Red Light Camera

[Daddyo Vulcan]

Originally Posted by hbgregg

was gonna start a new thread but there are some interesting links in this one...

even in a time where cities are scrambling for revenue, my town of Huntington Beach did a study and has smartly decided against installing red light cameras. yay! that's one for we the people. hope this starts a trend.

Huntington Beach rejects red-light cameras - Los Angeles Times

The cameras have become controversial in recent years, taking photos of drivers who run red lights, with the proof -- and the ticket -- arriving in the mail. Backers say the cameras improve safety and bring cities needed revenues.

But Ken Small, Surf City's police chief, isn't so sure.

He told the Huntington Beach City Council this week that adding cameras at intersections around the city could increase the number of rear-end accidents. And, he noted, the revenue from the red-light devices would not even be enough to pay for the cameras.

My wife and I were over in Ventura for our 26th anniversary recently. I was in an area new to me where a street merges into Main street and there was a left turn arrow that I didnt see so when the light changed to green I went, well instanly I saw the flash and new I was hosed. Week and a half later I get the envelope from a place in Phoenix with 4 views of me to doing the illegal left turn PLUS they gave me a site to go watch the video if I wanted! Turns out the company from Phoenix installs the cameras for "free" BUT they get a good size piece of the takings, in my case over 400 freakin dollars for a left turn... I think that is just a little exorbitant for an "evil" left turn!!!!!! now due to Caleeeeeefoarnia's lack of money, the LEO's are out in huge force locally at least City and CHP's writing tickets like crazy. Nothing against LEO's at all they are under orders of course. Red light camers just feel so damn "Big Brother"

[ALStensby]

I don't know...I bet you look more closely for those red arrows now. We've spent plenty out of pocket for various cares for Crysti because someone took an "evil" left turn after not seeing a red turn arrow. And it's been a lot more than $400. I also understand that her situation isn't the norm, but neither is people missing or not paying attention to traffic signals, but they both happen.

[Daddyo Vulcan]

Originally Posted by ALStensby

I don't know...I bet you look more closely for those red arrows now. We've spent plenty out of pocket for various cares for Crysti because someone took an "evil" left turn after not seeing a red turn arrow. And it's been a lot more than $400. I also understand that her situation isn't the norm, but neither is people missing or not paying attention to traffic signals, but they both happen.

Oh yes I look and I was looking then, BUT it was the type of intersection that you wouldnt expect and arrow and there was NO traffic as I wont dodge traffic. I think the 400 dollars is WAY too much and it is just California gouging us as they do on everything. I was also in the wrong technically but the intersection was not marked very clearly and I was not familiar with the area at all. My son was recently hit by an illegal alien who fell asleep drunk at the wheel and almost took his and his girlfriends life... they gave him a ticket and let him leave the hospital but I have to pay 400 dollars because I am "legal" and they can trace me... my Son just recieved his settlement but his lower back still hurts... I cannot wait to leave California.

[ALStensby]

Originally Posted by Daddyo Vulcan

Oh yes I look and I was looking then, BUT it was the type of intersection that you wouldnt expect and arrow and there was NO traffic as I wont dodge traffic. I think the 400 dollars is WAY too much and it is just California gouging us as they do on everything. I was also in the wrong technically but the intersection was not marked very clearly and I was not familiar with the area at all. My son was recently hit by an illegal alien who fell asleep drunk at the wheel and almost took his and his girlfriends life... they gave him a ticket and let him leave the hospital but I have to pay 400 dollars because I am "legal" and they can trace me... my Son just recieved his settlement but his lower back still hurts... I cannot wait to leave California.

MN is a nice place, but we have that thing called Winter! It's not as much snow as people think...just COLD!

[Daddyo Vulcan]

Very sorry about your daughter/wife? Crysti... I hope she heals fast and is doing ok. I flew into Minneapolis St.Paul Airport on my way back from Cleveland 3 months ago and while marveling at all the water, I kept wondering what the funny looking stuff was on the North side of each lake was. It was pointed out to me that it was Ice!!! being from Southern California I dont see much Ice unless I go into the High Sierras in Fall or Winter. Not sure I could deal with the cold but maybe. I DO want to Ice Fish so bad you wouldnt believe it, it is on the to do list for sure. We will most likely move to Navada, Arizona or New Mexico or possibly Seattle Washington. I LOVE Ohio and would move to there or Kentucky. My wife has been offered several move packages but I cant leave and keep my time with my company thanks to the UAW(You Are Worthless) Aerospace union and the comapny rules. I cant throw 30 years away so i will hang for a couple more until I retire. California has some pretty places but most of Southern California has gone to the Ghetto, at least places I can afford to live.

[Ruger]

One town near here just renewed their contract on red light cams. They only put in 4 or 5 at the worst intersections. Crashes were reduced by 43% in the first year so they decided to keep them for that reason alone.

