Improving safety without cameras

 

Here is an article about improving safety without the use of cameras. Hopefully, it can be deployed to replace cameras and eliminate the money grabbing.

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/52/5285.asp

it is or it isn't

There are places that are blanketed, like NYC, MD, DC, many parts of CA, TX, Québec. Plenty of places seem to have won the argument against, NJ, Boston, etc. To be honest, it's naive to think that without enforcement, society is completely civilized. Go to a 9 y.o.'s soccer tournament and see how parents behave.

We don't need to overthink things. If the legislation does not want cameras, so be it. If they do, so be it. The money grab argument is weak.

My brother and sis in-law got a summons in the City of Boston for illegal parking (commercial vehicles only/tow zone), they did not read the signs for the parking regulations. My brother sent it in stating he did not understand the sign--imho the pic he texted me was not ambiguous. He got a response that although they believe the fine is valid, they are waiving the fine.

This is the City of Boston. If they were all about revenue, why would they waive a valid fine?

This money grab term is an excuse and a crutch, we should stop using that term and move on. My .02

This is the only reason ...

johnnatash4 wrote:

There are places that are blanketed, like NYC, MD, DC, many parts of CA, TX, Québec. Plenty of places seem to have won the argument against, NJ, Boston, etc. To be honest, it's naive to think that without enforcement, society is completely civilized. Go to a 9 y.o.'s soccer tournament and see how parents behave.

We don't need to overthink things. If the legislation does not want cameras, so be it. If they do, so be it. The money grab argument is weak.

My brother and sis in-law got a summons in the City of Boston for illegal parking (commercial vehicles only/tow zone), they did not read the signs for the parking regulations. My brother sent it in stating he did not understand the sign--imho the pic he texted me was not ambiguous. He got a response that although they believe the fine is valid, they are waiving the fine.

This is the City of Boston. If they were all about revenue, why would they waive a valid fine?

This money grab term is an excuse and a crutch, we should stop using that term and move on. My .02

Oh boy! ...No need to look any further as to why RLC still exists!

RLC's USED TO BE a valid deterrent ... until the politicians got a hold of it!

Read the many threads here and notice how politicos succeeded in making this topic EMOTIONAL. Reason not required!

Corruption breeds corruption!

--
If the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem quickly resembles a nail. (Maslow's Hammer)

Money grab ???

I'll bet you that the people who are constantly screaming that this or that is "Money grabbing" are the same people who do rolling stops, don't stop on yellow traffic lights but rather hammer the accelerator, don't read the posted signs etc etc. I could go on and on.

--
Nuvi 2797LMT, DriveSmart 50 LMT-HD, Using Windows 10. DashCam A108C with GPS.

Emotions indeed.

Melaqueman wrote:

I'll bet you that the people who are constantly screaming that this or that is "Money grabbing" are the same people who do rolling stops, don't stop on yellow traffic lights but rather hammer the accelerator, don't read the posted signs etc etc. I could go on and on.

Perfect timing .... Thanks.

--
If the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem quickly resembles a nail. (Maslow's Hammer)

I agree

Melaqueman wrote:

I'll bet you that the people who are constantly screaming that this or that is "Money grabbing" are the same people who do rolling stops, don't stop on yellow traffic lights but rather hammer the accelerator, don't read the posted signs etc etc. I could go on and on.

I admit, even as recently as 5 years ago, I probably felt uncomfortable if I could not pass through a rlc on a full green. I know how it's supposed to work--ms after it turns red, it arms, your car would have had to have cleared the line, etc. But it's a weekly occurrence that the light changes to yellow while I am proceeding under the signal, etc. No tickets. I can't stop on green, we all know that, one proceeds on green. The system/technology works, plain and simple. It is not mysterious as to when to proceed, or when to stop. Just as it is not when 9 y.o. kids play soccer, they know when they are offside or on.

Again, if the fine is still $40 in Maryland, is that a money grab? I think not. If Boston waives the fine when my brother did not properly read a sign, is that a money grab? No. I suppose paying the ref for his time to officiate 9 y.o.'s playing soccer, that's a money grab too? lol

And what you describe about hammering the accelerator on yellow, that is clearly different than proceeding on green, to have the light change to yellow as you are almost under it. Again, it's not rocket science, and it's 100% predictable. We have RLCs where I live and commute, I have never gotten a ticket. So, I'm ok either way. Without the cams, there will be a lot more hit and run and accidents, but it's not really up to me. I can only voice my opinion that they are beneficial.

Where I live, passing a school bus on red, is an automatic suspension upon conviction, and 5 points. right now, the technology is cost prohibitive and also requires legislation. I suppose if the price of the technology dropped, and school bus arms were equipped with cams that busted those who pass them on red, that's a money grab too? Nah, it isn't. Losing one's license is pretty inconvenient--today, it can't really be enforced (amazing in 2017). Behavior changes with the cams.

