Redneck Parrotheads:
I'm not sure how we'll manage disproving waymarks so we can decline them. I know it's common practice now to establish a "do not want" list, but I think this is more about residents knowing their area and sharing local information globally. I'm not a fan of fictionalised waymarks but I'd have to believe that local peer pressure will keep waymarkers honest if they ever face the temptation. I look forward to seeing how the category is written up. 
This is one of the biggest issues - there are places that simply don't have peers to pressure with. I think there is like 5 active waymarkers in my Province, and only one other waymarker that I would call 'local' to my neighbourhood. This is just asking to have people tag any old location just to get the icon.
For the 'public service' of an inventory of speed traps, poifriends already has this covered, and I sincerely doubt the uptake of this category on waymarking.com will be even close to being as comprehensive as sites like that. It reminds me of the days that I wanted to know how to find the nearest Tim Horton's when out caching in an unfamiliar area. Poifriends has always had a much better list for that type of thing (heck they now have Tim Horton's actually endorsing that list), although the category is finally starting to fill out around here on waymarking.com.
Speed traps are unlikely to remain in the same location 5 years later, so we're going to end up with a database of (mostly) useless information here, that feeds some people's need to get an icon. Are people *really* going to go back and archive their speed trap waymark when the enforcement of that place stops?
So, my question to the group is, if we're already likely to fail at being the comprehensive inventory of speed traps --- why do I want to post a waymark in this category? Why do I want to log a visit to one of these? Do I log the visit while the officer is sitting in his cruiser with my driver's license and insurance 
?