[ALStensby]

Originally Posted by Daddyo Vulcan

Very sorry about your daughter/wife? Crysti... I hope she heals fast and is doing ok.

Oh, she's (wife) doing fine now. The only issue is at the time of the accident (about ten years ago, things were fairly minor until a "flair" up last year. It ends up the minor neck issue she had began to degenerate and curve the wrong way. The initial part for treating the pain (and partial immobility) was covered outside of the co-pay but now since it's preventative, it's out of our pocket. If we just it get to the "pain" portion again, it takes her out of commission for a couple weeks. Oh joy!

[VindianaJones]

watching that video that Rich posted and it looks like he actually hit the back of the other car. You can see the white car moving to the side at the rear and something comes off the front of the car going through the intersection. Looks like the offender kept going as well. Very high speed hit and run.

[sxgt]

could it be fake? the womans reaction seems to soon and the brief case is in mid air?

[hbgregg]

Originally Posted by ALStensby

While I'm not necessarily the biggest proponent of this (due to chances of not gettnig the right person, etc), I don't have that much of an issue with it.

the subject must be clearly identifiable in the image or video provided by the enforcement agency.

Originally Posted by ALStensby

Why? I'm not interested in breaking the law, particuarly ones that put people in direct danger. As such, I fail to see how it's "one for the people" versus just one for law breakers who don't wish to suffer the consequences of their poor decisions.

this is one for WE the people because red light cameras put people in danger by increasing accidents. ever ride or drive daily in an area enforced robotically? i do everyday and have for the last 5 years and know this first hand. at camera monitored intersections, a yellow light causes panic and many drivers hit their brakes instead of rolling through the yellow. you don't have to take my word, though.

if you read the article, you would have noted that Ken Small, our chief of police, sited this as one of his reasons for not recommending said systems in this city. aside from that, there are numerous studies that prove his point. you don't have to take his word, either. you can google or bing it.

Red-Light Cameras Increase Accidents: 5 Studies That Prove It

Red-Light Cameras Increase Accidents, USF Study Says

[ALStensby]

First off...when did this Bing site start? I just started noticing it this week!

Thanks for the links. As I'd alluded to earlier, I'm not 100% sure on this subject as there have been studies done that show them as reducing it...and just as many showing it increases it. They're not very common here so it's something that I'm still wading through the stats on. The few we've had have decreased accidents (sometimes drastically), but that could have many factors that lead in to it.

The most telling fact that I've seen is there is a severe decrease in accidents resulting from someone running a red light (duh), which has a higher probability of resulting in injuries to the occupants as well as passers by.

However, the overall increase (again, from what I've looked in to so far), has come from rear-end collisions due to what you mentioned...people panicking. While this wouldn't happen if people actually knew how to and DID follow at a safe distance, an accident is still an accident. And, afterall, that's what they claim to stop.

[hbgregg]

bing, microsoft's search engine, went "live" a few days ago. google is an ad agency and having a solid competitor is welcomed. we'll see if it sticks, though.

unfortunately, a redlight camera is not going to stop the clueless driver from running a red and causing an accident. it merely tickets the clueless. this area is so congested that cameras do indeed cause more rear-enders. i'm sure in less congested areas it may deter red-runners, but that's is still debatable.

i even googled (not a full-fledged binger, yet) red light cameras prevent accidents and red light cameras stop accidents and found the results to be the same as my earlier post.

i'm very glad we do not have the speed cameras our brothers and sisters have in Great Britain and other parts of the world.

be safe and hang loose!

[riverbound51]

That Huntington Beach police chief is pretty ill informed. I am suprised he is still the chief.

[Daddyo Vulcan]

I have read many times that Red Light Cameras increase rear end type accidents. One day soon there will be a landmark lawsuit on this and they may hopefully go away. I notice Arizona has mobile camera speed traps but at least they are kind enough to warn you with a sign. The Huntinton Beach Police Chief should run for Governor, he "gets it".

[hbgregg]

Originally Posted by riverbound51

That Huntington Beach police chief is pretty ill informed. I am suprised he is still the chief.

what are your credentials to making such a judgment?

[Hot Cruiser]

Odd - license (number) plate shapes look like it happened in Europe - Germany? If so, good-bye to her driver's license! And is that a cigarette in her right hand?

[CTRider]

Originally Posted by ALStensby

However, the overall increase (again, from what I've looked in to so far), has come from rear-end collisions due to what you mentioned...people panicking. While this wouldn't happen if people actually knew how to and DID follow at a safe distance, an accident is still an accident. And, afterall, that's what they claim to stop.

That's actually the reason why several areas that tested them removed them. Plus, ins some areas, red light cameras violations have been considered "non-moving violations", which means you can't fight it in court. That takes away due process.

Then there's this:

Originally Posted by 07Ninja250

The trick there's doing in Plano is after they install the cameras, they simultaneously shorten the amount of time the yellow light stays yellow.

