Judge Rules Speed Cameras Are A Scam

[HardOCP News]

This judge is just saying what everyone already knows, speed cameras are a scam. The judge went on to say that speed cameras were nothing more than a "high-tech game of 3-Card Monty."

A southwestern Ohio judge yesterday ordered a halt to a speeding-ticket blitz in a village that installed traffic cameras, saying it’s “a scam” against motorists. “Elmwood Place is engaged in nothing more than a high-tech game of 3-Card Monty,” Ruehlman wrote, referring to a card game used by con artists. “It is a scam that motorists can’t win.”

 

[Reloadin]

“It is a scam that motorists can’t win.”

They can win it by not speeding. Duh.

OMG I've gotta get to the mall 30 seconds faster than you! Sorry bro, gonna cut in front for pole position at the lights so I can shave 10 seconds off my daily commute.

 

[Kaitian]

“It is a scam that motorists can’t win.”

They can win it by not speeding. Duh.

OMG I've gotta get to the mall 30 seconds faster than you! Sorry bro, gonna cut in front for pole position at the lights so I can shave 10 seconds off my daily commute.

The scam works only if they shorten the yellow light timer and anyone still crossing in the intersection is in "violation". They also change the speed limits without notice such as manipulating common knowledge's of a certain road from 35MPH to 25MPH. Most public roads in the cities are 35 miles per hour UNLESS posted otherwise. That is common knowledge. So citizens are following the law, it's just that the mechanics have been abused to increase revenues.

 

[Sovereign]

The scam works only if they shorten the yellow light timer and anyone still crossing in the intersection is in "violation". They also change the speed limits without notice such as manipulating common knowledge's of a certain road from 35MPH to 25MPH. Most public roads in the cities are 35 miles per hour UNLESS posted otherwise. That is common knowledge. So citizens are following the law, it's just that the mechanics have been abused to increase revenues.

The "short yellow" is the usual trick (5 second yellows everywhere else, but at speed camera intersections it's 2 seconds).

If these things had any evidence in favor of them increasing safety, I'd be fine with them (that's usually the stated reason). So far, evidence to this effect is non-existent.

 

[nutzo]

“It is a scam that motorists can’t win.”

They can win it by not speeding. Duh.

OMG I've gotta get to the mall 30 seconds faster than you! Sorry bro, gonna cut in front for pole position at the lights so I can shave 10 seconds off my daily commute.

The problem is that they put these cameras in places with lower than expected speed limits.

It's just like the red light cameras out here in California. When they first started installing them, several citys where caught shortening the yellow lights so they could issue more tickets. Also, around 85% of the red light tickets are written for people who don't come to a complete stop (at least 5 seconds) before turning right on a red light. Not the same as someone who blows through a light after it has changed. A recient study actually showed an increase in accidents at many of the intersections where red light cameras have been installed. People are so afraid of getting a ticket they slam on thier brakes as soon as the light turns yellow, and then get rear-ended.

Instead on red light cameras, they could reduce accidents even more by simply putting a few second delay before a light turns green (all the lights are red for a couple seconds). This has been show to work in numerous studies, but there is no profit in it.

 

[wtiger]

Going a little fast isn't all that dangerous. It's large speed differentials between people going the same direction, people who don't know how to drive properly (know and follow the rules of passing, merging, etc), and driving like a dick that really causes accidents. They should be cracking down on these things, rather than handing out speeding tickets willy nilly.

I hate driving on 4+ lane roads for this reason. People not using their blinkers, idiots going slow in the passing lane, clumps of cars all going the same speed in multiple lanes; blocking everyone else, staying in the passing lane blocking everyone else, passing on the right for no reason, not leaving enough spacing; especially in heavy traffic so others to move into their exit lanes or merge into the higher speed lanes.

It infuriates me how badly people drive. I don't really speed anymore, but if someone wants to, I don't see the problem, so long as they aren't driving like idiots.

 

[westrock2000]

You think one time speed cameras are bad? England has averaging cameras where if you cover a large distance in less then the allowed time you get a ticket for speeding. Thats WAY too big brother.

Instead on red light cameras, they could reduce accidents even more by simply putting a few second delay before a light turns green (all the lights are red for a couple seconds). This has been show to work in numerous studies, but there is no profit in it.

This is more practical then extending the light. This lets people run the light, but not actually create danger.

However the majority of red light cameras deal with people making a right hand turn before coming to a complete stop. Here is Texas, the cities create "ordinances" specifically to this so that they don't charge you with a criminal act (like state law says), instead its a civil violation. Which allows thems to ignore the constitution, which means they don't have to prove who was driving the car.

 

[westrock2000]

It infuriates me how badly people drive. I don't really speed anymore, but if someone wants to, I don't see the problem, so long as they aren't driving like idiots.

