Closed Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 Last
  1. #1
    Junior Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    CNY
    Posts
    7

    Default Speed and Red Light Camera Scam

    A new government report shows redlight and photoradar cameras are designed to entrap drivers to get revenue. 300 drivers in San Diego sued the city, and they obtained confidential documents proving the city rigs the system to get millions in revenue. You can see the report at http://www.freedom.gov/auto/
    There are claims by those in favor of these cameras that they increase safety, but I dont think so. I have never been to an MVA and said "A redlight camera would have prevented this." I blame the majority of accidents on stupidity, recklessnes and a host of other human defects.
    I know that there are many issues that arrise with this debate ('big brother,' constitutional), the one I am most curious about is the saftey issue.
    Thanks for your input,
    Jeff

  2. #2
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    DFW area of Texas
    Posts
    660

    Default

    I blame the majority of accidents on stupidity, recklessnes and a host of other human defects.

    Stupidity?

    Recklessness?

    Human Defects?

    What kind of American are you?

    Don't you know that no one is responsible for their own actions except people that think that everyone is responsible for their own actions.

    Have you been hiding under a rock?

    the one I am most curious about is the saftey issue.

    Need more data. They have a report that shows less accidents with longer yellows, let's see the report from the red light operators that show less accidents from the cameras - if there is one.
    It's only my opinion. I do not speak for any group or organization I belong to or associate with or people I know - especially my employer. If you like it, we can share it, you don't have to give me credit. If you don't, we are allowed to disagree too (but be ready to be challenged, you may be on to something I'm not). That's what makes America great!

  3. #3
    Forum Member
    SFD13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Posts
    195

    Default

    I find it funny when people complain about photo radar and red light cameras.

    Gee, if you don't speed excessively or run red lights you won't be fined.

    If you want to endanger others then be prepared to take responsibility for your actions and suffer the consequences.

    People tend to blame everybody else. "Daddy didn't let me have a puppy when I was four, thats why I can't be held reponsible for speeding and running red lights" GIVE ME A BREAK!

    Sorry for ranting!
    "My friends, watch out for the little fellow with an idea." - Tommy Douglas 1961.

    Tender 9 - old, slow, ugly, cantankerous, reliable!

    All empires fall, you just have to know where to push

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Dalmatian90's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Posts
    3,120

    Default

    5. What safety benefits do red light cameras provide? They've been shown to reduce red light violations and intersection crashes. A recent Institute study of a program in Oxnard, California, shows that red light running violations dropped a total of 42 percent after cameras were introduced at nine intersections, which includes a similar decline at intersections that weren't equipped with them. Another study showed violations declined about 40 percent in Fairfax, Virginia after one year of camera enforcement. Victoria, Australia, began using red light cameras at traffic signal intersections in 1983 and posted signs alerting motorists of their presence. A subsequent report by the Road Traffic Authority found a 32 percent decrease in right-angle collisions and a 10 percent reduction in injuries after the cameras were installed. http://www.hwysafety.org/safety_facts/qanda/rlc.htm#5

    Ya know an awful lot of people speed.
    If we raise the speed limit, fewer people will speed.
    IACOJ Canine Officer
    20/50

  5. #5
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    96

    Default

    I think the point of the "red light" cameras is to catch people running red lights. What is the problem with that? If you make a habit of running red lights, you deserve to be caught and punished. What is the differnece between a marked unit sitting there watching the intersection from a parking lot nearby or a camera on the wire watching for the same thing? The way I see it, if you don't run the lights all the time, you won't have a problem? What is the big deal.

    When they say "improve safety", I think they mean that if the usual jerks who make a habit of running the lights know they WILL get caught, they will not do it anymore, therefore, the intersections would be safer. Again, I think this is a really good idea. They wouldn't run the light if they saw a marked unit sitting there watching. Now there is a camera instead of a marked unit. Whats the difference?

    Now, people that complain about a red light camera have one of two problems, or both:

    1. You probably complain about everything else having to do with authority

    2. You are a jerk and like running red lights

    I still don't see what the problem is?

  6. #6
    Member
    Will24's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Elverson, PA
    Posts
    79

    Default

    I think the big deal is people going through yellows getting ticketed, re-read the first statement
    There are three truths in life:

    1. Jews do not recognize Jesus as the Messiah.
    2. Protestants do not recognize the Pope as the leader of the Christian faith.
    3. Two Baptists do not recognize each other in the liquor store.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Dalmatian90's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Posts
    3,120

    Default

    If you don't have enough time to clear the intersection, don't enter on yellow.

