Author Topic: Red Light Camera -- good idea? (Read 874 times)

LePaul · « **Reply #45 on:** October 28, 2002, 02:36:48 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Eagler

more power to them

rather a speeder pay for road improvements than everyone who pays taxes

Speeders should be HAPPY to pay it and see it go to improvements. I've never seen any auto racer unhappy about a smoother track

Ripsnort · « **Reply #46 on:** October 28, 2002, 02:51:42 PM »

Some red light camera studies: Apparently, elongating the "yellow" light has a good effect..

http://www.motorists.org/issues/enforce/studies.html

mrfish · « **Reply #47 on:** October 28, 2002, 03:23:59 PM »

san franciscans are chronic red light runners - they did the cameras here and a big propaganda campaign in 800 languages and it hasn't helped at all not even a little.

people have this weird philosophy here: if the car ahead of you is just barely making it as the yellow turns then it is ok for you to go too as long as you are 3 feet from their bumper - you get these huge trains of people pretending to be one car up to 5 seconds after the light turns.

also it is ok to run the light if you are special, better, richer or different than everyone else, and of course, if you are late.

i'm all for cameras and mandatory 30 day license suspensions for the first offense and jail time for every offense thereafter. i live on lombard street and almost get run over every day because of some love muffin - it's really no laughing matter.

loser · « **Reply #48 on:** October 28, 2002, 03:35:05 PM »

I dont get it. I have seen a few good points to support red light cameras, but no decent points against. (having to pay a fine because you broke the law isnt a good point.)

Fine, maybe these things screw up from time to time, but in my experience, i have never gotten a traffic ticket i didn't deserve.

The only valid point against is that these systems are expensive as all hell.

Big brother watching, nope..if it saves lives and reduces accident insurance claims we are all ahead.

If getting a ticket makes some tard think twice about killing Eagler, we are all ahead again.

Btw what Ripsnort said, my Dad is a driver examiner and taught me how to drive........95% of all accidents are avoidable.

capt. apathy · « **Reply #49 on:** October 28, 2002, 03:39:03 PM »

eagler____________________
ya, that happens daily ..............

excuses, excuses ...
________________________

as I've said in a previous post. I have personally seen these things go off(you can see the flash) when people go through on green. probably about 1 in every 15 times I'm at the intersection where they are. and when they screw up it usually hits every car going through on green. you can sit there at your red light and watch the flash hit a whole string of cars as they go through their green).

the point is that there is no way to prove you didn't go through on red. the pic is of your car and the machine 'thinks' your light is red. you're screwed.

how would we know how often this happens. anytime it happens to someone, people just say he's lying to get out of the ticket.

it's very simular to the drug test, false positive issue. everybody blames the person who gets the false positive (or the bogus ticket) and says he's a liar. until it happens to them of course.

the problem is you have a system that can error and then an inocent person is punished for something he didn't do. a redlight ticket may be nothing to you but there are alot of people who it could bankrupt.

ther is no way you can prove your are inocent of most things. thats why our legal system puts the burden on the prosecution.

if these things have ever malfunctioned before. (and I've seen them do it) then they're not proof positive of a violation. 1 malfunction, ever, gives reasonable doubt to every other violation these things kick out.

let me ask you this. hypothetical-

you are working poor guy. 1 paycheck from being out on the streets. but you get up every day and do your portion. you pay your bills you obey the law.

then one day you get a letter with a ticket for $277 bucks saying you ran a red light 3 weeks ago.(that was the bail on the ticket I got 2 years ago when they said I ran a stop sign, so the price should be about the same/ thats about 2 weeks take home pay for a minimum wage worker 40 hrs a week.)

you know you didn't run the light. you are very careful, you always obey the law.

now what do you do.

Mickey1992 · « **Reply #50 on:** October 28, 2002, 03:58:13 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by capt. apathy
the point is that there is no way to prove you didn't go through on red. the pic is of your car and the machine 'thinks' your light is red. you're screwed.

Every pic from a red light camera that I have seen shows the offender's car, and the traffic light. If you went through a green light, it would show up on the pic. The new systems that I have seem actually capture video of the offense, which would be even better.

capt. apathy · « **Reply #51 on:** October 28, 2002, 04:07:38 PM »

the pics I've seen (the one they showed on the news) show the view from the front of the car. showing the driver. I've seen no light in the pic. how do they show a pic of a light that is facing the same way the camera is. I've seen no mirrors set up at these intersections.

I'm trying to picure a camera angle that would get the light, tag #, and drivers face. no luck

Vulcan · « **Reply #52 on:** October 28, 2002, 05:46:09 PM »

Well, you guys are about 10 years behind us Kiwis.

It started off like this. Safety improvements. Then the revenue gathering started. Then justification for using the money to improve safety on the roads.

Except someone figured out all traffic infringement fines go into the 'national pool' of funds. IE, money spent on roads etc does not qual money gathered from this stuff.