Watch Russian dash cam videos for a couple hours and you'll think America is vehicular heaven

 

[superfula]

The "short yellow" is the usual trick (5 second yellows everywhere else, but at speed camera intersections it's 2 seconds).

If these things had any evidence in favor of them increasing safety, I'd be fine with them (that's usually the stated reason). So far, evidence to this effect is non-existent.

Hehe, what? The evidence of increased safety is plentiful. A quick Google search yields several examples.

Don't like red light/speeding cameras? Don't run red lights or speed.

 

[Ashbringer]

I always considered camera's highway robbery.

 

[Kaitian]

Hehe, what? The evidence of increased safety is plentiful. A quick Google search yields several examples.

Don't like red light/speeding cameras? Don't run red lights or speed.

What evidence? Shortening the yellow-light timer does not increase safety. It only causes people to slam on their brakes more often and cause rear-end accidents. Studies have proven that. Especially when the red-light companies charge exorbitant fees to use these camersas.

 

[ballistic90]

What evidence? Shortening the yellow-light timer does not increase safety. It only causes people to slam on their brakes more often and cause rear-end accidents. Studies have proven that. Especially when the red-light companies charge exorbitant fees to use these camersas.

Also the red light cameras are strategically placed to cause the most problems. Not far from where I live there was a red light camera set up without any warning or signs posted at a double traffic light setup that is irritating to navigate already, and then shortened the yellow light. It was obviously set as a trap, and the city got sued for it. They had to remove the cameras after 3 or 4 months.

 

[Neb]

What evidence? Shortening the yellow-light timer does not increase safety. It only causes people to slam on their brakes more often and cause rear-end accidents. Studies have proven that. Especially when the red-light companies charge exorbitant fees to use these camersas.

Shortening the yellow light timer is actually against most municipal rules, there's been cases where someone actually timed it and afterwards it was corrected.

That being said there's a fair amount of research out there regarding red-light cameras and although most of it is flawed in one way or another the general results have been that it usually decreases right angle collisions while increasing rear end collisions by a lesser amount. Wikipedia article has links to a lot of sources.

 

[Putz]

Speed doesn't kill, its the sudden stop
-Jeremy Clarkson

 

[westrock2000]

Hehe, what? The evidence of increased safety is plentiful. A quick Google search yields several examples.

Don't like red light/speeding cameras? Don't run red lights or speed.

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/05049/

Shows that yes side impact (run light) decreased after the red light camera was installed, but that rear impact (fear of running light) crashes increased. This effect was almost universal across the board.

 

[westrock2000]

Speed doesn't kill, its the sudden stop
-Jeremy Clarkson

Speed DOES NOT kill. If that were true then every motorsport would see fatalities constantly. Its driver attitude almost entirely that causes every accident or incident. As a country we do not encourage good behaviour.

Providing insurance benefits to people who take track days could greatly help, instead insurance companies shun such activities and will usually refuse to cover accidents in such places.

 

[Fort_Major]

The "short yellow" is the usual trick (5 second yellows everywhere else, but at speed camera intersections it's 2 seconds).

If these things had any evidence in favor of them increasing safety, I'd be fine with them (that's usually the stated reason). So far, evidence to this effect is non-existent.

Also constant changing of speed limit.
In one area I have seen, the speed limit changes 4 times within less than a one mile. One section of the road is governed by two different speed limits. When you consider the other direction, its governed by 3 speed limits.

 

[Fort_Major]

There was a huge scam in this area regarding that. Turns out a bunch of city municipalities had deliberately shortened the yellow light. Big lawsuit.

This only goes on if people let it go on. Take an active part in your community and your community's politics.

 

[bucket]

Technically you are supposed to stop at yellow lights if you can safely do so, but seeing as everyone is dead-set on going 10 miles over the speed limit it's rarely an option, at least where I live.

 

[ballistic90]

Speed DOES NOT kill. If that were true then every motorsport would see fatalities constantly. Its driver attitude almost entirely that causes every accident or incident. As a country we do not encourage good behaviour.

Providing insurance benefits to people who take track days could greatly help, instead insurance companies shun such activities and will usually refuse to cover accidents in such places.

Acceleration can kill by subjecting the human body to massive g-forces.

Not that you could see that in a car, though.

 

[Meeho]

The Lanham-Md.-based company Optotraffic installed the Elmwood Place cameras and administered their use, in return for 40 percent of ticket revenue.

WTH?! Is this really possible in the USA? A private company making money from traffic violations? Mind blown!

 

[DarkStar_WNY]

Technically you are supposed to stop at yellow lights if you can safely do so, but seeing as everyone is dead-set on going 10 miles over the speed limit it's rarely an option, at least where I live.