    Then you don't get a ticket.

    If your too stupid to understand, reckless to care, or have another defect that makes you unable to comprehend yellow is warning you it will soon turn red, so don't enter if you can't clear, you deserve the ticket.

    While there is potential for abuse, I suspect that most people are grasping at straws.

    After all what's the difference between a cop and a camera? Camera costs $50,000 and a few thousand a year to run, covering the intersection 24x7. Cop costs $75-100,000 a year or more between salary, benifits, cruiser, training, etc -- for only 40 hours a week when not on training, vacation, or out sick.

    Camera catches offenders who speed and run red lights. Does so quite cost effectively. I also figure it's a lot less intrusive on law-biding folks than DWI roadblocks.

    We're way to lenient on traffic violations in this country -- and way to much into believing a driver's license is a right and not a privelege. Many of the offenses that might bring a few months suspension and few hundred dollars in fines in the US in England brings a few YEARS suspension and a few THOUSAND dollar fine -- damn well suspect you don't try to do it a second time after those penalties!
    IACOJ Canine Officer
    20/50

  8. #8
    Forum Member
    LACAPT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    LA Can.
    Posts
    350

    Default

    Red light infraction cameras do work, no doubt about it, and where do the majority of the stupid "I thought I had enough time" accidents occur. You guessed it, intersections. As for radar, try living up here in the great white north in Edmonton Alberta Canada where the cash cow pulled in 12 million in 2000. Does it slow people down? NOT. We are not assesed any demerit points on our licences so people pay the fine and go on their merry way usualy 10-20 over the speed limit I might add. Up here it definitly is nothing but a tax to the driving public, to the folks that say if you dont speed you wont get caught, true enough but the bottom line is that it does not slow people down nor prevent accidents, and the facts speak for themselves.

  9. #9
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Posts
    95

    Default

    Two cents

    Okay, about everything everybody else has said has a some merit to it.

    However, to call the red-light cameras a scam is wrong. It is not a scam. Cops cannot be everywhere. I know, I was one, and I just could not take that whole donut shop with me so I could be everywhere! Properly set up and maintained, those camera systems work. They are also great for railroad crossings, too.

    Having been a police officer, then a prosecutor for about 17 years total, I can tell you that at about every stoplight intersection accident I handled or prosecuted one driver was running the red light big time. Stupid, yes, reckless, oh yeah. How do you nail them without being there in person? Use those cameras!

    So what if the camera just also happens to raise some $$$. Maybe they can hire a new officer or two with that increased revenue.

    A Chicago suburb experimented with motorcycle patrols a few years back. They put on two motor officers. In three months, they collected enough in tickets to pay for a third officer, his training, and his motor.

    Cameras at intersections, I support them. Might just make some of our work a little less messy with them there than without.

    (Pontifically speaking from a county with only two red-yellow-green stop lights in the entire county)

    From where the 20th Century is still a few years away, Dr. Law.

    [ 07-10-2001: Message edited by: Dr. Law ]
    General McAuliffe said it best, "Nuts".

  10. #10
    Forum Member
    DeputyChiefGonzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Somewhere between genius and insanity!
    Posts
    13,584

    Default

    It looks like truck197 got caught by one of the aforementioned cameras and is looking for a place to vent!
    ‎"The education of a firefighter and the continued education of a firefighter is what makes "real" firefighters. Continuous skill development is the core of progressive firefighting. We learn by doing and doing it again and again, both on the training ground and the fireground."
    Lt. Ray McCormack, FDNY

  11. #11
    Junior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Shavertown PA
    Posts
    24

    Default

    Heck, I wish my township used them!! We are on a busy 5 lane highway with 3 lights within 3/4 of a mile. Needless to say, speeding and light running keep my department busy. Personally, I don't feel safe even with the green in my favor. Too many times I have seen the green, let up on the brake and went to pull out only to have to stop for some moron blowing the light at 60+! I live in PA, not jersey where the "Two through on red rule" is in effect.
    It is better to try and fail, then quit and succeed.

  12. #12
    Forum Member
    FGFD43's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Thomasville, NC, USA
    Posts
    63

    Default

    Do you think that if we start carrying a camera in our engines and squads and take pictures of the idiots that do not yield the right of way to us maybe we can raise some money too?
    Kevin Sink
    Fair Grove Fire Dept.
    Thomasville, NC USA
    kevinsink@northstate.net

  13. #13
    Forum Member
    BucksEng91's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Warminster, PA
    Posts
    576

    Default

    You know, this is such a great idea! Why don't we extend it?

