Are Red Light Cameras All That Bad?

the thumb of rule is,
If you don't like the redlight camera, then just avoid the intersection. Take another route.

I prefer redlight camera installed at every intersection with traffic light, not just high risk (or high profit, whatever) spot.

May I quote you?

You are so right, on that fact, But remember the car is registered to you, so you have to prove it's not you. In this case the guilt is associated with registration of ownership, who else would be driving your car?

The thing your over looking is, your accuser is there, it's called a photo, and all the data that created the citation! and thats your due process.

1) don't want to pay the fine? give up who did the crime.
2) don't lend your car out ever, then you don't have to deal with number 1.
3) Drive in a legal manor, don't speed and don't speed up when approaching a traffic light. Always be prepared.

In the very beginning I thought just like you, even fought a camera ticket.
But I was wrong, I rand a red light period. And they had it on Video and two pictures, What can you say about that with out looking like a idiot? Thats not me?? Okay, good enough, then who was it, Oh you don't want to say Huh, Then since the car is registered to you guess what, your guilty unless you use number #1

Do I agree with the cameras, Nope not even a little, Did I agree with Paying for Jacob's Field or Browns Field with a sin tax? Nope so I quit smoking. So just chill out and drive like your kids are playing on the intersection.

First of all, I don't run red lights, regardless of red light cameras. I have problems with red light cameras and speed cameras for the following reasons:
- When pulled over by a LEO, I typically change my behavior for a while. With 'automated' systems, I could break the law 2 dozen times and not know it for weeks until the mail arrives.
- They recently installed a red light camera very near where I live. Suprise! The lights used to allow about 8 - 10 cars to make a left from street A unto street B. Now the lights only allow 3 - 4 cars? Can you say revenue enhancement?
- For public safety, I want as many LEOs around as possible. I feel that if they can automate a bunch of this, than the number of LEOs will go down so the cities can 'save money'. Afterall, if they make more money from automated traffic citations than they do with a LEO, and the LEO is more expensive, why not make the cuts (from a purely budgetary perspective)?

just my 2 cents.
Tim

It's important to remember that the sole purpose of any law enforcement and our legal system has become another means of generating revenue. Any way that they can increase revenue and profits is pursued by the powers that be.

I live in a county with a district court clerks office that pays for all of its operating costs (over 100 million dollars per year) and nets an additional 30-50 million dollar per year profit from court filing fees, interest on such accounts, etc. This is in addition to fines that are assessed from court proceedings.

I live in a city that pays for the salaries of its police force and fire department from parking fines alone.

These things exist to generate revenue, to any extent the cameras and peace officers may create the illusion of safety is purely a side effect.

Sole purpose huh? I guess your city should just get rid of the police and fire departments then right? On the other hand, if you don't park illegally or break the law then you don't have to worry about paying the police officer and fire fighter's salaries. Sounds like you got it good.

Yes they are! It is a scam to make money!

They're great. They help reduce local government deficits by charging speeders and red light runners for their impatience. Sorta like the lottery, generating funds from people wanting to throw their money away.

That's a logical fallacy, an inductive fallacy if I am not mistaken. And the fire department is not involved in the question here even in the slightest.

I never suggested that the original intended role of the police department was revenue generation, nor would I; I was merely remarking that this is the unfortunate situation that has become reality. It is run by a combination of elected officials and career police administrators who care about three main things: public safety, crime statistics, and budget numbers. Some truly do care about public safety, but these people tend to not do as well compared to those who produce more statistically relevant results.

Think about it from a managerial standpoint. Would you rather promote somebody who improved the statistics of reported crimes and created budget surpluses, or somebody who didn't produce such good numbers? It is hard to quantify actions which improve actual public safety. What the statistics also can't show is when crimes are reclassified or under reported, but you can't argue about a budget surplus.

Going back to the original question of red light cameras, at least as much data exist that suggest they have a negative impact on safety as the data that suggest a positive impact. But the bottom line is what it usually is, that they generate revenue.

Really? There was another study published recently (someone posted it here), that showed that accidents increased a year after red light cameras were installed. I don't think it's as simple as you seem to state.

