rudy
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2004
- Messages
- 8,704
Why do you think this? Because you think that catching people who break the law is some sort of game? Where the rules need to be fair? lol
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
High Tech License Plate Frame Beats Red-Light Cameras
- Thread starter HardOCP News
- Start date
Why do you think this? Because you think that catching people who break the law is some sort of game? Where the rules need to be fair? lol
jojo69
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2009
- Messages
- 11,267
I must have missed that day in Civics class, which clause of the constitution does the red light camera violate again
If "Big Brother" really wanted to track your every movement he wouldn't just put the cameras on red lights but on every other light pole ... we actually have much less surveillance in the USA than they do in the UK ... these databases look great on NCIS LA but I suspect the reality is far less advanced
The point is not that the red light camera violates the constitution, though an argument could be made for unreasonable search. The point is that ubiquitous surveillance coupled with accelerated erosion of civil rights is a very disturbing trend to many of us.
D
Deleted member 222586
Guest
Because its a total waste to make photos to every moving thing. Wouldn't it be better to create a device that ONLY flashes people when they actually cross the red lights? The way I understand it it flashes to everybody passing it, which makes no damn sense.
SCSI-Terminator
Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2003
- Messages
- 1,013
Red light cameras? This is for running those "pay by mail" toll boths in Texas.
sfsuphysics
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2007
- Messages
- 15,993
Most of them do have sensors that only trigger when you go through a red light, but yeah there are some that flash at everything, not sure if they're broken or just wired silly
supergrover
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2004
- Messages
- 169
Agree with others here; just stop at the red lights and don't speed. I don't give a crap if you have some place to be...my family's safety is more important than you being late for work.
If you get pulled over and you think its BS, go to court and fight it.
If you get pulled over and you think its BS, go to court and fight it.
Emission
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2005
- Messages
- 4,420
It's interesting how little time you really save.
Taxation is no more voluntary than armed robbery. In fact, they are the same thing (refuse to pay taxes and have men with guns come to your home).
"Speed limits" do not, in fact, increase safety (one only has to look at the Autobahn for verification of this) but do provide a nice way for the state to steal money from people. Cops act as modern day highway robbers, shaking down motorists for money. Speed limits are often designed to be deliberately illogical and to suddenly change without warning so that the number of "violations" is increased.
Red light cameras are the same, except that now you have a for-profit company colluding with the government. A commission is issued on each ticket thus creating a profit incentive to ticket as many people as possible. A few cities around here installed red light cameras and then were caught shortening the length of the yellow light below required safety standards so that they could issue more tickets.
California has a standard (which I believe has the force of law; if the yellow is less than the required time (and you ran it after a yellow), courts will not convict you) http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/traffops/signtech/signdel/policy/05-01.pdf We also have a law that requires speed limits to be set based on traffic engineering surveys, and if those surveys are not done (or not made available), courts will not convict you either. (Of course, if you plead guilty/no contest, then the court isn't going to investigate). And you can contest traffic charges by mail. In short; if you're tired of lame traffic laws, move to california. (There are still red light cameras, but less and less, and usually in areas where red light running is really bad)
or just not run a red light...
Around me (Southern Cal, IE area) they have pretty much removed all of the traffic cameras. I herd they cost too much to operate. I also herd it was a third party company that runs them, and you legally dont have to pay them so no one was.
IDK if that's true, but I do know there all gone now, I haven't seen one anywhere in some time. All that is left is the metal poles that used to hold the flash units on bigger intersections.
Around me (Southern Cal, IE area) they have pretty much removed all of the traffic cameras. I herd they cost too much to operate. I also herd it was a third party company that runs them, and you legally dont have to pay them so no one was.
IDK if that's true, but I do know there all gone now, I haven't seen one anywhere in some time. All that is left is the metal poles that used to hold the flash units on bigger intersections.
There is a law in California that sets a minimum yellow light time.
It's 3 seconds for 25MPH or less, 3.6 seconds for up to 35MPH, and 4.3 seconds for 45MPH
A number of cities shortened the yellow light times when they installed red light cameras, some below the minimum amount, and they had to refund the red light tickets.
As for people who say just dont run a red light, over 90% of the camera red light tickets given out in California are to people who didt come to a complete stop before turning right on a red light. Bogus ticket, but a good fund raiser at $400-$500 a ticket.