    There are a lot of problems with drugs in North Philadelphia, for example. Let's put cameras up on every streetcorner and midblock, so we can catch those dastardly drug dealers. What's that? How can we be sure that the person who is seen on camera at 3 PM selling drugs is the same one we swoop down on and arrest at 9 PM? Well, hell, all those drug dealers look the same anyway, right? Even if we make a little mistake, hell, it's just one more worthless drug dealer. It all works out in the end, right?

    I understand that shoplifting is a concern to many retailers, and rightfully so. Many of these incidents are traced to people stowing things in their bag (or on their person if a bag is not permitted) while in the dressing room. Let's put cameras in the dressing rooms so we can stem this heinous crime wave! What's that you say? You don't want someone looking at your pin while you try on your new BVDs? Well, son, that's the price we have to pay to get RID of crime. You're not supporting CRIME, now, are you?

    Hey, you know what? Declining productivity is a problem here in these ol' United States. Employers just aren't getting the full 8 hours work for eight hours pay, dammit! So let's put a camera over everyone's work area, in the hallways, and in the bathroom stalls. That way, we can be sure that people are working for a full 8. Or, failing that, we can at least DOCK them for the extra time they spend wiping themselves, or when they arrive a minute late at their desk. Or if they linger too long at the soda machine. Or, if they pick their nose when they should be working!!

    Ooo, ooo! Here's another way we can use technology! Let's set up radar on every inch of the interstate, with little ID doohickeys on every car we make (and retrofitted to those already on the road), like those "EZ Pass" stickers. Then, if you go over 55 MPH for even one second, we can make sure you'll get a big, fat speeding ticket. 'Cause we all know that no safe, law-abiding American ever drives over 55 on the interstate. Hey, this is all in the name of SAFETY, people!!!

    Heyyyyy!!! I just had another brainstorm!!! Why don't we make PEOPLE wear EZ Pass ID stickers, so the police always know where we are? See, that way, if we get lost, we can just call OnStar or something and have them direct us. Or, if our car breaks down in the middle of the Mohave Desert, right, they can send people to rescue us! Or, if we happen to cross a street not at an intersection, the police can write us a jaywalking ticket! Or, if we bike on the wrong side of the road, the police can come and confiscate our bicycles (it's for our own good, trust me!).

    Am I making my point, or should I go on with this stupidity? I could do this all day.

    When Americans begin to give up their individual rights to freedom, privacy, and protection from the electronic eye of the state, it's the beginning of the end, my friends. Pretty soon, we won't even have to get out of bed. Mother Government will take care of everything for us, and make sure we don't do anything that might get us hurt. Doesn't that sound nice?



    [ 07-11-2001: Message edited by: BucksEng91 ]
    "Let's roll." - Todd Beamer, one of a group of American soldiers who handed the terrorists their first defeat.

    Joe Black

    The opinions expressed are mine and mine alone (but you can borrow them )and may not reflect those of any organization with which I am associated (but then again, they just may not be thinking clearly).

  14. #14
    Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    55

    Default

    I agree with Bucks engine. You know they already put little computer chips in the teeth of children if you want. This is so the coroner can more easily identify them. We put a curfew on ALL teens. Students having to wear uniforms is becoming a big hit. In Texas one legislator even suggested all students would have to serve community service before they could graduate (luckily this did not pass). Graduated drivers licenses for every one under the age of 18. Lets see, tell them when they have to be home, what to wear, work for the community for free, let them drive only at certain hours and in certain places,... Got to love this free country we live in. Lets give up some more of our freedoms in the name of crime prevention!

  15. #15
    Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    51

    Default

    Easy now, we should probably stay on topic. I see that Dalmatian90 has found some actual data to support his opinion what seems to answer truck197's question on increasing safety.

    As for me, if it truly will reduce accidents then that is good. If not, the to the can with it.

    [ 07-11-2001: Message edited by: jizumper-5 ]
    Keep Safe!

  16. #16
    Forum Member
    BucksEng91's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Warminster, PA
    Posts
    576

    Default

    jizumper5 -

    Are you saying I'm off topic? I think I'm dead on, actually.

    Maybe you miss the irony.
    "Let's roll." - Todd Beamer, one of a group of American soldiers who handed the terrorists their first defeat.