Let's all understand that these cameras are installed as revenue producers for cities - under the guise of 'safety' -

The cities don't pay a 'dime' for their installation or, in most cases their operation - it's done by an independent company that take their 'bite' of the 'action' for each person 'featured' in the pictures!

More money for the city, more money for the camera company, and BIG BROTHER stands guard there on the street corners to 'slap' your hand when you use bad judgement to try and beat the 'red'...

I agree, it's not a good idea the' run the red', and could be a safety hazard - BUT, the BIG BROTHER approach, looking over your shoulder is just plain WRONG, IMHO!

What's next...cameras on the freeways to see if your registration is up to date - OPPS, they already have those!!! Again, license plate scanners on main roads, installed in the guise of safety - but BIG BROTHER is just trying to keep track of you again!

I'm sure there are many other examples that we probably don't even know about - it's just getting out of hand, IMHO, and how much does it cost we taxpayers for someone to 'watch' all these surveillance devices???

End of 'rant'...for now...

Illinois has RLCs breeding like rabbits. Now the company that takes $30 of each $100 ticket and additionally charges the towns $50K/month for each installation is lobbying the state legislature to convert them all to combo RLC/speed cameras. So when you enter an intersection then see the light turn yellow, you can't speed up through the intersection for safety, as you will get busted for speeding. Here's the website of the evildoers:
http://www.redspeed-illinois.com
They brag about how it doesn't matter if it makes the roads safer, as it is a revenue generator for the towns.

I spend 2-5 month every year in The North America, US and Canada, and admire the, in general, polite way people are driving! Maybe this is new to americans and canadians, but that's the way it is. I live in Europe and we don't show the same responsibillity as you do in the traffic. Generalizations are generalizations, there will always be exceptions. OK, thats my background. I like your driving!
In this thread I have read a lot pro et contra speed cameras, red light alerts etc. But, I would rather have heard at least some comments on the drivers behaviour. There are some but few. One of my solutions to avoid speed tickets are: Stay below the speed limit, it's that simple, drive carefully and enjoy your ride.
Have a good day, looking forward to visit your wonderful country in 2009!

you have a GPSr, Change your route so you don't have to pass them, nobody is trying to control your life, actually your trying to control everyone elses.
The cameras just keep you legal, Don't speed, don't run red lights, no problem. The Cameras are transparent to 99 percent of the folks going down that road.

Can you give a citation to the study? The one I am referring to was done by the University of Virginia based on cameras located in Fairfax city and county in 2007.

Yes they are!

http://www.phantomplate.com/photoshield.html

Partly right anyway. I remember seeing here, just don't remember exactly where. It did in fact show that there was an increase in the number of accidents. What he fails to say is that it was an increase in the number of "rear end" collisions and that even with the increase in rear end collisions the decrease in the number of other types of collisions was greater than the increase, resulting in a NET DECREASE in colisions.

Well, I don't speed or run red lights. In fact, I am a safe driver and I don't really have issues with the red light cameras from a law abiding prespective.

My nickname is hi-tech bob because I am always looking for new technology and well ahead of most of my friends. Well, we are surrounded by technology and for every advantage or convenience it brings there are disadvantages or potential abuses. That is all I was refering to. Wait a couple of years and every step of our movement will be trackable or video recorded. Do you really think all of this is being created for our convenience or in the name of progress. I remember when I first got a mobile phone in 1980. Wow, what a convenience but now I can be found anywhere. With my cell phone, computer and gps, people that want to know can follow my every move. I am not paranoid, I just think everyone may be in for a rude awakening when all technology comes together and is used against use. Maybe it never will but maybe it is sooner than we think. I will keep using my devices but I am just watching to see what is next.

Everybody is all exicited about a GPS that gets them from point A to B without error, and so am I, but I am not sure I like a satellite always knowing exactly where I am. Is this progress or Big Brother in the making?

These are just the side effects or our advances in technology. Little by little we are being put under a microscope and as we become used to these devices and depend on them we can't live without them. I love my cell phone and my GPS and the red light cameras may help enforce the law but I don't like where we are headed if these technologies and others to come are used for the wrong reasons. These red light cameras just started. In 5 years every intersection will have a camera on it. Hide and watch and you will see what I mean!

http://www.motorists.org/photoenforce/home/inside-red-light-...