That's not a bogus ticket at all, you're supposed to come to a full stop before making a right turn on a red.
Ahh yes, the famous California Stop. The Montana Stop is worse though, they don't even slow down.
ol1bit
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2007
- Messages
- 1,246
Easy register your car in your wife's name only, register her car in your name only. Works..if your married.
Actually, driving cross country.. say a trip that would normally take 32 hours or maybe a bit more of driving time, can be cut down to 27 hours or less of driving time. And that isn't even speeding all the time.
Makes a huge difference if you are driving by yourself.
Some places need longer yellow lights than others. The traffic lights down the hill from where I live used to have a lot more accidents before they extended the yellow light so people coming down the hill had more time to decide if they had space to stop.
If you go by the rule "if it's safe to stop, stop, if it's not safe to stop, go through" then you should pretty much be right. The only times I've been worried about getting a fine for a red light is when I've clearly seen the yellow and thought "meh, I can beat that", lol.
I've never actually gotten a red light fine, but I figure unless it's something absurd like the light changed to red 2 or 3 seconds before you even entered the intersection, I'd be writing a letter saying under the circumstances it was safer to continue than to stop.
I'm going to disagree with some that say that the solution is to, "not speed, stop at red lights,and be an attentive driver."
I'm all of these things. I'm extremely careful and attentive when driving.
However, I was driving through Spokane, WA and ran a red light despite all my active attempts to obey the law. There was a rail bridge over the road obscuring the location of an intersection. The road dipped down for extra clearance, which made the intersection even harder to see as your car was angled down until the last moment. Because of this issue the city put up one of those yellow signs with a traffic light symbol on it, with blinking yellow lights alerting you to when the light was about to change.
I was driving toward the bridge and saw the yellow lights start to blink. I looked for the intersection, but couldn't see it, but was actively looking for stop lines painted on the road, and for where the signal was. The other cars on the road were showing no signs of slowing, stopping, or speeding up, so along with looking for the intersection, I relied on the other traffic to help me a bit.
I was under the bridge, which was dark. Being in a shadow, with everything else in bright sunlight, creates a lot of glare, so it's hard to see anything outside of under the bridge. When I emerged from being under the bridge I had entered the intersection and the light was already red. I couldn't even see it (I'm tall) and my wife told me.
All of this happened in a matter of a few seconds. The yellow sign with blinking yellow lights was literally two car lengths before the intersection. They are usually a couple hundred feet before. The surrounding traffic didn't help me know where the intersection was. The stop line was obscured by the glare when I was under the bridge. Finally, there was no way to see the traffic lights because the bridge covered any view until you were practically in the intersection at which point the roof of my car was in the way of my view.
And yeah, a couple weeks later I got a ticket in the mail.
Odds are the city knows about this issue. It seems obvious. Are there a disproportionate number of drivers who generally get no moving violations that get one in this intersection? How does it compare to bad drivers (who would also get tickets at other intersections)?
It's a technique professors use to check whether or not questions on a test should be thrown out. If an equal percentage of high scoring students answer wrong on a question as low scoring students, then it means that, more than likely, both groups are guessing. However, good questions will have a higher percentage of high scoring students getting it right than low scoring students.
Apply the same technique to traffic violations and we could statistically determine all the places where the civil engineers messed up and fix those issues.
But what is probably happening is that they are applying that technique to figure out where to put speed traps and cameras to generate the most revenue while not increasing public safety one bit.
I'm all of these things. I'm extremely careful and attentive when driving.
However, I was driving through Spokane, WA and ran a red light despite all my active attempts to obey the law. There was a rail bridge over the road obscuring the location of an intersection. The road dipped down for extra clearance, which made the intersection even harder to see as your car was angled down until the last moment. Because of this issue the city put up one of those yellow signs with a traffic light symbol on it, with blinking yellow lights alerting you to when the light was about to change.
I was driving toward the bridge and saw the yellow lights start to blink. I looked for the intersection, but couldn't see it, but was actively looking for stop lines painted on the road, and for where the signal was. The other cars on the road were showing no signs of slowing, stopping, or speeding up, so along with looking for the intersection, I relied on the other traffic to help me a bit.
