What do you guys think about red light cameras?

to oppose is the guy/company that owns the cameras. They refuse to deny they are, so makes it appear that they are.

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Murrieta_Ban_on_Red-Light_Enforcement_Cameras_(November_2012)
Although Flynn is the plaintiff, he acknowledged to local reporters that he is not paying the legal fees for the lawsuit. Charles Bell, Jr., is the attorney who filed the lawsuit. He has declined to say who is paying him. Some residents in Murrieta believe that American Traffic Solutions is paying the legal fees. They are the company that maintains the four red-light cameras in Murrieta. They declined to say whether they are paying the legal fees.

I'm thinking of trying to get something similar on our local ballots if the Murietta and Newport Beach ones pass.

because preventing peoplefrom running red lights is such a massive waste of time and money.

Some time ago I was in the emergency room with a lung problem and was where I could hear the ER crew talking to the EMTs in a first response team. The latter was describing the injuries sustained by a mototcycle rider in a collision with a car; his helmet was split in half and air had beed moving in and out through his skull fractures with each breath, but he was no longer breathing. They wanted to pronounce him dead and the doctors said to do so.

The next day I read the paper. The motorcycle was going through an intersection on green and a car ran the red light at high speed because he was late for work and hit the guy on the motorcycle. Killed him.

But taking steps to prevent people from running red lights is just stupid and unncessary.

Cities install them, and then a while later, they stop using them because it gets too expensive to collect and the public gets REALLY annoyed.

than the towns/cities do. FUCK THEM.

Yes, we have these fucking things here in Maryland.

First, they send you a ticket in the mail, even if you weren't the driver. The burden of proof is then on the defendant, which is unconstitutional. According to our judicial system, the burden of proof is on the state. I'm surprised no one has challenged this.

Second, they set up a system in which private companies profit from the penalization of citizens. These companies install the cameras for nothing. They just sign a contract with the local municipality that sets up the sharing percentages of all fines collected. On the surface, that sounds fine, but they go too far. First, lest a local judge start dismissing a lot of disputed tickets, the contracts usually state that if the monthly take falls below a certain level, the local government has to pay the company for the shortcomings. Second, studies have been done that shows the duration of the yellow light decreases significantly after installation of the cameras.

is truly breathtaking. Apparently, the local consensus means that you have five to eight seconds after the light turns red to go through.

I only wish we had red light cameras here.

I've lived in several cities, and in various parts of the country, and while overall the drivers here are okay most of the time, the whole red-light thing is really scary.

in fact, they appear to cause a number of rear-end collisions.

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111025/10301416503/another-report-shows-redlight-cameras-increasing-accidents.shtml

to improve or promote safe driving.

And the rear-end collisions would be caused by the cars who are hoping to go through the red light, even later than the car ahead. So the first car stops, as it's supposed to. Gosh. What a strange thing to do.

Let's see, I was taught that you aren't even supposed to enter the intersection once the light turns yellow. Be prepared to stop. In fact, stopping at the yellow light is actually the correct thing to do. No one in this city seems to have any notion that that's what they should do.

So maybe the cameras aren't the correct thing. Maybe just stationing cops who will then pull over and ticket the red-light runners would be sufficient.

...floor it, it's about to turn red!

what a strange thing to do, indeed. you can read the studies, or you can continue to hold strong to your bias. it's completely up to you.

means to come to a stop?

I'm seeing a lot of implicit defense of running red lights. And the car in back of me is supposed to likewise be paying attention to the color changes, and since all cars are equipped with brake lights, should notice when those come on.

I don't slam on my brakes, mainly because I'm generally not speeding as I approach a light. Not speeding. There's another charmingly old-fashioned concept apparently.

your accusations of pro-red light runners smacks of republicans framing of the pro-choice debate as pro-abortion.

there would be no need for red light cameras. Certainly those who actually stop for a red light don't need to be concerned.

you managed to beat the living shit outta that strawman you've erected, and no amount of stats or studies are going to convince you that red light cameras are nothing more than a money generating scam for the corporations that manufacture and maintain them, and for the politicians and lobbyists that are making bank. so by all means, feel safe and secure knowing that those red light cameras have eliminated all vehicle accidents at metered intersections.

Ran smack into my passenger side door.. and I got blamed.

Apparently it's legal to run red lights and smash into cars if there is someone waiting to clear the intersection after the light has changed. Whodathunk?