    Joe Black

    The opinions expressed are mine and mine alone (but you can borrow them )and may not reflect those of any organization with which I am associated (but then again, they just may not be thinking clearly).

  17. #17
    Senior Member
    Dalmatian90's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Posts
    3,120

    Default

    Problem with your arguements Bucks is most of the examples you cite are passive always-on monitoring -- the camera monitoring the street for drug dealers, or in the employee bathroom.

    Red-Light cameras are an active system triggered when a law is violated.

    Additionally, the red-light cameras and speed-cameras have much less of a civil rights issue than a cop stopping a citizen. The tickets issued by such cameras are issued to the PROPERTY OWNER, who misused or allowed the misuse of his property (the car). The actual driver remains perfectly anonymous.

    I have a *huge* problem with police roadblocks for DUI, etc that stop everyone, interview them, look in their cars for violations (alchol or otherwise). Except for the roadblock, most of these motorists had done nothing to get police attention.

    Yes, give me the automatic cameras, that report it *if* and *only if* an actual violation occurs! Not some subjective police fishing trip!
    IACOJ Canine Officer
    20/50

  18. #18
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    DFW area of Texas
    Posts
    660

    Default

    OK, I thought I'd stay with the safety issue, but...

    truck197

    A new government report shows redlight and photoradar cameras are designed to entrap drivers to get revenue.

    What branch of the government is Freedom.gov?

    It's Dick Armeys personal website which is probably funded by conficasted taxpayer funds.

    So anyway...

    As usual, Bucks sums things up nicely.

    Now let me say first as a non-hard-working American (at least according to the communists, uh, I mean democrats) who has WAY too much money that fortunatley I don't work hard to earn confiscated from them by the federal government, I can see the cost savings and money making benefit of the camera system. Especially if applied as alleged in this case.

    And I wonder, do the taxpayers of this fair city get a tax break because this is saving them so much money?

    Probably not...

    BUT!

    As a freedom loving American citizen, this is a load of crap. Where do we draw the line on big brother watching over our shoulders?

    No handheld cell phones while driving in NY. The NY state rep. that sponsored that BS said it's just the beginning. What's next, no eating, drinking, listening to the radio (especially changing the channel to evil talk radio), no dingbats digging through their purses or pockets to find the cigs and a lighter to smoke in the comfort of their own personal property, no talking to passengers and sure as hell no kids in the car - way too distracting! Just another way for the government to stick their nose in your house.

    Follow these posted arguements that essentially say "if your doing nothing wrong you've got nothing to fear" to their logical conclusion:

    You're a decent and honorable citizen, if you do nothing wrong, then you've got nothing to fear with the government putting a camera in your house do you?

    Heck, were heading towards being a socialist country where private property will be confiscated, outlawed and everything will belong to the state for the good of the people.

    So really the state is just doing it to make sure you're treating their stuff that you bought with due regard for their interests.

    nomad1085

    If you make a habit of running red lights, you deserve to be caught and punished.

    Then catch me and punish me.

    What is the differnece between a marked unit sitting there watching the intersection from a parking lot nearby or a camera on the wire watching for the same thing?

    Yeah! Right On!

    And what's the difference if a mob kills a guy for raping and murdering a little girl or the state executes him? He's still dead.

    ...the usual jerks who make a habit of running the lights know they WILL get caught, they will not do it anymore, therefore, the intersections would be safer.

    Yeah, I don't know anyone that has a string of parking tickets or speeding tickets or failure to stop tickets either. They always stop after getting caught. Don't they?

    Right...

    The usual jerks will not be stopped by this. The usual jerks aren't stopped by anything short of getting themselves killed - suspending their license, confiscating their cars, telling their mommy, throwing them in jail for five to ten doesn't do squat.

    Now, people that complain about a red light camera have one of two problems, or both:

    1. You probably complain about everything else having to do with authority

    2. You are a jerk and like running red lights


    Yeah, if you don't like red light cams, there's no way you can love the freedoms this country was founded on, just no way.

    Dalmatian90

    If you don't have enough time to clear the intersection, don't enter on yellow.
    Then you don't get a ticket.


    Yessir. Texas Transportation Code 544.007. Traffic-Control Signals in General

    (d) An operator of a vehicle facing only a steady red signal shall stop at a clearly marked stop line.