How does the US divie up its $$$$. Does every dollar earned from speeders go back into road improvements? I think you'll find it disappears into a big tax pool.

Quote

Originally posted by Eagler

more power to them

rather a speeder pay for road improvements than everyone who pays taxes

Sandman · « **Reply #53 on:** October 28, 2002, 05:56:11 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ripsnort
Some red light camera studies: Apparently, elongating the "yellow" light has a good effect..

http://www.motorists.org/issues/enforce/studies.html

Makes sense. The lights here in town are way too fast, IMHO.

Ever see a yellow light and then have the feeling that you're going too fast to stop without applying a lot of pressure and at the same time, you're going too slow to get through the interesection before it changes?

Happens all the time here. I wouldn't mind a longer light.

funkedup · « **Reply #54 on:** October 28, 2002, 05:56:30 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Vulcan
Well, you guys are about 10 years behind us Kiwis.

It started off like this. Safety improvements. Then the revenue gathering started. Then justification for using the money to improve safety on the roads.

Except someone figured out all traffic infringement fines go into the 'national pool' of funds. IE, money spent on roads etc does not qual money gathered from this stuff.

How does the US divie up its $$$$. Does every dollar earned from speeders go back into road improvements? I think you'll find it disappears into a big tax pool.

Yep it goes to pay salaries for more revenue collectors. This is how big government works, and is why we keep paying more and more for less and less from an increasingly bloated government. Amazing that so-called "conservatives" can't see it.

john9001 · « **Reply #55 on:** October 28, 2002, 06:29:16 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by capt. apathy

you know you didn't run the light. you are very careful, you always obey the law.

now what do you do.

why, you hire a lawyer at $200 per hour , of course

Vulcan · « **Reply #56 on:** October 28, 2002, 10:34:41 PM »

The convervatives here have finally started bleating with the 3 ticket quote and the mandatory ticket talk within 5km/h.

All of a sudden this crowd has turned 180 now that everything is being so harshly enforced.

Quote

Originally posted by funkedup

Yep it goes to pay salaries for more revenue collectors. This is how big government works, and is why we keep paying more and more for less and less from an increasingly bloated government. Amazing that so-called "conservatives" can't see it.

beet1e · « **Reply #57 on:** October 29, 2002, 02:33:17 AM »

We have these red light cameras in England, and I'm all for them. Driving around the London area, I would see people running red lights every day where no camera exists.

I don't know how the red light cameras work, but I have seen them work, and two pictures are taken at the moment the light turns red. For speed cameras, two pictures are taken at a predetermined interval (half a second), and the distance the car has travelled in that time is used to determine its speed. That's why there are markings on the road in front of the camera at one yard intervals.

It's much easier to run a red light in England than in America. When the light changes from green, we get a much shorter yellow light before we get the red. Also, the light does not change from red directly to green as in the US. We have a three second phase of red and yellow before the green. Trouble is, many people pull away the moment the first photon of yellow light meets their nearest retina.

bloodstain · « **Reply #58 on:** October 29, 2002, 02:54:51 AM »

You are all missing the one key element in these red light cameras. The one big draw back to them is that the companys that produce the cameras are making almost all of the revenue from them. The State barely breaks even on the installation of these spendy units. So in a way its like someone like Bill Gates charging you money if you go through a red light.

I know the supposed intent of these cameras are for public safety, but lets face it government relies on our money. So for them to spend tax money on these cameras and not renew their expense is basically wasting our hard earned tax dollars!

I frankly think government is starting to get to powerful and yes intrusive into the publics lives. Its almost as ridiculos as getting a #@*#@*@ seatbelt ticket! Do you think that they care about your safety when they write you these ticket......Hell NO! They are just making a way to increase revenue. IMO if a person of legal age can vote, drink, and smoke cigarettes, Why cant he or she decide if they strap on a seatbelt or not? If they dont and get in an accident the only person hurt is themselves, so I say Government needs to stay out of some things.

If they want to make traffic lights safer then instead of wasting money on new technology, try lengthening the cycles between yellow to red and from one directions' red to the others green!

Whew I feel better now feel free to continue........

Vulcan · « **Reply #59 on:** October 29, 2002, 04:12:41 PM »

I thought it was to cover costs for when they scrape your brains off the road from not wearing a seatbelt?

Quote

Originally posted by bloodstain
I frankly think government is starting to get to powerful and yes intrusive into the publics lives. Its almost as ridiculos as getting a #@*#@*@ seatbelt ticket! Do you think that they care about your safety when they write you these ticket......Hell NO! They are just making a way to increase revenue. IMO if a person of legal age can vote, drink, and smoke cigarettes, Why cant he or she decide if they strap on a seatbelt or not? If they dont and get in an accident the only person hurt is themselves, so I say Government needs to stay out of some things.