' said Atkinson."

Isn't the whole idea of this app to allow people slow down just before the speed trap? If they drive slowly all the time then they don't care about speed traps in the first place

Re:Ha

[zappepcs]

There is an ancillary benefit. While what you say seems on face value to be true, anything that gets drivers to pay more attention to the road and traffic on it will increase safety. Even if that attention is somewhat fleeting, it will help. Public service minded police do not mind as long as you do slow down. There are those that want to catch you to fill the bank account with booty from fines, but for the most part people and police just want safe roads.

Re:Ha

[MMC Monster]

Actually, what will happen is that people will drive faster when the phone says they are not near a speed trap.

Revenue stream

[Xistenz99_2000]

I am sure that there are some that want people to slow down at the speed traps, however speed traps are intended to collect revenue for the city that they are in. Traffic tickets are one of the easy ways an officer can collect 140 dollars within 15 minutes for the city and supply his paycheck without doing any hard work.

Re:Sergeant Stronginthearm says...

[larry bagina]

I just wish speed limits were designed for modern cars and modern traffic, not increasing revenue.

Speed up

[Bezultek]

In California the problem isn't people driving too fast, it's people driving too slow. By all means, slow down when the conditions merit it. But why must people drive stop before turning, go slow because there is an accident on the other side of the freeway, etc?

I appreciate anything that keeps the traffic moving. What we really need is an app to disable the speed trap.

Crazy Idea

[RAMMS EIN]

``the ultimate speed trap repository available to you when you need it most while you're driving.''

Or you could just not drive so fast you would get a ticket. I know, I am totally out of touch with reality and my ideas are correspondingly crazy. But I'll happily take a few minutes extra travel time and have a relaxed ride, because I don't have to worry about law enforcement and other drivers slowing me down.

Bollocks to that

[JamesRose]

Locating speed cameras means people can slow down to avoid a fine and then speed up again- not slow down to be safer. If they were truly trying to help people drive safer how about "WARNING! SCHOOL AHEAD" or "WARNING HIDDEN EXIT AHEAD", no, because slowing down for a speed camera is more rewrd than slowing down and driving safely around risky areas.

Re:Sergeant Stronginthearm says...

[ColdWetDog]

I just wish speed limits were designed for modern cars and modern traffic, not increasing revenue.

Unfortunately speed limits are designed for the modern driver. You've all seen them - drivers with the attention span of a crack-addled squirrel and the reflexes of a hypothermic snail. These folks really shouldn't be going fast. In fact, they should stay in their driveway playing with all the little gizmos in the car.

Hey, this would solve a bunch of problems: Oil consumption, traffic congestion, road rage. Buying more gizmos will help the economy. In fact, everyone should go out and buy a new, shiny, gizmo-laden car.

And leave it in their driveway.

I'm calling Senator Obama right now....

In other news

[Aranykai]

Local police have found a new way to setup surprise speed traps. It stems from an application on the popular iPhone that allows drivers to avoid known speed traps. Now officers just avoid these locations and catch the drivers before or after they exit the alleged "safe zones".

Re:Sergeant Stronginthearm says...

[Aranykai]

Perhaps its our driving instruction and licensing procedures in the US that are at fault. Go look up what they have in Poland. You have to drive on a skidpad during one test even!

Re:Sergeant Stronginthearm says...

[LordKaT]

You're either reading too much into my statement, or you're a fucking moron.

I don't really understand where you think I'm executing illegal U-turns, speeding, or fishtailing other people because they run red lights. I've never stated that I did any such things, in fact I'm outright denying it right now.

But, hey, you seem to think the statement "when cops start obeying the law, so will I" is a statement of fact. If that was the case, I would've killed a few cops with a taser by now.

Just for reference - since you seem to be unable to think beyond statements - I have not, and have no desire to kill people.

Re:Sergeant Stronginthearm says...

[LaskoVortex]

Clearly I'm the moron, because you made a statement and I assumed you actually meant what you said.

To clarify, in case its a little opaque for you--the statement "when cops start obeying the law, so will I" means that cops represent the government entity that creates laws. When cops break these laws, the government entity effectively breaks its own laws. If that government entity turns a blind eye to this law breaking, it has sacrificed any and all of its moral authority. Moral authority is the only absolute authority any law can have. When this moral authority is gone, then the populace has no absolute reason to obey any law and can and *should* break laws they disagree with or don't like. This is one of the corner stones of civil disobedience and it is an important component of democracy. So quit being righteous and try to think about the motivation about what people say.

When you see people blatantly breaking the law and you are aware of abuse by the police at the same time, you might consider whether that particular municipality has let its moral authority slip. I'm waiting for your righteous rebuttal before I provide half a dozen real world examples of this effect in action. But make sure you are very indignant and condescending when you rebut, or it won't be worth my time.