    (e) An operator of a vehicle facing a steady yellow signal is warned by that signal that:

    (1) movement authorized by a green signal is being terminated; or
    (2) a red signal is to be given.


    Running the yellow may be stupid, but it's not illegal.

    Camera catches offenders who speed and run red lights. Does so quite cost effectively.

    And in homes they would catch offenders breaking a multitude of laws, murder, child abuse, getting high and underage drinking, doing so quite effectively.

    Hey, there would probably be a great reduction in all crimes if cameras were installed in the home!

    I also figure it's a lot less intrusive on law-biding folks than DWI roadblocks.

    Which should also be outlawed. Hey, we can just put breathalizers in the cars or police cameras in the parking lot.

    We're way to lenient on traffic violations in this country -- and way to much into believing a driver's license is a right and not a privelege.

    Man, you know it!

    DON DELANCEY

    where do the majority of the stupid "I thought I had enough time" accidents occur. You guessed it, intersections.

    Where else would they occur?

    Does it slow people down? NOT....

    All the things you mentioned do not detere here either.

    Dr. Law

    However, to call the red-light cameras a scam is wrong. It is not a scam.

    If the facts as presented in this case showed they were placed a targeted 'low time yellow' lights, that wouldn't be a scam?

    Cops cannot be everywhere.

    Nope, but they should be where the danger lurks and if that's at an intersection busting red light runners then that's where they need to be.

    I just could not take that whole donut shop with me so I could be everywhere!

    - LOL, I know some that have tried, they have a box of two dozen in the right seat

    Properly set up and maintained, those camera systems work.

    Whether they work or not isn't the issue. The freedom we have to move about is the issue. Ultimately the cameras work to limit or at least monitor those freedoms.

    In three months, they collected enough in tickets to pay for a third officer, his training, and his motor.

    Then do it that way.

    Captain Gonzo

    It looks like truck197 got caught by one of the aforementioned cameras and is looking for a place to vent!

    You're probably right!

    SFD-129-3

    I wish my township used them!!

    Then how about the ones Tampa put in service to scan crowds for wanted people? Do you wish your town had those as well?

    FGFD43

    Do you think that if we start carrying a camera in our engines and squads and take pictures of the idiots that do not yield the right of way to us maybe we can raise some money too?

    I wouldn't use it to make money, but as a public service.

    BucksEng91

    You said a mouthful!

    Dalmation90

    are passive always-on monitoring -- the camera monitoring the street for drug dealers, or in the employee bathroom.

    A cops eyes are always-on monitoring, well they're supposed to be...

    Additionally, the red-light cameras and speed-cameras have much less of a civil rights issue than a cop stopping a citizen. The tickets issued by such cameras are issued to the PROPERTY OWNER, who misused or allowed the misuse of his property (the car).

    So now we don't hold the actual offensder liable? Just the person who unwittingly loaned someone their car?

    The actual driver remains perfectly anonymous.

    You mean the actual offender remains anonymous? The guy that committed the crime is not responsible unless he happens to be the owner of the vehicle?

    Dalmation90, you're a smart guy, I love to read the logic and thought that goes into your posts and I hope someday we can break bread. But are you sure this is what you intended to say?

    Not some subjective police fishing trip!

    Which is exactly what these things are.

    Potential solution and less than a $50,000 camera - a $25,000 car with a dummy in it set up as a deterent.


    "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759.

    [ 07-11-2001: Message edited by: mongofire_99 ]
    It's only my opinion. I do not speak for any group or organization I belong to or associate with or people I know - especially my employer. If you like it, we can share it, you don't have to give me credit. If you don't, we are allowed to disagree too (but be ready to be challenged, you may be on to something I'm not). That's what makes America great!

  19. #19
    Junior Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Ellington, CT
    Posts
    13

    Default

    Additionally, the red-light cameras and speed-cameras have much less of a civil rights issue than a cop stopping a citizen.
    There are constitutional issues with this just as with the DUI roadblocks you mentioned. The original post asked to focus on safey though.

    On safety: You really need to find out how a safety study was done. The more complete ones will monitor a whole neighborhood's traffic patters before and after photo/radar technology was employed.

    One photo radar study found that all the machine did was redistribute the offenders to different streets -- changing the safety on surrounding streets in a downward direction.
    The same study also compared photo-radar and those solar powered radar units that tell you your speed. There was no difference in effectiveness.