I was under the bridge, which was dark. Being in a shadow, with everything else in bright sunlight, creates a lot of glare, so it's hard to see anything outside of under the bridge. When I emerged from being under the bridge I had entered the intersection and the light was already red. I couldn't even see it (I'm tall) and my wife told me.
All of this happened in a matter of a few seconds. The yellow sign with blinking yellow lights was literally two car lengths before the intersection. They are usually a couple hundred feet before. The surrounding traffic didn't help me know where the intersection was. The stop line was obscured by the glare when I was under the bridge. Finally, there was no way to see the traffic lights because the bridge covered any view until you were practically in the intersection at which point the roof of my car was in the way of my view.
And yeah, a couple weeks later I got a ticket in the mail.
Odds are the city knows about this issue. It seems obvious. Are there a disproportionate number of drivers who generally get no moving violations that get one in this intersection? How does it compare to bad drivers (who would also get tickets at other intersections)?
It's a technique professors use to check whether or not questions on a test should be thrown out. If an equal percentage of high scoring students answer wrong on a question as low scoring students, then it means that, more than likely, both groups are guessing. However, good questions will have a higher percentage of high scoring students getting it right than low scoring students.
Apply the same technique to traffic violations and we could statistically determine all the places where the civil engineers messed up and fix those issues.
But what is probably happening is that they are applying that technique to figure out where to put speed traps and cameras to generate the most revenue while not increasing public safety one bit.
Acer_Sheep
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- May 18, 2007
- Messages
- 1,201
I don't understand why people are always concerned about public surveillance, only people who are either doing something illegal and/or immoral and have to hide something are worried they are going to be captured and caught. When I'm outside I don't care at all who seen me, who captured me and so on, because I know I won't go over a speed limit, I wont destroy anything, harm anyone and I wont be cheating on my partner. I infact welcome surveillance in cities because it helps to resolve many crimes and speeding is also big issue.I must have missed that day in Civics class, which clause of the constitution does the red light camera violate again
If "Big Brother" really wanted to track your every movement he wouldn't just put the cameras on red lights but on every other light pole ... we actually have much less surveillance in the USA than they do in the UK ... these databases look great on NCIS LA but I suspect the reality is far less advanced
I'm sure this license plate frame is not fast enough to cover the number when capturing occurs.
It's already illegal in US and EU, because traffic act describes that license plate must be visible either in night and day, not to mention that xenon lamps can easily be triggered by vehicles behind.
None of this has anything to do with the frame.
I was terrified of these red light ticketing systems but once you understand how they work in terms of what you can and can't do, like coming to a complete stop at a red light before making a right hand turn, it's easier to live with in the long run. Being aware of the system at intersections and not driving like a complete moron also helps. I know a few friends that got into major traffic accidents and requested videos as evidence to support their claim was an unexpected surprise. Overall, I don't mind these systems, I've seen countless idiots blow red lights flying through an intersection around a school zone, only to have a few flashes fire. It's to my complete satisfaction to know that he's kicking himself as he looks in the rear view mirror knowing he's got a present in the mail coming.
I don't know. They are getting stupid with some of these lights. There is one not far from my house where if you make a right on red and you were not fully stopped for 4 seconds, it hits you.
Also, if you are a dickhead to a motorcyclist, they can come up beside you and force the camera to grab you since the bike doesn't have a plate and the camera cant tell the difference. I have done that to a dickhead that almost hit me talking on a phone.
Also, if you are a dickhead to a motorcyclist, they can come up beside you and force the camera to grab you since the bike doesn't have a plate and the camera cant tell the difference. I have done that to a dickhead that almost hit me talking on a phone.
blitzkommando
Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2009
- Messages
- 888
There's a town near where I live that installed red light cameras that, for a long while, took pictures of all right turns on red lights, regardless of whether the driver stopped or not. They also sent out tickets to all of those drivers. The city was sued, multiple times, and lost a fat wad of money for it. Ohio has had real issues with speed traps as well. A lot of rural towns have a 25 MPH speed limit on roads that are otherwise unmarked county roads with a 55 MPH speed limit. They're kind enough to put the 25 signs around 10 feet behind their gigantic "Welcome to Generic Midwestern Town #50458" signs too so you end up seeing people not familiar either zooming through or slamming on their brakes. I'm all for proper road safety, but the road laws need to be reasonable too. Having a 30 MPH speed drop with the speed limit signs obscured by other signs put up by the city is done for no reason other than to hike up tickets.