From 2007. I imagine that by now some of these "policies" have been dealt with. But interesting, nonetheless.

What I mean by that is this, if they're timed properly with enough yellow light, and they also have the green right arrows (for say, when the other directions have both green left turns) they can be really good. The problem is that the people maintaining them shorten the yellow times and they are timed properly, or even legally. When this is the case, they're better off not there.

Even worse....You start to stop and notice a tractor-trailer behind you that can't stop..
...you catch the very 1/00 of a second of a red light. Tough Shit!..pay up MF!

Very unfair...you can explain things to a cop.

It is like people just don't care. I guess if you are in a more urban area, you would see the accidents more.

I am a bit wary because it seems like the yellows are shorter, not sure if they give you a ticket if any part of your car is in the crossing box when it turns red.

Finally, the police have fought it for years because they could not fix the tickets for themselves and their friends. wonder if there is a work around now. I am pretty sure it is the same in all states where if you are stopped you can take out a card and the police let you go for any traffic violation. No one ever gave me one, but my cousin had them all the time.

they should be taken out of banks and convenience stores also. These cameras are unfair to those who are breaking the law by running red lights as well as those holding up tellers and clerks. Police in squad cars should be at each intersection to nab the red light runners and each bank and convenience mart should have their own security.

that the camera settings were somethow off?

but then that would cheat someone like yourself from erecting that strawman.

Drive through an assload of red lights with cameras (wearing a ski mask, of course), then fill up the tank and return it to where it was initially parked. Todd Palin would be a good on for that prank

Don't have a reference handy, but I've read that extending the length of time that the yellow light is on by just a few seconds greatly reduces the number of red-light runners w/out the downsides of the traffic cams.

Re the traffic cams. I dislike any system (especially computerized) where you don't really have the ability to confront your accuser. We had a personal case where the policeman had no clue how to use his LIDAR (laser version of a radar gun) and it took us a couple of thousand dollars of legal fees to prove to the court that we weren't speeding. Ever since I've been tempted to have a "black box" running in our car to defend against erroneous/misused/bogus/uncalibrated computerized traffic systems.

And of course there's the little privacy issue of the new systems that can record and save license plate info and build up a decent database of where everyone has been driving. I wish I were making this up. Sometimes I wonder if anyone actually read 1984 as anything other than a how-to manual.

or if the driver of the vehicle is not the registered owner of that vehicle, the registered owner cannot be held responsible for running the light. So if you own the car, and your wife/son/cousin runs the red light (and if it is clear in the picture it is not you), or if you can't be recognized as the driver, you can't be convicted. And you are under no burden to identify the driver. (California)

If (when) the states and the fed RAISE TAXES on the wealthy and if (when) tax loopholes for corporations ever end municipalities won't be so broke that they have to revert to this sort of thing.

BTW, our city has three cameras. Accidents have decreased at those intersections.

A colleague got a photo in the mail from his buddy. On a ski trip, his buddy tried to make it through but wound up running a red light. He received his ticket in the mail, along with the photo. Both the driver and my friend riding shotgun were clearly identifiable ...with my friend holding a can of Budweiser. Fortunately for them, the beer can wasn't as easily recognizable.

Maybe your lawyer was drinking.

The red lights are timed to prematurely go from green to red in a fraction of the necessary time to clear an intersection. It's shooting fish in a barrel.

And if you're hip and decide to slam on the brakes when you see yellow, guess what? The driver behind you will be slamming into you as s/he might want to beat that yellow light regardless of your intention.

Insurance companies say there is NEVER any reason to be following so closely that you can't stop in time.

That said...I beat one in Mass. It was winter, icy roads. Stopped at an intersection on an uphill slope. The middle of the intersection was covered in black ice. The car in front of me took off, hit the ice, and obviously couldn't go any further. She just stopped moving, wheels spinning on the ice. I was behind her and accelerated at the same safe speed. But I never made it to the black ice, I was still on dry pavement as the car in front of me slid backward and we collided.

Massachusetts is one of the only states to have state-regulated insurance rates. I think NJ is the other. Anyway, I got a surcharge on my insurance in Mass, but I appealed and explained it pretty much as I just did above. It took six months to get a response from the state, but they found in my favor and overturned the surcharge and had the insurance company issue me a refund.