Cross Bar Cameras

johnnatash4 wrote:

Where I live, passing a school bus on red, is an automatic suspension upon conviction, and 5 points. right now, the technology is cost prohibitive and also requires legislation. I suppose if the price of the technology dropped, and school bus arms were equipped with cams that busted those who pass them on red, that's a money grab too? Nah, it isn't. Losing one's license is pretty inconvenient--today, it can't really be enforced (amazing in 2017). Behavior changes with the cams.

I don't know why you think this is so expensive. The county I used to work in has had the technology for at least 8 years, and many more localities are adding it to new buses. It's not rocket science.

--
Frank DriveSmart55 37.322760, -79.511267

But when we, Tucson & Pima County, had RLC's

the Fine was in the multi hundreds dollars and the law was changed to make it easier for them to get, harder for you to defend. Plus it was a Foreign Country getting its share of the money, Tucson spends big bucks telling people to buy local, "keep the money in Community", lol!!!

Correction !!!!!

phranc wrote:
johnnatash4 wrote:

Where I live, passing a school bus on red, is an automatic suspension upon conviction, and 5 points. right now, the technology is cost prohibitive and also requires legislation. I suppose if the price of the technology dropped, and school bus arms were equipped with cams that busted those who pass them on red, that's a money grab too? Nah, it isn't. Losing one's license is pretty inconvenient--today, it can't really be enforced (amazing in 2017). Behavior changes with the cams.

Correction, that is NOT my writing !!!!!!!

--
Nuvi 2797LMT, DriveSmart 50 LMT-HD, Using Windows 10. DashCam A108C with GPS.

please quote members' posts accurately!

When quoting other members' posts, please do it accurately. I would not appreciate someone else's words being put into my mouth!

After you make the post, read it. If it isn't correct, edit the post.

dobs108

My Bad

Melaqueman wrote:
johnnatash4 wrote:

Where I live, passing a school bus on red, is an automatic suspension upon conviction, and 5 points. right now, the technology is cost prohibitive and also requires legislation. I suppose if the price of the technology dropped, and school bus arms were equipped with cams that busted those who pass them on red, that's a money grab too? Nah, it isn't. Losing one's license is pretty inconvenient--today, it can't really be enforced (amazing in 2017). Behavior changes with the cams.

Correction, that is NOT my writing !!!!!!!

I'm sorry, I screwed it up. When i saw it, it had been replied to and couldn't edit it.

--
Frank DriveSmart55 37.322760, -79.511267

.

dobs108 wrote:

When quoting other members' posts, please do it accurately. I would not appreciate someone else's words being put into my mouth!

After you make the post, read it. If it isn't correct, edit the post.

dobs108

Just to add to this ... always scroll the quoted material and post your text AFTER the last instance of the bracketed word quote.

[/ QUOTE ] (without the spaces)

--
. 2 Garmin DriveSmart 61 LMT-S, Nuvi 2689, 2 Nuvi 2460, Zumo 550, Zumo 450, Uniden R3 radar detector with GPS built in, includes RLC info. Uconnect 430N Garmin based, built into my Jeep. .

Thanks phranc

phranc wrote:

I'm sorry, I screwed it up. When i saw it, it had been replied to and couldn't edit it.

Thanks. That's right - after someone replies, it can't be edited.

dobs108 smile

Better

idea than thievery that is going on with the red light cameras.

--
Garmin Nuvi 765T, Garmin Drive 60LM

Interesting

Interesting technology. However inexpensive, I personally would like law violators to pay for it rather than my tax dollars.

yeah

not me either stating "I don't know why you think this is so expensive..."

At any rate, even rlcs don't solve a lot of problems, like people not waiting their turn and barging in. Example, Grays Ferry and 34th st. Rather than wait their turn, rlc or not, people shoot up the middle and then cut across 1-2 lanes of traffic. Commercial tow trucks simply drive onto the other side of the double yellow when possible--they usually cannot do it as there is oncoming traffic.

I'm ok with having neither enforcement nor deterrents, as long as that's what the majority wants. Like in Boston. Opposite is DC.

this whole thread should be deleted

dobs108 wrote:

When quoting other members' posts, please do it accurately. I would not appreciate someone else's words being put into my mouth!

After you make the post, read it. If it isn't correct, edit the post.

dobs108

I didn't say this either, "Correction, that is NOT my writing !!!!!!!" and it was after you posted to correct....this is like Abbott and Costello.

Corrections

I think I fixed all of the quoting.

~Angela

here's an example

where there's no cost to the school district.

http://wtvr.com/2017/04/19/richmond-set-to-slap-fees-on-driv...

OK, I think we already often have issues with govt. contracts being in favor of an outside vendor, so imho there should be no third party with their hand in the pot. Meaning, just because we can equip for no cost, we don't worry about the terms and let a third party in. this feeds the money grab issue.

I say when the cost reaches a point where school districts can handle on their own, then every bus should have them. Short of a driver forgetting to take off their reds and waving motorists to pass them (I have witnessed this action in W Phila), there's really no excuse to pass a school bus....