This!

Now I'm not saying that some shady things aren't done to increase profits from these cameras, but my problem is with the tricks not the cameras themselves.

 

[dr.kevin]

It sounds like these cameras were functioning normally, but ignorant or reckless drivers are looking for a copout.

I've seen many people ignore the 25mph school zone limit here in southern california.

They also change the speed limits without notice such as manipulating common knowledge's of a certain road from 35MPH to 25MPH. So citizens are following the law, it's just that the mechanics have been abused to increase revenues.

I didn't read it that way.

It sounds to me that that stretch of road was already a 25mph zone, and they put in a camera to enforce it.

The plaintiffs’ attorney, Mike Allen, called the ruling “a victory for the common people.” He said people who were unemployed, working poor and single mothers were hit with $105 citations they couldn’t afford. He said Ruehlman’s decision could spur more legal challenges and state legislation against traffic cameras.

dumb excuse. They should be let off the hook just because they're unemployed, poor, or single moms?

These are the people I'm most afraid of getting into accidents with because they might be under- or un-insured.

 

[ml_paladin888]

WTH?! Is this really possible in the USA? A private company making money from traffic violations? Mind blown!

while i dont have concrete evidence, im fairly sure most, if not all, traffic cameras (speed and red light) are set up/maintained/operated by private companies, which in turn gets a fairly large cut of the money generated from tickets from a municipality.

 

[Inu]

while i dont have concrete evidence, im fairly sure most, if not all, traffic cameras (speed and red light) are set up/maintained/operated by private companies, which in turn gets a fairly large cut of the money generated from tickets from a municipality.

this

 

[nutzo]

That being said there's a fair amount of research out there regarding red-light cameras and although most of it is flawed in one way or another the general results have been that it usually decreases right angle collisions while increasing rear end collisions by a lesser amount. Wikipedia article has links to a lot of sources.

Yet they can also decrease right angle colisions by delaying the green light by a couple of seconds (all lights stay red for 2 seconds). Works even better than red light cameras, and doesn't result in an increase in rear-end accidents.

The only problem with delaying the green light has to do with the traffic level. If the intersection is already too busy, the 2 second delay can cause an even worse traffic backup. However in most cases this can be overcome with better timing on the lights.

 

[Meeho]

while i dont have concrete evidence, im fairly sure most, if not all, traffic cameras (speed and red light) are set up/maintained/operated by private companies, which in turn gets a fairly large cut of the money generated from tickets from a municipality.

That is just...wrong.

 

[JimmayLong]

The other issue of the red light camera is the city is actually putting everyone on the road at risk by not remediating at the time of the incident. It would be awesome if lawyer would take that case and the city offical(s) would made the decision got charged accordingly with willfull public endangerment.

 

[Activate: AMD]

while i dont have concrete evidence, im fairly sure most, if not all, traffic cameras (speed and red light) are set up/maintained/operated by private companies, which in turn gets a fairly large cut of the money generated from tickets from a municipality.

this is true of the red-light cam they put in my home town as well. Its disgusting. Not only do they take a large cut of the revenue, but the municipality is on the hook for disputes. In the case of my town, there was an issue where the yellow light was shortened AND the camera was set-up improperly, resulting in a massive number of tickets being issued (surprise ) Literally hundreds of tickets were issued over the course of a few weeks and a large percent were disputed. The municipality was on the hook for dealing with all the disputed tickets and it wound up costing them money to do so. Its a massive scam and I can't believe that its legal.

 

[Activate: AMD]

^^^I can't edit my post, but this article also goes over accident data for light I just mentioned in my post. As mentioned earlier, accident increased at the light year-on-year.

 

[Arcygenical]

The "short yellow" is the usual trick (5 second yellows everywhere else, but at speed camera intersections it's 2 seconds).

If these things had any evidence in favor of them increasing safety, I'd be fine with them (that's usually the stated reason). So far, evidence to this effect is non-existent.

And screeching to a halt to avoid a 2 second yellow actually decreases safety. I've seen someone get rear ended because they were forced to stop at a light with a known short yellow - down from around 40 to 0 in 2 seconds.

 

[ballistic90]

this is true of the red-light cam they put in my home town as well. Its disgusting. Not only do they take a large cut of the revenue, but the municipality is on the hook for disputes. In the case of my town, there was an issue where the yellow light was shortened AND the camera was set-up improperly, resulting in a massive number of tickets being issued (surprise ) Literally hundreds of tickets were issued over the course of a few weeks and a large percent were disputed. The municipality was on the hook for dealing with all the disputed tickets and it wound up costing them money to do so. Its a massive scam and I can't believe that its legal.

...So they're like music producers in that way?

