a scenario where mandatory RLC and speed cameras would be beneficial

Woo we'll all be driving google cars where:

We won't do the driving

Won't be making the decisions on the route

The cars will behave rationally because there wont be any emotion involved.

...,.

Soon the nanny state will be here and all these issues will go away.

The OP seems to have a lot of stories of how his daily life is interacting with the cameras and traffic in general.

As much as I am not a fan of cameras, the alarming trend of motorists is a joke on how many go through a red light or very stale yellows.Where i live or any where else for that matter people don't even care if there light is red they just keep going through till the green light people force them to stop. In Ontario as fer as i know the timing of red, yellow ,green is set and is controlled by the ministry of Transport. So revenue is not on the top of the list.There is not many red light cameras but i think there is a lot of people that need to get ticketed for running red's.Way to many accidents at intersections. The main concern of more cameras is the towns or cities must budget for them on the recommendations of the Police and councils for the money to do it,and traffic studies,resulting in a long wait or not at all.

I just realized that this never really happened, I was playing Grand Theft Auto 5 with the rlc mod. Yes, that was a joke.

It just seems that there are those who need to get out from behind that computer more often.

That would be a shame, for those of us who enjoy driving (the 100 mph should be only on the track).

One thing that illustrates what you say is that manual transmissions are today 7% of cars. Tractor trailers now come in automatic to accommodate the new wave of 20 y.o. drivers.

Name all the AWD BMW cars that come in a manual. That's right, 0.

Did a search for a 6-spd manual Mazda (Mazda3 5-dr s grand touring), within a 250 mile radius of NYC--there were a total of 4.

You are onto something with the driving, but I don't think that has anything to do with enforcement.

I concur & just ignore

Just like Amazons Drones, they will crash and burn and maybe kill more people then the ones with real humans in control. Electronics crash, get jammed and just plain go nutty too!

ummmmmmmmmmmmm

I heard that engineering students are working on tubes by which people can travel 700 mph and go from Phila. to NYC in minutes.

What happens if the tube jams? And if you've ever taken a train out of NY Penn, people are packed up against one another, fighting to get onto the train.

imho the professor should say, let's all take a step back and work on real stuff, we all don't need to be the next facebook.

Think about it, my 2 y.o. is learning to skate. It's not easy. His fine motor skills are not developed yet. Is there some sort of whiz bang technology that can speed this process up? imho, short of giving up and playing NHL 2018 in 1080p on a 60" screen instead of the real thing, not really...

Actually they won't have any wrecks.. It will be those same Microsoft cars that require a reboot as service is applied while in motion!

Accurate Ahhh... NO

There's a RLC at a intersection in my area that I can trip the camera by making a "quick" stop just before passing over the white lane line (at which point I sit stopped for a manual count of 6 seconds before then making my "legal" right hand turn).

I'm able to do this on a constant basis... having the RLC flash me as though I just ran the red. After having the video reviewed of the situation I haven't received a single ticket... which proves to me that the accuracy of said RLC is quite questionable.

Nuvi1300WTGPS

Your expectation of "accurate" is based on your expectation and not as to how the camera functions. If the light is red, the camera will be armed and ready to capture an image when a vehicle crosses the measurement point which is usually the stop line. Did the camera go off before you crossed the line or after? If after, it was accurate. The light was red, so therefore the conditions were right for documenting an apparent violation. Because you were stopped and then proceeded to turn right makes no difference as to when the camera would flash, the video would show no violation occurred. Your expectation is the camera would have the intelligence to determine you were making a right on red and not blowing through the light. Sorry, the computers in those cameras don't have DWIM (Do What I Mean) settings or instructions.

Where FedEx trucks do that all day, and all night. They wouldn't be doing the right on red if the legal right on red were generating tickets.

Yet another scenario, I am the 2nd car yesterday waiting to make a left on green arrow. The car in front of me, not sure why, decides to blow the left turn? IT was as if the light were taking too long in her mind, that's all I can think of. And the flash went off.

