Red Light Cameras.

[Ed B]

$70, that's a steal. It was $100 here and that was 5 years ago. It's gotta be more now.

I got one in the mail when it was relatively new in the area. It was a day my father borrowed my car! The pics were crystal clear. He totally ran the red light. After this he was super cautious and not just at those certain intersections. For that reason I don't mind them at all. ANYTHING that makes someone a better, more cautious driver is a good thing in my book. Many things are taken for granted in life. I think driving and the false sense of security on the road is at the top of the list.

Recently more have been added. I have to say I approach the intersection passively. I can't see that as being a bad thing. Being hasty at this particular intersection is a bad move. Too much going on.

 

[Fred61]

My friend got one. He got stuck in the middle of an intersection, two other cars ran a red light and kept him there. He got a hundred dollar ticket. Would have cost him more to go to court and dispute it.

That's how they get ya

I don't have a problem with them telling people not to run red lights or whatever, but in my area, they have started to remove them because the police are finding that there are more accidents. Why you may ask? Well jackasses who don't know how to drive flip shit and as soon as a light turns yellow, they slam on the breaks even if they are in the intersection. Any time the camera flashes, they slam on their breaks. I have seen too many accidents from them to say that it is even a borderline good idea

 

[LarsK]

..
We need a $500 ticket like we need a hole in the head. We start making payments on it next month (with another $30 tacked on cuz we're broke and can't pay $500 all at once).

Money grabbing bitches...

That's a little bit too high. Fight it.

 

[Greg's Guitars]

I was following several semi trucks near a busy intersection once, not on their arses but they were tall enough and the road was such that the signal light at an upcoming intersection was not viewable, they went right on through never even tapping their brake lights to give me reason that the light may have been changing , as I entered the intersection the light was changing from yellow to red, to late to stop, instant ticket........I probably could have taken a bunch of pictures and fought it in court but it was not that expensive and no points were assessed against my license so I just paid the ticket and remember to never take that road again...

 

[cybermgk]

These are all about increased revenues. Any other explaination is PR justification milarky. Its EXACTLY the sales pitch the companies selling the systems make to the municipalities. They show them exactly what their increased revenues will be.

If these systems only penalized those that actually broke an ordinance, that would be one thing. That MIGHT almost be acceptable.

Unfortunately, thats just not the case. There was an expose on a news station a couple of months back. There are numerous cases of people coming to a complete stop even a scant inch or two to far (literally) being issued a ticket.

Another, was for an intersection that was nabbing person after person for illegally turning right at a red. Many of these came to a complete stop, everything by the book, but still a ticket. The problem is, there is a no turn on red sign posted. However, said sign was completely not viewable for 100 feet, up to the stop. Only after one started the turn, thus getting photographed, was the sign viewable.

When both the missed by inches, and the right turn violations were fought in court, the answer was they could not. When attempted to be fought with "I have the right to face my accuser", they were told they could not.

Thats the problem with these, the misuse of them. Its greed by the muninciplaities. Instead of actually having a means to dismiss improper flaggings by thse cameras, and coming closer to only punishing true violators, they take this greedy, all approach. IF they took the afore-mentioned, their revnenues would not be as much, but they also wouldn't have as much public dischord. Its short sided. I also think some of these public officials might be seeing a lil somin somin under the table.

Of course, push for referendums to remove them. Failing that, use your other weapon and vote everyone involved with their installation, or keeping them in place, out of office (including the judges).

 

[spitfire]

We have them where I live and, as I understand it, studies have shown a small increase in rear-enders, but a significant decrease in T-bones and fatal accidents.

As far as I’m concerned, if you break the law, I don’t give sh@t how you are caught. I’m all for these. A LOT of people in my city run red lights and people get killed every so often as a result. I’m not sure what the fines are here, but $500 sounds like a good starting point to me.

And I have no problem if this generates significant revenue for the city. This means a lot of bad drivers are running a lot of red lights.

If you don’t want the fine, don’t run the red light.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

That's a little bit too high. Fight it.

Those fines have already been fought and upheld here in California. As far as fighting the particular circumstances of his ticket, I suppose he could, but the court looking at a photo of his car in an intersection is not likely to reverse.

We have them where I live and, as I understand it, studies have shown a small increase in rear-enders, but a significant decrease in T-bones and fatal accidents.

As far as I’m concerned, if you break the law, I don’t give sh@t how you are caught. I’m all for these. A LOT of people in my city run red lights and people get killed every so often as a result. I’m not sure what the fines are here, but $500 sounds like a good starting point to me.

And I have no problem if this generates significant revenue for the city. This means a lot of bad drivers are running a lot of red lights.

If you don’t want the fine, don’t run the red light.

The right to confront one's accuser in court is a precious one here in America. I seem to recall reading about us picking a bone with you guys over it; of course you're going approve of this modern iteration of a colonial policy.

 

[colchar]

So here in Houston there's been a recent series of controversial events concerning Red light cameras.

A couple of years ago, the Houston City Council voted to have red-light cameras installed in about 70 intersections. This was not put to a public vote, the council and our then mayor, a dope named Bill White ceaselessly espoused the "advantages" of the cameras... All of which was supposed to be about increasing safety on our roads.

Since when do politicians have to put things to a public vote? Once they are elected they get to make decisions without subjecting each of those decisions to a public vote.

As for the cameras themselves - we have them in various spots around here and, while they are a bit of a cash grab, I haven't seen or heard anything to indicate that they have increased accidents. Maybe people there just need to adjust their driving habits and understand that red light cameras are for red lights, not amber ones?

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Since when do politicians have to put things to a public vote? Once they are elected they get to make decisions without subjecting each of those decisions to a public vote.