Here's an interesting read from the National Motorists Association

Photo-Radar Van Driver Shot to Death

http://www.myfoxphoenix.com/dpp/news/photo_radar_van_driver_...

Discussed that incident in this thread:
http://www.poi-factory.com/node/22033

CAVS

Boy, that sucks. No local attorneys want to challenge the legality of that one to make a name for themselves?

For a GPS unit, it's passive... it receives signals and calculates. The satellites never know where you are because it's not a broadcasting unit.

Cell phones have GPS units though, and are basically connected at all times. This is why the current court case in which the Obama administration argues that it shouldn't need a court order for cell tower records is so important... theoretically a cell tower can know your location at all times. This is a major backdoor into a surveilance state that's many times worse than merely listening to a phone call.

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2009/04/scholars-reject.htm...

I agree this is scary and many of us have our eyes closed to how GPS technology can and will be used by our government to invade our privacy.
I'd love to get your comments on the following thread:
http://www.poi-factory.com/node/22072

I know many members rightfully ask for citations on studies for or against Red Light Cameras, here is another study for the archives:
http://www.thenewspaper.com/rlc/reports/rlcreport.asp

The study I saw was done by a city or state, and it showed net accident increases year over year after red light cameras were installed. Unfortunately the article is deeply buried in one of the threads here and I have not had luck or the time finding it as of yet.

Ok found the link http://www.poi-factory.com/node/21626

The story shows the year after red light cameras were installed, accidents increased on an overall basis.

Technology is replacing cops,because the cops`s salary are starting to be to high.
Cams are expensive to operate,but are on 24/7 without overtime, and they collect revenue for the city and for the company that manage them.

Big Brother is on 24/7

The cop gives you the ticket right there and the camera gives you the ticket 3 weeks later without explanation.

I wouldn't say "without explanation". The RLC ticket I received from NYC in January had several perfectly clear photos of my car going through the intersection after the light had changed. There was no doubt about what happened.

I don't like them.

Correct me if I am wrong but doesn't most cities lose money on red-light cameras? I'm pretty sure that for the cost to run/maintain them they cannot hand out enough tickets to pay for them.

Yes and no. I have had to step on my brakes hard at times to avoid a summons. I feel that it is a money making nuisance, more than a way to have people stop for red lights. I have received 3 summons before I had my gps and I did not go through a red light. In Staten Island, they get you on the yellow.

probably not if you look into future http://www.poi-factory.com/node/21935
so many people here can't see that it works as old saying: give them little finger they soon ask for whole arm.
but it was sad long time ago, that most of people newer learn anything from history. sad but true.

If all amber/yellow lights were timed the same length (that is throughout the U.S.) before changing to RED, most people would adhere and stop when the light turns Red. After saying that, some drivers will always run Red Lights no matter what. Most people are in too much of a hurry to go nowhere.

Watch out for other drivers and stay alert at all times, because there are too many inconsiderate drivers and pedestrians to stress us out.

Ray

how nice it is when you notice motorists stop right before your signal turns green and you can proceed as you are entitled to How nice!!

Thanks to redlight camera!!

i would rather be pulled over by a police office, just give him respect and don't be a jerk. At least you have the possibility of a warning.

On the other hand the traffic camera has no feelings, you get the ticket 100% of the time.

wow, I've just read the website. Although he was doing his job I'll admit to that but he's a prick cop. What gives him the right to make threats like that. I can make your night difficult. I totally understand why the public is outrage. Because of comments like that!

To Protect and Serve!

Here's a novel approach. The next time you see a yellow light, put your foot on the brake and depress it instead of the accelerator. Then you won't have to jam the brake on when it turns red.

If you are concerned about the vehicle behind you hitting yours, that's his problem, not yours. Maybe after his insurance company pays for a few repairs, he'll get incentive to do the same thing.