 

[GotNoRice]

Watch Russian dash cam videos for a couple hours and you'll think America is vehicular heaven

Something to consider, but the endless hours of Russian video where no accidents happen tend to not get posted to the internet. If everyone in the US had a dash-cam, I would contend that we are just as bad.

 

[Ryokurin]

Shortening the yellow is a good way to drive up revenue. Several cities in Georgia used that trick a few years ago to justify the placement of cameras all over the town, someone figured it out, sued and won forcing the lights back to normal. When this happened however revenue plummeted and now probably around 95% of them are gone.

Oh and while accidents due to people running the light dropped considerably accidents from people rear ending people not wanting to run the light.

 

[sfsuphysics]

The Lanham-Md.-based company Optotraffic installed the Elmwood Place cameras and administered their use, in return for 40 percent of ticket revenue.

WTH?! Is this really possible in the USA? A private company making money from traffic violations? Mind blown!

Yeah, this is the part that should be declared unconstitutional, not the "scam" aspect of it. Oh hey the cops get to set up traffic traps by having speed drops in areas that doesn't make any rational sense and aren't clearly marked (a single sign is not clear marking), and these companies jump in and say "hey we'll let you catch them with our equipment, all we want is a piece of the profits". But this isn't new, tow companies have been doing the same thing for ages, they'll happily tow cars when necessary and then your fine for whatever parking violation you did they increases dramatically because they get their piece of the pie.

 

[weebling1]

Speed DOES NOT kill. If that were true then every motorsport would see fatalities constantly. Its driver attitude almost entirely that causes every accident or incident. As a country we do not encourage good behaviour.

Providing insurance benefits to people who take track days could greatly help, instead insurance companies shun such activities and will usually refuse to cover accidents in such places.

Apples =/= Oranges

Controlled environment with proffesionals vs. inattentive noobs. Whattayagonnado? Take peoples cars away? I can already hears the screams of "constitutional rights!"

I say we outlaw bikini barristas in thongs. That nearly caused my wreck this morning

 

[Kaitian]

WTH?! Is this really possible in the USA? A private company making money from traffic violations? Mind blown!

Chicago's entire parking meter system is privatized. Some company owns it for the next 70 or so years (was bought in 2008 for 1.1 billion dollars or so). So private organizations doing that kind of crap isn't new.

 

[Dunnlang]

This is what happens when government is handed over to corporations. Books are closed. Practices are private. Profits are nigh untouchable.

If the cameras were wholly owned and operated by the municipality, at least their full profits would be a mater of public record. All the profits would go to the city and be available to the residents for investment, or disputes. All information about the cameras would be available via Freedom of Information requests.

When the private companies are involved, the money is quickly sheltered in a shell game like structure. Half of your ticket price goes to a company that made one single camera and installed it one time. That's quite a bit of money for a tiny bit of work.

 

[Elios]

Apples =/= Oranges

Controlled environment with proffesionals vs. inattentive noobs. Whattayagonnado? Take peoples cars away? I can already hears the screams of "constitutional rights!"

I say we outlaw bikini barristas in thongs. That nearly caused my wreck this morning

driving is not a right this has already be proven
so yet they could take peoples cars if the drive like shit and should
but speed/red light cameras dont work

here where i live they took them out after 6 months because they started to cost the city to much money to keep running lol

 

[c3141hf]

driving is not a right this has already be proven
so yet they could take peoples cars if the drive like shit and should
but speed/red light cameras dont work

here where i live they took them out after 6 months because they started to cost the city to much money to keep running lol

Freedom of movement IS a right. The fact that the state steals my money to pay for the roads also gives me the right to use them.

“It is a scam that motorists can’t win.”

They can win it by not speeding. Duh.

OMG I've gotta get to the mall 30 seconds faster than you! Sorry bro, gonna cut in front for pole position at the lights so I can shave 10 seconds off my daily commute.

You could always try minding your own business. Idiot drivers that hold up the flow of traffic are far more dangerous than speeding.

Hehe, what? The evidence of increased safety is plentiful. A quick Google search yields several examples.

Don't like red light/speeding cameras? Don't run red lights or speed.

Don't like getting beat up? Don't criticize the government.

You think one time speed cameras are bad? England has averaging cameras where if you cover a large distance in less then the allowed time you get a ticket for speeding. Thats WAY too big brother.



This is more practical then extending the light. This lets people run the light, but not actually create danger.

However the majority of red light cameras deal with people making a right hand turn before coming to a complete stop. Here is Texas, the cities create "ordinances" specifically to this so that they don't charge you with a criminal act (like state law says), instead its a civil violation. Which allows thems to ignore the constitution, which means they don't have to prove who was driving the car.

My understanding is that there is a significant group of people in the UK who torch those cameras. I rather like the idea myself.