You're right, but the problem comes when they enact crap they made no mention of in the campaign. At that point, it begins to look like a bait-and-switch, and no one likes learning that they've been played for fools.

Also, if they take decisions without considering public opinion at the time of the decision, they aren't avoiding putting them to a public vote. What they are doing is taking action, and then submitting those decisions to public vote ... when they run for office again. This is why "lame-duck" politicians are viewed with some suspicions here in America.

 

[colchar]

I learned long ago not to argue with a fool. So I concede from this conversation. But I leave with these parting words:


You are a fine example of what the brainwashing and psychological operations, that have been pushed upon you, create. A person who has no understanding of and can not fathom what liberty is, nor the sacrifices so many of us and our forefathers have made for it. Mindless puppies created and controlled by the spawn of the oligarchy that has been pushing to usurp the liberty that our founders shed their blood for.


Welcome to socialism.

 

[colchar]

Thing's are VERY different here. Say you're caught doing 96 on a 70 limit... you get an instant court order and 6 points... an instant ban if you're within the first 2 years of getting your license. If you speed carelessly and put other people at risk, you can be jailed, plus a £1000 minimum fine. Here, it's the law you're breaking. (Info here)

As for red light camera's, there's a lot of them nearer our city center, and they will be soon converting those to catch speeders too. I'm all for red light cameras, but i'm NOT for speed camera's. I feel it's a fact that they cause more accidents, and it's been proven that many places in the UK have actually had an increase in crashes because of them, mostly by drivers who weren't speeding in the first place and simply panicked.

Yes a car is your responsibility if you own it, but the person driving the car is responsible for THEIR actions. And to say it's the 'law' to make your car hard to steal? I've never heard of something so stupid! If that was the case, there'd be no shopkeepers... they'd all be in jail from people stealing their stuff!

PS. To put it simply...

Mildly Speeding: 3 points + £60 fine ($110 approx.)
Severely Speeding (14% over limit): 6+ points + £1000 fine ($1800 approx.)
Running Red Light: 3 points + £60 fine ($110 approx.)

Amount of points before you're disqualified and must take an extended re-test: 6 (if had license two years or less), or else 12.

We used to have speed cams (photo radar) here but they were gotten rid of. We still have red light cameras in some spots though.

We also have a law enacted a couple of years ago that deals with racing/stunt driving/excessive speed. You don't actually have to be racing, just speeding excessively. If you are caught doing 50kmh over the limit your license is immediately suspended, the car is impounded for a week regardless of who owns it (a fire chief got caught using a fire department vehicle on personal time and even that was impounded), and you face possible jail time as well as a $10,000 fine.

 

[SteveGangi]

This is one of the most ignorant statements I have ever heard. If someone else breaks the law, blame the innocent guy. Don't worry he can square it up later.



Hey I think that black guy raped that girl.
who?
that one.
are you sure?
no, but he's black. He can always square it up later.
Guess ur right. no biggie.

Judging from MANY of his other posts, he seems to have a real love affair with the idea of a police state.

 

[colchar]

These are all about increased revenues. Any other explaination is PR justification milarky.

Not entirely true. They were started here after some pedestrians were hit by people not stopping. I cannot remember any discussion of them before those incidents.

 

[colchar]

You're right, but the problem comes when they enact crap they made no mention of in the campaign. At that point, it begins to look like a bait-and-switch, and no one likes learning that they've been played for fools.

But politicians have to make decisions on things that were not discussed during the campaign all the time as situations arise and circumstances dictate so I don't see them doing that as a problem especially when, as you mentioned in the second half of your post, those decisions are put to a public vote at the next election.

 

[Lungo]

They should leave those cameras up and activated to honor the contract but turn them over to the Texas DOT. Use them for data collection and leave enforcement to living breathing officers like it should be.

 

[Phoenix59]

I can't believe you guys get a $400 to $500 fine. Fook me. How much for jaywalking?

 

[b-squared]

Pillow party at Bertzie's tonight.

I think you mean 'blanket party':

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCNqKrX1sx8]‪Full Metal Jacket (1987) - The Blanket Party (It's just a bad dream fatboy) (2 Min 8 Sec)‬‏ - YouTube[/ame]

These DO happen, btw...

BB

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

But politicians have to make decisions on things that were not discussed during the campaign all the time as situations arise and circumstances dictate so I don't see them doing that as a problem especially when, as you mentioned in the second half of your post, those decisions are put to a public vote at the next election.

Indeed. The point being that they are answerable, but the answer isn't meted out when shit like this isn't discussed. A voting base, like any other movement, must be stoked. And while politicians must always deal with unforeseen circumstances, I think the voters have a right to expect their decisions to comport with their campaign rhetoric, even in novel circumstances. Being a Texan, I'd be willing to bet that a goodly proportion of the politicians Skinny (and others) are pissed at campaigned on smaller government. This seems to be an abnegation of that philosophy.

I think you mean 'blanket party':

‪Full Metal Jacket (1987) - The Blanket Party (It's just a bad dream fatboy) (2 Min 8 Sec)‬‏ - YouTube

These DO happen, btw...

BB

We called 'em "pillow parties" in basic, and yes, they do happen.

 

[cwness]

Here in MN they were found Illegal and the cities that had them had to pay
the people who had paid fines back. It's a money grab pure and simple.

CW

 

[Taylor339]

Since when do politicians have to put things to a public vote? Once they are elected they get to make decisions without subjecting each of those decisions to a public vote.

As for the cameras themselves - we have them in various spots around here and, while they are a bit of a cash grab, I haven't seen or heard anything to indicate that they have increased accidents. Maybe people there just need to adjust their driving habits and understand that red light cameras are for red lights, not amber ones?

It's called a referendum. Look it up.