has anyone ever conducted their own research under the grace period

Running the light is asking to get in an accident. I still remember one of the first times--almost 30 years ago-- that I drove my mom's brand new car alone with a relatively fresh driver's license. The car next to me got t-boned by someone smoking a red light. The light had just turned and the guy in the lane to the left of me was a little faster taking off.

The other methods don't really prove anything. Consider the false negative case where they "got you" but did not bother wasting the stamp. Or, they recalibrate the software or camera filters. Possibly, they later use the video stream to get the tag number instead of the overexposed "spray on flash juice" still photo.

Consider a false positive case: Over by my house, there is a camera that is overly sensitive that fires on someone coming into the stop a little hot. That doesn't mean that they will send a ticket later on because the flash went off.

Really? We're supposed to test these to make sure that work as described?

Please try this th a theory and leg us know how it works out.. Inquiring minds wanna know!

I figured you were dying disprove only one physical object can occupy the same physical space simultaneously.

Sounds like a very dangerous research project.

Actually, the "new" way of doing things is to not test for something that is infinitesimal. For example, a couple weeks ago women no longer need to have breast screenings blah blah blah. Doctors were dumbfounded how/why this changed. INSURANCE.

So logically it's not necessary to test these new lights, when there is a 99.999% likelihood that they absolutely perform as designed. Good point. On this forum, there has never been one case of someone showing that they were wrongfully ticketed. And to the forum's integrity, there have been several cases where folks stated they were rightfully ticketed.

I was, sort of. It was years ago before all the hooplah. NYC has had a few cameras around for over a dozen years. This was prior to 2002 when I lived in my prior residence. I received notification that I was tagged at a location in Westchester where I had never been. Not on the day of the summons nor any other. I called the number, and while speaking with the representative (you could do that in those days), telling her that I don't own a Ford/Mercury station wagon, was when I noticed the plate was one digit away from mine. She noticed it as well, and it went away. OK, so I didn't really get a ticket I didn't deserve, but they tried.

human error though in the 35mm film days, not technology failure. imho, today, with video, there are no ifs, ands, or buts. It would be like saying we can't tell who won the Kentucky Derby based on the video.

I like to think back to the Tampa violation my buddy got. The car in front of him ran the light, no flash, he ran the light, flash. The video was HD, and clearly supported the notion that the system arms a split second after red, allowing in some circumstances that the first car gets a free pass.

It was not as likely to be a timing issue for arming the flash as it could depend on where the radar/laser is aimed. The aiming point could have determined the other vehicle was in the intersection when the light changed so therefore didn't flash. The only way to prove or disprove would be to examine any video.

He didn't suggest running through the intersection on a red light. He's suggesting stopping (or creeping up) a couple of feet over the stop line, which should trigger the camera but not cause an accident as long as no pedestrians are around. And running the yellow, which is legal and also will not cause an accident.

And no I've never done this, even when I lived in an area (Chicago) which used them, which, happily, I no longer do.

no GPS.

I am 100% certain, that I did not run any red lights. So it is absolutely impossible for me to get a red light ticket.

I am NOT 100% certain that I did not speed. I just drove normally.

Let us see if in 30 days, whether or not I got a speeding ticket. There is no limit to that, it could be $50 times 27. We shall see.

Imagine, the law limits the number to 140, in a city as large as New York. Once again, either it's good, or it's not. There should be no limit to safety.

imho giving a 10 mph leeway is generous, so if I had to bet, I will not be getting any ticket. The point is something needs to be done about people that break the law, day in, day out. And it should be reasonable. 10 mph over is reasonable.

There is an intersection that I approach daily that says, "NO TURNS." Every day, people turn there. Because it is faster to make the illegal turn at the corner, than to use the diverter, which has two traffic lights (a subsequent left, then right, signal).

http://abc7ny.com/traffic/nyc-speed-cameras-in-place-as-scho...

..my luck, some semi would plow over top of me and I would be bug food.

Nope, I always stop.

Florida uses cameras to bill for tolls on some of their roads.
Same type that checks plates at red lights.
I was billed for a toll on a road I was never on. (I was not even in the state at that time)
If you have a SunPass (same as E-Zpass) you can check the pictures of the toll.
When I checked, it looked like my plate but not on my car (I had a Chevy and the car was a Lincoln) But when I enlarged the picture it turned out not to be my plate. It was the way the camera read it.
When I called and explained to them what happened and the enlarged the picture, they had to agree. The moral in "always check the picture yourself"

The camera will never lie. There is an opportunity for error by software, or humans. But one can always go back to the source, which cannot lie.

I think a lot of people have a hard time grasping the notion that you can no longer lie and say, but it was yellow. No, it was not. Your vehicle clearly went over the stop line on RED, and the video supports it.

My buddy who forwarded me the link to his Tampa violation laughed that he was so busted. And he's a normal person, he said do the crime, pay the fine. Didn't try to weasel out of it.

we traded in our 2002 kia for a 2015 kia filled out all the forms and title transfers and about 4 months later got a ticket for $150 for speeding in a school zone . after looking at the picture the only thing they got right was it was a kia but it was the wrong model wrong color and looking at the plate it was the wrong number the plat holder on the car had a design on it that made a 1 look like a 7 . I called the license office and the girl that answered said there was nothing she could do so I asked for her name and told her that when I went to court I would mention her name as no help at all, low and behold all of a sudden she fixed it all!! I wonder how many people she screwed by not correcting a mistake made by the department she works for !

This is why RLC and speed cameras are questionably unconstitutional. You have a right to confront your accuser. Your accuser is the camera and by proxy some unnamed officer/employee in some room someplace who views it. The average person in a traffic court situation does not have the resources to identify, subpoena and confront said person and evidence against them.

Many states have made these "infractions" civil instead of criminal to get around this issue, no impact on your drivers license, just a monetary fine proving, at least in my mind, that these cameras are truly unconstitutional and nothing more than a money grab.

Not many. Again, the technology correctly identified a Kia that sped through a school zone. The fact that you received a summons for a vehicle you did not own/operate shows that the review process failed. And, you rightfully were not held responsible. The video supported the fact of the matter.

And wow, your Kia lasted a pretty long time. I still have my 1998 Nissan as a DD. Cool? Maybe not. But it's nice to have no car payment and distribute the miles over 3 cars in our household.

are used at banks, airports, privately held companies, etc. Cameras do not lie, they have no feelings and simply record what transpired.

Money grab, well, when NYC is $50 for speeding, and Calif. is $480, maybe a case can be made for the latter. But not at all for the former. If the summonses were $0.99, they would be ineffective. $50 and a 10 mph leeway, wth else does anybody want. $40 and 12 mph in MD (at least 2 yrs. ago), c'mon now.