There I am, plain as day, in yet another photo/video. I cannot be ticketed, because there is no way a video can be created showing that I crossed the line on red, and proceeded through the intersection. If there is such a video, then it's doctored, and I would not be the only person who complains.

It's interesting that there are a couple of factors here. There are still those who don't believe that RLCs work as designed. For them, I think there isn't much hope, I think they enjoy playing devil's advocate.

The 2nd scenario is the big brother/Constitutional rights violated position. It's the latter where I think people truly believe there is something wrong. I don't think they have much idea on what happened in 1787.

I get what you're saying and agree. If a yellow has been shortened to < 1 sec per 10 mph of the speed limit, a human has done that. The RLC is still performing as designed.

Going back to the original topic, there are many positive effects when RLCs and speed cameras are deployed.

Even though the credit union films me in 1080p and soon to be ultra HD, they have never accused me of robbing them. There is no way the technology would be able to do that.

The reference to 1787, I think, is meant to say that the United States would be so much better off if we just were able to follow the ideas of the Framers of the Constitution. Why? Well, such people think that our "Founding Father" had it exactly right and subsequent events have eroded our "rights"

Every now and then, I feel compelled to point out that our "Founding Fathers" did not have it totally right to start with.

When people invoke the “Founding Fathers” or the “framers of the constitution”, one has to ask exactly what they mean. Were these people so wise that what they instituted should never be altered?

Consider this:

The United States started out as a country that was run by white, male, property owners.

In 1865, the 13th Amendment to the Constitution abolished slavery.

In 1868, the 14th Amendment to the Constitution grants citizenship to blacks.

In 1868, the 15th Amendment to the Constitution gives black men the right to vote.

In 1920, the 19th Amendment to the Constitution gives women the right to vote.

Then consider this:
In 1954, the Supreme Court declares school segregation unconstitutional

In 1965, the Supreme Court strikes down laws banning contraception

In 1971, the Supreme Court bans sex discrimination in hiring

Looking over the above, one can ask of those Founding Fathers “What were they thinking?”.

Maybe I didn't explain clearly enough, so here goes...

There is a intersection where I live that I'm able to trip the camera, allowing it to flash and take a photo of my vehicle supposedly passing over the measurement point... and thus faking said camera into thinking I just ran the red light.

I'm able to do this by driving up to the measurement point at such a speed that the sensor/trip/camera flash is activated... yet, I'm able to STOP behind the white painted lane line (?), at which point my vehicle is stopped for a number of seconds (still within the legal "has not crossed over and into the your vehicle shouldn't be here area").

At this point it wouldn't have mattered if I had turned right... or if I had gone straight ahead (after having waited for the light to turn green), the camera had flashed taking a picture of my vehicle running the red... even though in reality I hadn't.

Nuvi1300WTGPS

Many cameras measure speed as well as where you are in relationship to the stop line. By your own admission "driving up to the measurement point at such a speed" you have triggered a speed measurement. Your action is reminiscent of on of your other complaints about enforcement cameras, that of drivers slamming on their brakes when the light turns yellow causing rear-end accidents. It appears as if you are one of those drivers that "pushes the envelope" in attempting to cut as fine a line as possible. Glad you are not near me.

They're good enough, they're smart enough, and doggone it, I like them!

/s

I've been caught. I didn't think I needed that. It wasn't intentional. BUT very clearly the first frame shows my front wheels were behind the white line AND the light was red - and the sequence showed me proceeding thru the intersection with the light red.
SO, the logic that one is caught but in actuality has not gone thru the light is false. You must be shown to be behind the line with the light red and proceeding thru on a red light. If your front wheels are over the line in the first frame then proceeding thru the intersection on red is not a violation.

IF it is any other way then that would be good reason to question and fight red light cameras. I believe there are poorly managed lights that may be falsely accusing, but the pictures are worth 1000 words and all the proof you need to dispute it.

You are not in violation, it will cost you a day or more to prove your innocence! So pay $300+ and let it go as it does not involve points or waste a day or more fighting it and see a grumpy arrogant judge and be treated like dirt!!

It will cost you a day of work to fight any traffic ticket so your premise is false in that this is a special case.