  20. #20
    Forum Member
    thefyreman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Md., USA
    Posts
    72

    Default

    If you guys would take the time to check out the link that truck197 posted, you'd see that the scam he's referring to is local municipalities rigging the light to "short yellow" cycle in order to INCREASE the number of cars going through the red light, thus getting more money from more fines! If that's the case, I'd really be upset at the jurisdiction using that method of red-light enforcement. HOWEVER, I try to drive at or within reason of (<5mph over) the posted limit, and I have yet found ANY intersection that has a yellow light that is so short that I had to run the red light! I say, if the intersection isn't rigged to falsely trap people running red lights, let the cameras catch the guilty and make 'em pay.
    - Remember our brothers in FDNY -

  21. #21
    Junior Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    CNY
    Posts
    7

    Default

    For Clarification:
    1. 'Scam' refers to the shortening of the duration of the yellow light, causing more people to run run the red light, get a ticket, and then have to pay. (What some might call a hidden tax on drivers)
    2. As disapointing as it might be, I have never recieved a moving violation, and I only have issues with the abuse or misuse of authority.
    3.To quote
    "They wouldn't run the light if they saw a marked unit sitting there watching. Now there is a camera instead of a marked unit. Whats the difference?"
    The difference is that by the governing law of the land (the Constitution, Amendment VI) I have the right to, among a few other things "...To be confronted with the witnesses against [me];" this is not possible in an automated, assume the defandants guilt type situation.
    4. Back to the original intent of the first post, what you, as public safety officials think. I think that the shortening of yellow lights has probably caused as many accidents as some claim the cameras have prevented. Imagine a good driver, doing everthig right who has to slam on thebrakes to avoid entering an intersection. Now he is rear-ended and all of us get to jump on our trucks and go do what we signed up for.
    5.No one has refuted the point that the overwhelming majority of accidents are caused by drivers, and can not be prevented by an unblinking eye.
    Once again thank you for your opinions and interest,
    Jeff

    [ 07-11-2001: Message edited by: truck197 ]

  22. #22
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    'bedrock' LI, NY
    Posts
    242

    Default

    accidents, and to be bluntly, sh*t happens!

    yes, i did get caught by one of these camera 'regulated' intersections. And the traffic light . . . was 20 feet from one of the sh*tiest pj's in queens, nyc. one of the guys in my company used to be a cab driver, and even told me how when he was in that area, he'd blow through the light because he feared being attacked, and had heard similar stories of being being car jacked or attacked. that of which he spoke of was some 8 - 10 yrs ago. the projects ain't changed one bit, with the exception of the 'people' that live there (less shootings and stabbings).

    when i went through the 'red light' which takes a few different views of the rear of your veh., it has a close up of your plate, and a general shot of the intersection, and also has on the photo, the time the light was red when you went through it (me was about .75 sec.'s - in the rain). had a cop pulled me over, i with about 75% certainty, could have gotten nothing with the exception of a 'stern talkin to'. "Hey officer, it was raining, i didn't want to slam on my brakes, . . . blah blah blah . . ."

    getting back to what was said about 'there being a marked rmp on the street corner, and how that would deter crime / 'bad guys' from miss behaving, what world have you been spending time in, and can you find me a nice house that's for sale?

    people (for the most part) are gonna do what ever the hell they want to do, when ever the hell they want to do it! the only ones that don't, are the people who fear reprocussions for their actions, and subsequently restrain themselves.

    not to bash or bark at anyone here, so some of us never got a moving violation, great, wonderful, good for you. ever been pulled over and talked your way out of getting one? maybe you have a better line of bullsh*t than the rest of us, but it doesn't mean your 'driver ed' material.

    anyway, so i got a red light photo ticket ($50-), atleast I didn't get any points on my license.

  23. #23
    Senior Member
    Dalmatian90's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Posts
    3,120

    Default

    Well Mongo, the laws do vary a bit. Here's Connecticut's:

    14-299
    2) Yellow: Vehicular traffic facing a steady yellow signal is thereby warned that the related green movement is being terminated or that a red indication will be exhibited immediately thereafter, when vehicular traffic shall stop before entering the intersection unless so close to the intersection that a stop cannot be made in safety


    If you can safely stop, you must stop on yellow in CT. The doing it safely though does give considerable discretion to the driver.

    My position on this is picking a very fine hair, and one that does border on my normal views of personal responsibility and civil rights.

    However, the cameras are acting very fairly and consistently in carrying out the first line of justice -- by targeting people whose vehicles have violated a very specific law; and only taking pictures and recording those offenders.