I cant vouch for any state but IA but my brother in law was the coordinator when red light and speed cams came to IA. He even ran the mobile unit. So here are a few of my opinions. Firstly, these cams were initially only set to ticket when going 14mph over the speed limit. To me that is totally reasonable, you travel through intersections at more speed than that and your a risky driver to begin with. I'm not saying I dont speed but I would say I'm an aggressive driver but I rarely drive that much over the limit in city anyway. They will eventually cut it to 12 mph so that still is quite lenient. Did you know nowadays even with officers taking radar, that a high% of those turn out false. Our local hospitals even reported less accidents and emergency room visits from auto crashes. I know what your thinking, most oppose of the privacy factor. There will always be them, but personally, I have very rarely loaned out my car to anyone and if I did, I would tell them that they will be responsible for how they drive. We have 6 red light and 7 speed cams here so it doesnt take much driving around to know when you will be approaching cams. I sware, I've spent 4 years in CA and when I come home, people around here are crazier drivers than them. Everyone is in a hurry and talking or texting. For me, if these deter accidents and save some lives, then I'm all for them and if I do happen to get caught by one of them, I'll man-up and realize I was taking a chance by speeding too fast and pay the fine. By the way, these contracting companies dont make as much as some of you think, the city gets the bulk of the fines and use them for other city needs(hopefully!)lol

Either way - I'm going to court to fight... Whether I win or lose - I'm not giving them a free cheque

Will you get hit with court costs if you lose?

But it looks like they're getting the desired effect. Ok, yes, there was an increase in the first year, at one intersection, of 18 crashes (about 20%) but then look at the next year. 35 fewer crashes (greater than 20%) than the year prior to installation and a decrease of 53 crashes (about 30%) from the year after installation.

Coincidence?? Don't think so... sounds like they're working as they should.

My answer would be yes! I want a cop to pull me over. Atleast an officer can see if it was blatenet or not.

These cams are set to detects speeds over 12mph over the limit.(here in IA) Before these cams were even out, the odds of a real officer shooting radar coming up with exact info and speed is lower than you think.Plenty of those were not justified. If you want to travel that much over the limit in a residential zone, you deserve to get caught either by a cop or a cam, cuz ur just placing others at risk.

TWEEEET!
/Throws yellow flag for Undeserved Sarcasm and Glibness penalty.

In your "novel approach" paragraph, you're missing his point. He said he is putting on his brakes when he sees a yellow light, so he doesn't get a ticket. Haven't you been in this situation? Some of these cameras are on intersections where the speed limit is 50 mph. If you possibly can stop, you have to try to. It can be uncomfortable and dangerous to have to brake very hard so you don't go over the line by a foot and trip one of these cameras.

And you should be concerned about a car hitting you from behind because it's going to be as much your problem (maybe more) as it will be the other driver's. Are you serious? Do you think the only thing or main thing that matters is legal liability and insurance coverage in a rear end accident? You think you're off scot free because it's the other driver's fault? You've lived a charmed existence.

Yes they are bad... They are nothing but revenue sources for local governments who only care about the revenue.

Case in point.. in my city... the authorities recently requested to discontinue the service because it was no longer self sustaining. hmmmmm....

If they provide such a saftey benefit, why would you discontinue their service....

Time to look for new sources of revenue...

jb

Atlanta

Right you are, they call for safety but they lower the time the yellow is on... that is dangerous for drivers and pedestrians.
They have to do assessments on all intersections to prove the time lights are on gives plenty of time for drivers and pedestrians to clear the intersection on a timely matter.

Next source will be on the registration of vehicles. I pay $74.00 a year to the province for the plates of my car, and now I have to pay an additional $60.00 to the city which implemented this fee last September.
They catch you all the time.

I was against them at first. When I drove through phoenix az and they had a speed camera every 3 miles (seemed like it anyway) I thought this is a $$$ making deal. Now though i appreciate driving through Phoenix going the speed limit and not getting run over. Of course as soon as i get the dreaded mail with a ticket I am sure my attitude will change.

When red light cameras first came on the scene in Albuquerque, there were more accidents at intersections (13% weekly increase in three months time). This may be due to people paying more attention to factors unrelated to safety.
Jen

Always has been, always will be. They recently installed a new camera near me. They did not shorten the yellow (yet), but now the left turn arrow only let's through about 4 cars, where previously we used to get about 8-10 cars through.

IMHO they (the municipalities) will do whatever they want to do to make more money when they come up short, become dependent on the money, and then keep tweaking to improve revenue.

just my 2 cents.

Tim

It sure beats higher taxes, Stop on red and slow down, then it won't cost ya a penny! Now if people could only get that message, use the POI camera files so you are aware of the cameras, if you get a ticket its your fault.