Lol I got one in houston. We are supposed to stop and wait for 3 seconds, I did 2.2 something (timed the video they put up) and made my right turn, I think that is pretty bogus. But law is the law and I really did not wait the full 3 seconds. Hard fighting that but the ticket was only $70, fighting it wasnt worth my time and effort.
SamuraiInBlack
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2003
- Messages
- 5,771
The only thing red light cameras have done in my area is raise the number of accidents at their intersections, due to people slowing down abruptly to avoid getting hit by the red light, even if they would have been able to pass through while it was yellow.
Because with near absolute public surveillance, the adversarial legal system breaks down in the face of corruption.
Right now the system usually works by the police creating a narrative based off of facts of the crime. They challenge you with that scenario, maybe in court, and you produce facts that attempt to refute their narrative. One of those ways is to prove you didn't have the opportunity.
Now they can do the opposite. They can custom fit your opportunity to a crime. Sometime somewhere you've parked near a restaurant where a store was robbed or stopped for a long light at a street corner where drugs are sold. The police may not even realize they're doing it, but if they're convinced you are guilty of something they can probably generate a long list of crimes that match your opportunity and you also don't have any witnesses.
Add some corruption to that and it gets far worse. The intersection you stopped at where drugs are sold, all they have to do is wave a deal to the pusher for his help as a witness against you and voila, they now have opportunity and a witness.
Now technically they could do this without the cameras but they would have to be surveiling you heavily ahead of time without justification leaving a trail that they were doing such a thing.
kbrickley
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 13, 2012
- Messages
- 7,514
Isn't that also partially the fault of poor drivers who are following too closely ... when I was raised in New Mexico it was fairly common to see 2-4 cars go through a red light ... now that my car is out of commission and I have been forced to use a bicycle and my feet for transportation I am much more aware and concerned about people who don't look before they turn on reds or try to run lights ...
maybe we should just let everyone be like in the Philippines ... when I worked in Manila I would see 10-15 cars go through the red lights (in fact they would block the intersections because the of the traffic they were trying to turn into) ... I wasn't even sure why they had lights since no one really seemed to follow them
TheWeazmeister
<a href=http://www.blogcdn.com/www.parentdish.com/
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2010
- Messages
- 3,346
Use your head, for once.
Red light cameras cause more accidents than they'll ever hope to prevent. They're a revenue tool that at the same time puts motorists at risk.
percydaman
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2011
- Messages
- 294
No way this works. Whats more likely to happen is your license plate will see all sorts of false positives and start flashing all over the place, making you look like an idiot. Please nobody buy this trash.
goodcooper
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2005
- Messages
- 9,771
we actually always call him Jon... specifically without the h...
probably is him, i know he was working on something similar
goodcooper
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2005
- Messages
- 9,771
yeap, that's him.... he went to school in cinci... it's on his linkedin
I made one of these myself 2 years ago. I use a 2.5 watt 808nm laser diode in an aluminum frame. It's virtually invisible to the naked eye, but to ANY camera it's a big white ball of light. It's controlled by a switch on my dash. I use it pretty much anywhere there are cameras.
It's also fun to use a parking garages where they try to take a pic of your plate and verify when you leave.
It's also fun to use a parking garages where they try to take a pic of your plate and verify when you leave.
Red light and speed cameras are not "police tools." They are usually installed, maintained, run, and ticketed through civilian companies that have no enforcement capability.
For example, while I was deployed recently, my wife got a red light camera ticket in the mail. It only shows her license plate and does not show her in the driver's seat. This does not meet the burden of proof required to assign the ticket to her.
She paid it before telling me about it. I would not have paid it.
kbrickley
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 13, 2012
- Messages
- 7,514
It might actually be better if there were more surveillance cameras here (like in the UK) ... right now the Police tend to rely on "eyewitness" testimony (which is notoriously unreliable - eyewitness testimony is much more heavily affected by the Ladder of Inference) ... if a camera showed the perp of a crime were a different race than you or taller or shorter then it might exonerate you too ... all technologies can be abused (we just have to weigh the potential benefits against the potential risks and choose ones that are truly beneficial)