    The fact these cameras are triggered by an illegal event, on a public roadway maintained by the State, presumably by someone who already has received a license to drive from the State, using a vehicle (presumably) registered with the State makes such arguements of privacy extremely weak.

    However, the interaction of the Camera taking the photo indeed preserves the privacy of the CONTENTS of the car -- as opposed to having a police officer stop you and a minimum conduct a search for what's in obvious view.

    Unless someone conducted a string of violations in an area with a plethora of triggered cameras, the data gathered from any location on a single car would be insufficient to draw conclusions what is being done with that vehicle -- other than going through a red light at this moment in time. The privacy of origin and destination is still preserved.

    While the frequency of fines may increase with these cameras, the drivers actually enjoy a greater degree of privacy from having the intimidation of a police officer asking them what there up to, looking in there car, running their driver's license, etc.

    Yes, it does nag me a little that even the identity of the driver remains anonymous, and the owner is responsible. And a reasonable arguement can be made that by allowing your property to be misused, you are at least in part liable for that misuse.

    Matt
    (Somebody pass me the microscope...these hairs are getting awful fine to split )
    IACOJ Canine Officer
    20/50

  24. #24
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Mornington Peninsula.Victoria.Australia
    Posts
    135

    Default

    I agree with Dalmation90. I live in Victoria and we have had these cameras for almost 20 years. I do alot of miles and have never recieved a ticket by camera. Approach each intersection at a safe speed you can stop at. If it turns yellow then stop. Only continue on if it is unsafe to stop. ie You have stuffed up, miscalculated. If everybody stopped at more yellow and red lights fewer emergency vehicles would get cleaned up at these intersections. Technically its the rapid de-exceleration which kills but the slower you go the less damage. Some people do get lots of photos they either need to change teir driving habits or smile alot!
    Disclaimer
    These views are my own and not of either my brigade or any other organisation.

  25. #25
    Senior Member
    Dalmatian90's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Posts
    3,120

    Default

    1. 'Scam' refers to the shortening of the duration of the yellow light, causing more people to run run the red light, get a ticket, and then have to pay. (What some might call a hidden tax on drivers)
    Has the light been made so short that drivers driving at the speed limit have insufficient time to stop before the light goes to red? Then yes, it is a scam.

    If however drivers at the speed limit still have sufficient time to react and stop, then it isn't a scam. If the light cycles are faster, but still allow a vehicle operated by an attentive driver at the legal speed limit or at a speed safe for conditions (i.e. drive slower in rain to allow for longer braking distance), there's nothing wrong with it, especially if the intent is too allow traffic waiting for a green light to wait less time.


    The difference is that by the governing law of the land (the Constitution, Amendment VI) I have the right to, among a few other things "...To be confronted with the witnesses against [me];" this is not possible in an automated, assume the defandants guilt type situation.

    Is this a photo of your vehicle going through a red light?
    "Yes."

    Well, that concludes the confronting the witness part of the trial.

    Doesn't matter whether the Cop is giving you a ticket in person, or by looking at the ticket. Any "confronting the witness" is done in court, not the field.

    4. Back to the original intent of the first post, what you, as public safety officials think. I think that the shortening of yellow lights has probably caused as many accidents as some claim the cameras have prevented. Imagine a good driver, doing everthig right who has to slam on thebrakes to avoid entering an intersection. Now he is rear-ended and all of us get to jump on our trucks and go do what we signed up for.

    Again, if they've shortened it so a driver paying attention and driving at a speed safe for conditions can't stop in time, then there is a lawsuit against the municipality/state waiting to happen.

    If it's just that it's shorter than the driver assumed it would be, well that's not paying attention and you know what happens when you assume.

    5.No one has refuted the point that the overwhelming majority of accidents are caused by drivers, and can not be prevented by an unblinking eye.

    Huh, well then we can all greatly reduce our expenditures on Highway Patrols and turn them into Highway Responders -- going only to events after an accident occurs.

    Absent of law enforcement on the highways, do we believe most people would follow the speed limit, or would they simply go as fast as they personally feel comfortable with?

    It is the possibility of being caught and being fined that keeps people driving at or near the speed limit.

    Drivers are responsible for their actions, however cameras & cops reinforce good behaivor and punish bad behavior.

    Change the behavior of the driver in a positive fashion, and you'll reduce the accidents their involved in.
    IACOJ Canine Officer
    20/50

Closed Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 Last

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register