Courts: Not So Fast With Those Red-Light Camera Tickets

I agree it is all about money, my comment I said about just stopping was more directed at those that seemed to think destruction of the cameras was the better option lol
 
Darunion said:
or stop running red lights and wait your 30-45 seconds?
Click to expand...

The problem is when redlight cameras are installed, they frequently push for the caution signal time to be greatly reduced. So now you have to Slam on your breaks the second it turns yellow(potentially causing an accident) or end up with a ticket. Another factor is a majority of tickets(over 80%) are for those make a rolling stop and turn right. Once again if they make a full stop there is often an increased chance of accidents.

Pricing structures are different as they are normally negotiated by the different counties. So many different plans it is hard to debate how much of the money stays local. Normally it seems a majority travels out of state.
 
mope54 said:
Warnings don't seem to be "plenty" for you if you've been given "a few" already.
Click to expand...

Considering it's been 3 warnings in 15 years, I don't think that's bad at all. Two of them were for speeding (7 over in a 55 that dropped from 65 outside of Denver, 8 over in a 65 that dropped from 70 coming in to WI from MN) in areas I wasn't familiar with at the time and one was for a burnt out tail light that I didn't know was out. Considering I averaged almost 40,000 miles a year thanks to work for the last 7 years I think that's not bad at all. Not that I have to justify myself to you, but if you want to be so damn judgmental about it then go ahead.

So yes, I do believe warnings were just fine in those cases and warnings in many cases would be "plenty."
 
It would be nice if the city didn't ticket for speeding on the cameras but only for people Running through red lights.
I've seen several close calls of people walking across the street almost getting hit by cars that blazed right through red lights.
1 more second and splat. :eek:
 
in the bay area these red light tickets are fucking 400+ bucks... it's ridiculous.
 
mope54 said:
The second issue is that you don't seem to know how these cameras actually work. It sounds like you haven't received an automated ticket because if you had you would know that they take multiple photos of your car as it enters, is in, and exits the intersection with time sync so the agency can review whether you entered before, during, or after a red.
Click to expand...
So, you're saying that the cameras start taking pictures as soon as the traffic light turns yellow if there's any movement within the camera's motion sensor? That would require a whole lot of actual police review, assuming the traffic light changes every 30 seconds or so. Daytime traffic would generate oh, let's see, 120 camera shots an hour, minimum 12 hours, oh yeah, potentially minimum of 1440 camera shots to be reviewed by an actual human being to see if they should send out a ticket. Every day.
 
nightfly said:
So, you're saying that the cameras start taking pictures as soon as the traffic light turns yellow if there's any movement within the camera's motion sensor? That would require a whole lot of actual police review, assuming the traffic light changes every 30 seconds or so. Daytime traffic would generate oh, let's see, 120 camera shots an hour, minimum 12 hours, oh yeah, potentially minimum of 1440 camera shots to be reviewed by an actual human being to see if they should send out a ticket. Every day.
Click to expand...
do traffic lights change every 30 seconds in your town?

I don't think the violations are all reviewed by humans and I *know* they are not reviewed at all by police officers (at least in Southern California where red light cameras were managed by private companies).

in any case, I don't manufacture, program, nor do I have anything to do with sending out automated red light tickets. All I know is that when we received ours in the mail there were pictures of us before the line, after the line, in the intersection, and afterwards as we were completing our left turn

regardless of the work involved, that's what's necessary to prove someone entered the intersection after a light turned red (in states like California where, as I wrote earlier, it's legal to be in an intersection after a light turns red so long as you entered it before it started turning). it's certainly less resource intensive than posting officers at each light physically
 
Of course I knew. Which has absolutely nothing to do with quoting a single paragraph.

You seize on the weirdest shit.
 
mope54 said:
When you make this kind of claim (that it's not about safety) and then describe a situation where you completely miss the point of what stopping before turning right is supposed to be safeguarding it really undermines your argument.
Click to expand...

Stopping before turning at a red doesn't magically make things safer. Allowing enough time to evaluate whether it's safe to turn is separate from coming to a complete stop for exactly X seconds or else you get a fine. If anything I'd say it's distracting having to ensure your car comes to a complete stop for a specific number of seconds.

But then when I was over there I did notice the USA has a hard on for coming to complete stops all the time even when it's unnecessary. You guys sure do love your stop signs.
 
Tudz said:
But then when I was over there I did notice the USA has a hard on for coming to complete stops all the time even when it's unnecessary.
Click to expand...

Waaait, are you...no longer in the US? :eek: As in you left us and took away all the value and sensible thingies you were adding to our society? (I mean, aside from your misunderstanding of which breed of goldfish is superior, but we all have faults.) How could you?! :(
 
Tudz said:
Stopping before turning at a red doesn't magically make things safer. Allowing enough time to evaluate whether it's safe to turn is separate from coming to a complete stop for exactly X seconds or else you get a fine. If anything I'd say it's distracting having to ensure your car comes to a complete stop for a specific number of seconds.

But then when I was over there I did notice the USA has a hard on for coming to complete stops all the time even when it's unnecessary. You guys sure do love your stop signs.
Click to expand...
in rural parts of Oregon you can turn right at stop signs without stopping. not sure about other states. can't do that in Southern California, but not sure about Northern California.

clearly if you are turning without even stopping at a stop sign, at night, it's hard to argue that you have sufficient time to evaluate the safety of the situation of whether a pedestrian, fully expecting you to fucking stop your vehicle at the stop sign, is going to step off the curb :rolleyes:

and interesting that you think it's distracting to drivers to pay attention to traffic devices and right of way...but at least you're off our streets. thanks for that at least.
 
Ur_Mom said:
I say keep private companies out of it. Then, it becomes a for-profit style business. They will do things to keep in business, be it lower the timing for yellow lights, false positives, etc..
Click to expand...

Technically, the DOT is supposed to set the timing for yellow lights based upon the traffic pattern(s) of the intersection(s). Municipalities are not supposed to mess with it because it could potentially create an unsafe situation. We are going through this right now in a municipality that I drive through to get to work. They installed red light cameras and shortened the yellow lights by a second and a half. Now they are getting sued for violating DOT regulation, but the whole mess will be tied up in court for a while. Guess who foots those bills? The very revenue machines that these systems are supposedly there to 'protect': us...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top