Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Speed and Red Light Camera Scam

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    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).

    Comment


    • #17
      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

      Comment


      • #18
        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!

        Comment


        • #19
          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.

          Comment


          • #20
            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 -

            Comment


            • #21
              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 ]

              Comment


              • #22
                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.
                May God bless all the people and families who have lost
                their lives on 9-11-01, to those also lost on Flight 587, and to the rescuers who responded to both.

                "I'm not saying it's right, i'm just saying (the way it is)."

                FDNY-EMS - Still New York's Best!

                e-mail always accepted @
                [email protected]

                Comment


                • #23
                  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

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    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.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      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

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Dalmation90 -

                        I like the dog, and I like the number (station 90 is one of our sister stations...and I do mean "sister" )

                        Anyway, your point is well taken about the "passive" nature of the cameras. HOWEVER, any of the scenarios I wrote about could easily be modified to accomodate such a feature - in fact, the one about speed detection on the interstate implicitly HAS this feature. You don't get a nice big ticket unless you do 56 MPH (or more) for a second or two. You think that's constitutional, or appropriate, because of the 'passiveness'? One could argue that the detection feature is certainly not "passive". A camera that randomly takes shots of the intersection would be "passive".

                        I tend to think as Mongo does, that it's one more way to seperate your dollars from your wallet. And Mongo's Franklin quote sums it up nicely. Hey - maybe we don't, as a nation, deserve freedom anymore. We certainly don't get very upset when it's incrementally taken from us. It's just one more sign of what George Carlin has called the "pussification" of America.
                        "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).

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          OK now after reading the executive summary about the 'scam' in question, I think there is a problem if a yellow is shortened to increase people going through red light, the ways the lights were picked, etc. It seems that in the case of the light at N Harbor Dr. and Grape, an adjustment was made and there was a decrease in offenses.

                          I still have no problem with these cameras catching people running reds, even if you get a ticket you can still go to court to refute it. I am not sure what your odds are with that.

                          On the issue of revenue vs. safety, my opinion...(taking the report at face value) bad decision.

                          Bucks,
                          I did find humor in your responses. I was just hoping other would not take this off on a tangent an rune a good topic. I do see you point and accept you opinion.

                          Hey you can't please everyone, right. That is the good thing about living here, everyone has the right to their opinion.
                          Keep Safe!

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Mongo, you have way too much time on your hands. Typical.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              nomad -

                              You have nothing to add to the discussion. Typical.
                              "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).

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                How about this scenario......

                                It's raining. Speed limit is 45mph. You are doing 40, however you have an idiot tailgating you. You have your 6 month old child with you and you can tell the driver behind you has a small child with them. You are approaching the intersection (equipped with a red light camera) and all of a sudden, the light turns yellow. You know that you are close to the intersection, but could probably stop, but the driver behind you will end up rear-ending you, possibly injuring yourself, your child,the child in the car behind you and the driver behind you. What do you do?

                                I know I'd run the light, for SAFETY's sake. But it would **** me off that I got stuck with a ticket because some idiot behind me was in a hurry....
                                The comments made by me are my opinions only. They DO NOT reflect the opinions of my employer(s). If you have an issue with something I may say, take it up with me, either by posting in the forums, emailing me through my profile, or PMing me through my profile.
                                We are all adults so there is no need to act like a child........
                                IACOJ

                                Comment

                                300x600 Ad Unit (In-View)

                                Collapse

                                Upper 300x250

                                Collapse

                                Taboola

                                Collapse

                                Leader

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X