I think one of the news magazines did an investigation and found in some areas that use the cameras, the yellow lights on the camera-equipped lights were up to 2.5 seconds shorter than surrounding lights. That means, you could go through one intersection and have plenty of time to clear it, then get snagged just down the street when it's unexpectedly shorter.

The worst part is, those companies that run them usually focus only on "increased revenue" when selling the system and completely gloss over safety as a reason to use them. Sorry, but good enforcement should actually decrease revenue coming in by preventing violations from happening in the first place. If the camera doesn't do that, then they may as well use the revenue to pay officers and increase the fines than use a system that offers no community presence that can potentially prevent other crimes. Visible police cars in the field make people slow down, drive less aggressively and someone's less likely to mug, rob or shoot someone when they're around.

I should point out that I have nothing against having cameras monitoring traffic to see where the problem areas are and where to put in an additional police presence, but I really am against the automated systems, especially with the potential for fraud by having them controlled by a company that is in business to make money.

[CTRider]

Originally Posted by Hot Cruiser

Odd - license (number) plate shapes look like it happened in Europe - Germany? If so, good-bye to her driver's license! And is that a cigarette in her right hand?

It would have to be Europe. Look at the caption where it says "Foto". That indicates Germany.

As far as the rest, no that's not a cigarette - that's her thumb. She's using a perfect 10 and 2 position, but her mind is resting somewhere in between: at lunch.

[RichLockyer]

Originally Posted by CTRider

I think one of the news magazines did an investigation and found in some areas that use the cameras, the yellow lights on the camera-equipped lights were up to 2.5 seconds shorter than surrounding lights. That means, you could go through one intersection and have plenty of time to clear it, then get snagged just down the street when it's unexpectedly shorter.

More than likely inaccurate information (as to be expected from a news organization). Modern traffic signal controllers can not be set to yellow times shorter than either 3 or 3.5 seconds (depending on the software).
That would mean that the yellow time for an adjacent intersection would be at least 5.5 and possibly 6 seconds... that is VERY rarely done. Normally, any yellow time longer than 4.5 seconds is outside of MUTCD guidelines.... unless you're talking an intersection that is 250feet across with a speed limit of 60mph.
A typical intersection has a yellow time of 3.5 to 4 seconds. I occasionally see 4.5, but not often at all.

BTW: Locally, photo-enforcement systems typically result in only about 20% citable "violations". The remaining 80% were legal right turns, legal (but late) stops (more on that later), or the driver could not be identified as the registered owner of the vehicle.

Late stops? The system uses video or inductive loop sensors about 6-12ft AHEAD of the crosswalk... there are no sensors past the crosswalk.
If you are moving 15mph or faster when you approach the crosswalk, the system makes the assumption that you aren't going to (be able to) stop before entering the intersection.
A human reviews EVERY violation and makes the call on whether to issue a ticket or not. If you stop late, you've stopped but the system still recorded you.

Identify the registered owner? The photo taken by the system runs a comparison through the DMV database. They pull up the image of the registered owner from the driver's license database, then they compare it to the captured image. If it is not a match, no citation is issued because they are unable to identify the driver.
Used to be, even sunglasses would get you out of a ticket because if they couldn't see your eyes they wouldn't even try to match it.
Now, they'll go ahead and issue the cite if the gender of the driver matches that of the registered owner, but if in fact someone else was driving your car and you take it to court, it'll be thrown out.

[CTRider]

Originally Posted by RichLockyer

More than likely inaccurate information (as to be expected from a news organization). Modern traffic signal controllers can not be set to yellow times shorter than either 3 or 3.5 seconds (depending on the software).
That would mean that the yellow time for an adjacent intersection would be at least 5.5 and possibly 6 seconds... that is VERY rarely done. Normally, any yellow time longer than 4.5 seconds is outside of MUTCD guidelines.... unless you're talking an intersection that is 250feet across with a speed limit of 60mph.
A typical intersection had a yellow time of 3.5 to 4 seconds. I occasionally see 4.5, but not often at all.

They actually showed the light change on camera in real time. It was one of those 4 lane roads flanked by shopping centers with left and right turn lanes each direction (so 8 lanes total at the intersections). The rated speed was 55. The intersection in question had a 2 second yellow while the rest of the lights down the line had 5 sconds. The left turn arrow had a 1.5 yellow and only a 7 second green.

I seem to think it was 20/20 on ABC, so you can't blame NBC's Dateline for fudging things.

If that's not possible, then I'm not sure how they did it, but they showed it work and the footage was definitely not sped up or edited to remove time.

Of course, it wouldn't be the first time things were shortened at the expense of the "violator".

A girl scout whose mother got a parking ticket and was certain time hadn't really run out decided to time all the meters in town. She enlisted her fellow troop members to time them on video using stop watches. All of them were shorting people on time - some as much as 3 minutes.