This morning on the news, there was a piece about drivers getting tickets because they had to proceed through and intersection (red light) to clear out of the way for approaching police and emergency vehicles. Same issue when they were waved through an intersection at construction sites. The tickets were not dismissed when contested. This (and the examples cited in the article here) is why people hate these devices.
-- "Primum Non Nocere" 2595LMT Clear Channel and Navteq Traffic
This morning on the news, there was a piece about drivers getting tickets because they had to proceed through and intersection (red light) to clear out of the way for approaching police and emergency vehicles. Same issue when they were waved through an intersection at construction sites. The tickets were not dismissed when contested. This (and the examples cited in the article here) is why people hate these devices.
williston's example seems to be flat out outrageous if true. I can not imagine why these tickets were not dismissed. I hope williston will report if this is reversed.
It will be interesting to see what various members of poi-factory have to say about the NBCNEWS article. Like williston said, there are lots of people who hate these devices. But, the question is why do they hate them.
The article gives lots of examples of what causes people to oppose camera - privacy, can't face your accuser, unconstitutionality, etc. It gives example of situations where the red/yellow lights have problems. It brings up strawmen like the fact that there are bad apples working for the Camera companies who resort to bribery and the like, or that Camera manufacturers spend money lobbying for their company (see presidential elections, agriculture, defense contractors, etc for other examples of lobbying).
However, a couple of paragraphs give some balance to the article:
Quote:
What does science say?
Red light violations were associated with some 700 deaths and nearly 90,000 injuries in 2009, according to a study based on data reported to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Fatalities and injuries have decreased in recent years, the study shows.
Researchers, however, are divided on how much red light cameras increase safety.
In 2011, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, a nonprofit research group funded by the insurance industry, released a study that found red light cameras decreased fatal accidents by an estimated 24 percent in large cities that use them.
But a 2005 Federal Highway Administration study painted a more nuanced picture. Data from seven jurisdictions showed a decrease in front-into-side crashes at intersections with cameras. But it also showed an increase in rear-end crashes. The researchers said that apparently was the result of drivers hitting the brakes to avoid a ticket. Overall, however, the research showed the cameras saved money by both decreasing the most serious accidents, and generating revenue.
I will try and find the station that aired this in my local area. Unfortunately, I was only getting bits and pieces of it from the other room, but when I asked my son who also watched about the part where people lost when they contested, he said "you heard it right".
I don't have a problem with speed or red light cameras. I live in MA and it's out of control here. You MUST LOOK when a light turns green before pulling out because it's not unusual to see 3-4 cars blow through the red after it changes.
What I do have a problem with is the city, officials, etc etc tilting the playing field in their favor by tweeking the timers, and telling you to get lost when the cameras are clearly wrong. When they do this they are telling all of us that they don't care about making things safer; They only care about making MONEY off us UNFAIRLY!
-- "Primum Non Nocere" 2595LMT Clear Channel and Navteq Traffic
The problem with these sites is that they misrepresent (sometimes outright lie) the problems that exist with red light and speed cameras. If they were honest about the fact that cameras have been found to have safety benefits, then they might be able to get quick action on complaints that some municipalities do not have reasoned reviews (like a officer might have done on the scene) such as perhaps a half second grace period into the red or allowing rolling reds if done in a prudent manner when not pedestrians, bicyclist of cars were around. If municipalities gave such grace then it would be clear that those ticketed were violating the law.
It is clear to me that revenue is generated. I find it comforting that additional revenue is generated by those who break the law as opposed to everyone as might be the case if the sales tax was increased to obtain comparable revenue.
There have been several attempts to end RLC in Iowa. Chief of Police in Davenport does not like a bill in the legislature that would direct all proceeds to the state DOT. Unfair says he. Davenport would continue to pay the people to run the program without the proceeds from the program.
Presently all the revenue goes to traffic enforcement and police overtime.
A police officer views the tickets. The fact that the more tickets he approves mean more OT for his co-workers does not seem to be a conflict of interest.
There have been several attempts to end RLC in Iowa. Chief of Police in Davenport does not like a bill in the legislature that would direct all proceeds to the state DOT. Unfair says he. Davenport would continue to pay the people to run the program without the proceeds from the program.
Presently all the revenue goes to traffic enforcement and police overtime.
A police officer views the tickets. The fact that the more tickets he approves mean more OT for his co-workers does not seem to be a conflict of interest.
I love this proposed law in IA. to let the money go to the state. Hopefully this will stop Dubuque from any more thought about them.
Interestingly Dubuque put cameras in with some kind of grant at the corner of Pennsylvania and JFK Rd. They ran them far a while, never gave tickets, then said forget it and turned them off. They are still on the poles. This was a lot of years ago.
-- NUVI 660, Late 2012 iMac, Macbook 2.1 Fall 2008, iPhone6
, Nuvi 3790, iPad2
Just watched a segment on the news about red light cameras and how the city of Chicago collected 69 million last year from RLC's. If the city is collecting that much money they should be required to spend it to rehabilitate the intersections and make them safer so they can remove the cameras. This would increase public safety and generate construction jobs. http://www.nbcchicago.com/investigations/chicago-red-light-c...
This morning on the news,
This morning on the news, there was a piece about drivers getting tickets because they had to proceed through and intersection (red light) to clear out of the way for approaching police and emergency vehicles. Same issue when they were waved through an intersection at construction sites. The tickets were not dismissed when contested. This (and the examples cited in the article here) is why people hate these devices.
