RSS FeedsDiscuss
Do you think red light cameras should be used to address major traffic concerns or catch every violation?
1.
Study after study has shown the best way to increase safety is to increase the time of the yellows. Yet many studies have shown whenever a municipality installs these cameras, they cannot resist the temptation to actually shorten the yellows. Because they are so focused on revenue, they even actively take steps to increase danger.
In Chicago where I live, the lights with cameras are the shortest of all. It's just insane.
2. Red light cameras are only for revenue generation! How can anyone buy into the public safety argument? The technology uses "after the fact" to penalize an alleged violation. It does nothing to prevent the violation. Prevention is the key! Wake up people, this is just another way the cities can get there hands into your pocket. People do make mistakes (so does technology)If public safety was the main concern and not revenue generation, most moving violations would come with a recorded warning then proceed with a fine on a repeat offense of that violation. This isn't about public safety, it's about money...nothing more!
3. Today, I was cited for "running a red light" (which I did not) in downtown L.A. and the cop took 40 minutes to write the ticket - and all this while there are two armed guys on the loose in Downtown L.A. who had just robbed a market and seriously injured the manager, and the police were looking for them (according to an LA Times article). I certainly think there is a better application of my taxes than for two cops to spend 40 minutes struggling to fill out the citation form and telling me that they will take me to jail if I don't sign it. Certainly more fun for them than looking for some armed robbers!
4. The intersection of Harbor Blvd & Chapman Avenue in downtown Fullerton is one of the more frightening intersections. On almost a daily basis I see drivers blatenly run red lights to turn in front of oncoming traffic. I had hoped our safety would improve with the installation of cameras, but it does not seem to have made a difference. A pity these cameras only give the illusion of identifiying DANGEROUS drivers. Rather than filing suit, I would hope authorites would take note of the comments listed here and do what we all thought was the intent; identify and fine DANGEROUS drivers.
5. Oh, BTW Hiram, I checked the properties/statistics on my violation video, during playback, and it is indicating 29+ frames per second. Unlike you, I accepted responsibility for my actions, paid the fine and took traffic school.
6. Hiram- The fact of the matter is; you didn't stop and you know it. Don't try to B.S everybody into thinking you really stopped, but for less FPS the video wasn't conclusive or reliable. Fact is, you got away with it that time.
7. just stop at red lights. ANY moron can do that. Case closed.
8. Do you notice the yellow light is shorter for camera equiped untersections than for non-camera intersections? They are starting the same program in Orlando Florida and any intersection with a camera has shorter amber light times causing more instances of "running red lights" to prove these are neccessary operation by an outside firm. They need to lengthen the amber light time for these intersections to give drivers proper time to respond. The short amber light times is a case of entrapment.
9. The age old question wether cameras, irrespective of wether they are red light cameras oir speed cameras is if they are intended as a road safety measure or revenue maker. Well the answer to the question unfortunately is that the do both which is why our governments love them so much. The only ones who get caught out are the ones who allow their driving weaknesses to be exploited by them. Avoiding punishment from them is really not that hard. The sooner we recognise this and adapt our driving ability to them, the sooner they will become redundant and the more death and injury will be avoided.
10. As earlier stated, Redflex cameras only take 5 frames/sec, & do not show true video (30FPS) & may not show actual right turn stops. My explanation was rejected in court. After I appealed & after the Times article, I received notice the judge reconsidered & dismissed the case. An attorney wanted to use my case to challenge right turn camera citations. Perhaps the court determined my appeal too dangerous. But if this is not a passing fad & people are mad & serious enough, we could still run a class action civil lawsuit against Redflex & affected cities to outlaw camera evidence on red light right turn citations.
Submitted by: chrisb
2. Red light cameras are only for revenue generation! How can anyone buy into the public safety argument? The technology uses "after the fact" to penalize an alleged violation. It does nothing to prevent the violation. Prevention is the key! Wake up people, this is just another way the cities can get there hands into your pocket. People do make mistakes (so does technology)If public safety was the main concern and not revenue generation, most moving violations would come with a recorded warning then proceed with a fine on a repeat offense of that violation. This isn't about public safety, it's about money...nothing more!
Submitted by: TC
3. Today, I was cited for "running a red light" (which I did not) in downtown L.A. and the cop took 40 minutes to write the ticket - and all this while there are two armed guys on the loose in Downtown L.A. who had just robbed a market and seriously injured the manager, and the police were looking for them (according to an LA Times article). I certainly think there is a better application of my taxes than for two cops to spend 40 minutes struggling to fill out the citation form and telling me that they will take me to jail if I don't sign it. Certainly more fun for them than looking for some armed robbers!
Submitted by: MS
4. The intersection of Harbor Blvd & Chapman Avenue in downtown Fullerton is one of the more frightening intersections. On almost a daily basis I see drivers blatenly run red lights to turn in front of oncoming traffic. I had hoped our safety would improve with the installation of cameras, but it does not seem to have made a difference. A pity these cameras only give the illusion of identifiying DANGEROUS drivers. Rather than filing suit, I would hope authorites would take note of the comments listed here and do what we all thought was the intent; identify and fine DANGEROUS drivers.
Submitted by: Kristin - North Orange County
5. Oh, BTW Hiram, I checked the properties/statistics on my violation video, during playback, and it is indicating 29+ frames per second. Unlike you, I accepted responsibility for my actions, paid the fine and took traffic school.
Submitted by: Le
6. Hiram- The fact of the matter is; you didn't stop and you know it. Don't try to B.S everybody into thinking you really stopped, but for less FPS the video wasn't conclusive or reliable. Fact is, you got away with it that time.
Submitted by: Le
7. just stop at red lights. ANY moron can do that. Case closed.
Submitted by: solution
8. Do you notice the yellow light is shorter for camera equiped untersections than for non-camera intersections? They are starting the same program in Orlando Florida and any intersection with a camera has shorter amber light times causing more instances of "running red lights" to prove these are neccessary operation by an outside firm. They need to lengthen the amber light time for these intersections to give drivers proper time to respond. The short amber light times is a case of entrapment.
Submitted by: jerrystroud
9. The age old question wether cameras, irrespective of wether they are red light cameras oir speed cameras is if they are intended as a road safety measure or revenue maker. Well the answer to the question unfortunately is that the do both which is why our governments love them so much. The only ones who get caught out are the ones who allow their driving weaknesses to be exploited by them. Avoiding punishment from them is really not that hard. The sooner we recognise this and adapt our driving ability to them, the sooner they will become redundant and the more death and injury will be avoided.
Submitted by: Tom Heavey - Stoke on Trent - UK
10. As earlier stated, Redflex cameras only take 5 frames/sec, & do not show true video (30FPS) & may not show actual right turn stops. My explanation was rejected in court. After I appealed & after the Times article, I received notice the judge reconsidered & dismissed the case. An attorney wanted to use my case to challenge right turn camera citations. Perhaps the court determined my appeal too dangerous. But if this is not a passing fad & people are mad & serious enough, we could still run a class action civil lawsuit against Redflex & affected cities to outlaw camera evidence on red light right turn citations.
Submitted by: Hiram