"Primum Non Nocere" 2595LMT Clear Channel and Navteq Traffic
What does the science say?
This morning on the news, there was a piece about drivers getting tickets because they had to proceed through and intersection (red light) to clear out of the way for approaching police and emergency vehicles. Same issue when they were waved through an intersection at construction sites. The tickets were not dismissed when contested. This (and the examples cited in the article here) is why people hate these devices.
williston's example seems to be flat out outrageous if true. I can not imagine why these tickets were not dismissed. I hope williston will report if this is reversed.
It will be interesting to see what various members of poi-factory have to say about the NBCNEWS article. Like williston said, there are lots of people who hate these devices. But, the question is why do they hate them.
The article gives lots of examples of what causes people to oppose camera - privacy, can't face your accuser, unconstitutionality, etc. It gives example of situations where the red/yellow lights have problems. It brings up strawmen like the fact that there are bad apples working for the Camera companies who resort to bribery and the like, or that Camera manufacturers spend money lobbying for their company (see presidential elections, agriculture, defense contractors, etc for other examples of lobbying).
However, a couple of paragraphs give some balance to the article:
What does science say?
Red light violations were associated with some 700 deaths and nearly 90,000 injuries in 2009, according to a study based on data reported to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Fatalities and injuries have decreased in recent years, the study shows.
Researchers, however, are divided on how much red light cameras increase safety.
In 2011, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, a nonprofit research group funded by the insurance industry, released a study that found red light cameras decreased fatal accidents by an estimated 24 percent in large cities that use them.
But a 2005 Federal Highway Administration study painted a more nuanced picture. Data from seven jurisdictions showed a decrease in front-into-side crashes at intersections with cameras. But it also showed an increase in rear-end crashes. The researchers said that apparently was the result of drivers hitting the brakes to avoid a ticket. Overall, however, the research showed the cameras saved money by both decreasing the most serious accidents, and generating revenue.
I will try and find the
I will try and find the station that aired this in my local area. Unfortunately, I was only getting bits and pieces of it from the other room, but when I asked my son who also watched about the part where people lost when they contested, he said "you heard it right".
I don't have a problem with speed or red light cameras. I live in MA and it's out of control here. You MUST LOOK when a light turns green before pulling out because it's not unusual to see 3-4 cars blow through the red after it changes.
What I do have a problem with is the city, officials, etc etc tilting the playing field in their favor by tweeking the timers, and telling you to get lost when the cameras are clearly wrong. When they do this they are telling all of us that they don't care about making things safer; They only care about making MONEY off us UNFAIRLY!
"Primum Non Nocere" 2595LMT Clear Channel and Navteq Traffic
No surprise, that! What
No surprise, that!
What needs to happen is a national interest group is needed that will command attention from the public, & generate fear in politicians.
Fred
Several exist
No surprise, that!
What needs to happen is a national interest group is needed that will command attention from the public, & generate fear in politicians.
Fred
There are several that already exist
www.thenewspaper.com
www.motorists.org
www.banthecams.org
to name the most vocal
The problem with these sites is that they misrepresent (sometimes outright lie) the problems that exist with red light and speed cameras. If they were honest about the fact that cameras have been found to have safety benefits, then they might be able to get quick action on complaints that some municipalities do not have reasoned reviews (like a officer might have done on the scene) such as perhaps a half second grace period into the red or allowing rolling reds if done in a prudent manner when not pedestrians, bicyclist of cars were around. If municipalities gave such grace then it would be clear that those ticketed were violating the law.
It is clear to me that revenue is generated. I find it comforting that additional revenue is generated by those who break the law as opposed to everyone as might be the case if the sales tax was increased to obtain comparable revenue.
In Iowa
There have been several attempts to end RLC in Iowa. Chief of Police in Davenport does not like a bill in the legislature that would direct all proceeds to the state DOT. Unfair says he. Davenport would continue to pay the people to run the program without the proceeds from the program.
Presently all the revenue goes to traffic enforcement and police overtime.
A police officer views the tickets. The fact that the more tickets he approves mean more OT for his co-workers does not seem to be a conflict of interest.
1490LMT 1450LMT 295w
In Indiana
There was someone that kept shooting the camera. The city finally stopped replacing it. RED DAWN MOFO's!!! LOL
Iowa law
There have been several attempts to end RLC in Iowa. Chief of Police in Davenport does not like a bill in the legislature that would direct all proceeds to the state DOT. Unfair says he. Davenport would continue to pay the people to run the program without the proceeds from the program.
Presently all the revenue goes to traffic enforcement and police overtime.
A police officer views the tickets. The fact that the more tickets he approves mean more OT for his co-workers does not seem to be a conflict of interest.
I love this proposed law in IA. to let the money go to the state. Hopefully this will stop Dubuque from any more thought about them.
Interestingly Dubuque put cameras in with some kind of grant at the corner of Pennsylvania and JFK Rd. They ran them far a while, never gave tickets, then said forget it and turned them off. They are still on the poles. This was a lot of years ago.
NUVI 660, Late 2012 iMac, Macbook 2.1 Fall 2008, iPhone6 , Nuvi 3790, iPad2
On the news tonight
Just watched a segment on the news about red light cameras and how the city of Chicago collected 69 million last year from RLC's. If the city is collecting that much money they should be required to spend it to rehabilitate the intersections and make them safer so they can remove the cameras. This would increase public safety and generate construction jobs.
http://www.nbcchicago.com/investigations/chicago-red-light-c...