"Red light" Traffic Cameras

[The Blob]

Anybody who thinks these things are a good idea is insane.

They are there for one reason and one reason only... to generate revenue. If they ever stop generating enough revenue as red light cameras they can be turned into speed cameras.

Now how would you like them?

And, statistically, they slightly reduce side impact collisions while greatly increasing rear end collisions. So it's not about safety.

There is a reason some places are taking them down... some city leaders, believe it or not, do not let greed trump facts.

 

[Brer Rabbit]

Theres a few in my district,

3 rys ago at Peterson and Western (Chicago) there was an accident at the intersection Clearly seen in the pictures,there was a copper standing off to the side waving everyone thru,I think was say $80,$80,$80,$80 ,I received a ticket and could not fight it since it was sent to my old address....
there is another at Foster and Pulaski ave in Chicago
oh and Cicero and Lawrence
List more in Chicago if you know...

Fullerton and Central, Fullerton and Cicero, Belmont and Austin, Belmont and Pulaski, North Ave. and Kostner. I ticketed a guy that ran the Belmont and Austin light even though the Camera got him. He was very, very late on the light, and even mentioned to me that he should not get a ticket from me because the camera got him. I wanted so bad to give him the "Im Rick James Bitch" response, but I politely told him that the cameras dont always clearly show the plates but my writing on the ticket does.(We are a kinder more politicaly correct Dept. now days). Those cameras are great, they really keep people from blowing thru the lights.

 

[Brer Rabbit]

Thats interesting,

Anybody who thinks these things are a good idea is insane.

They are there for one reason and one reason only... to generate revenue. If they ever stop generating enough revenue as red light cameras they can be turned into speed cameras.

Now how would you like them?

And, statistically, they slightly reduce side impact collisions while greatly increasing rear end collisions. So it's not about safety.

There is a reason some places are taking them down... some city leaders, believe it or not, do not let greed trump facts.

I agree that they are intended to generate revenue, so what? The best part about them is that the Police dont have to sit on a light and can patrol looking for more serious crime if they so choose. The camera at North and Kostner I mentioned in the above post made it possible for me to not worry about writing tickets at all. And since its been installed I have not had one traffic accident at that intersection. As a matter of fact Wickedv6's Aunt was involved in an accident at that exact location before the camera was installed. (What a story that was ) so I would love to see some real staistics on ur increase in rear end accidents. Maybe that would be true when they are first installed but after a while people remember where the cameras are and are looking for the yellow signs before the intersection that indicate "PHOTO ENFORCED". That to me makes the intersection much safer.

 

[Brer Rabbit]

Driving is not protected under the constitution...

I agree with keeping families safe and finding ways to control idiots in cars. I just have a problem with our government putting these types of devices out there under the guise of "we're doing it to save people". They are doing these things because it's an easy way to generate revenue, as if we don't pay enough taxes on everything else in our lives. I don't want a robot giving me a ticket and feel that big brother is creeping into our lives a bit too much. I also have a problem with the traffic safety van that Illinois has out on the roads in construction areas. A friend of mine is a state trooper and he hears stories all the time of people getting tickets they can't fight. I think not being able to fight a ticket is fundamentally wrong and against the constitution. A robot or automated system has no sense of situations.

Hey what the... I just found myself on my anti-establishment soap box, I'll step down.

Fighting a ticket is an option because of the human element. Tickets written by a policeman will always be contested because its a my word against your word issue. But the camera on the other hand will be proof of what is actually going on. In Chicago they take a series of photos as U enter and continue thru the intersection. Its going to be clear what happened so remember driving is a priviledge not a right that can be revoked by the state if warranted.

 

[BlackMetal]

Someone made a good point about rear-end collisions that I did not think of before. In Chicago the camera intersection I deal with is Peterson and Western and I do notice that when the light turns yellow, some people punch the gas to make the light and some people slam on their brakes because they worry that the camera will give them a ticket during the yellow, so I will agree that it's kinda ironic, the camera is trying to stop collisions in the intersection but almost creates collisions because of people stopping suddenly because they fear the camera. I have never seen an accident because of this but I do often see people stopping suddenly because they know the camera is there.

Go ahead and argue that "it's just for revenue". Fine with me, makes me happy to know that the jerk blowing through the redlight will be getting a bill from the city for some money.

 

[chopped39]

I watched on the news that bolingbrook was shutting the cameras off for some legal reasons.Fly by night insurance companies probably dont like them because there is proof of who caused an accident and then they will have to pay. I almost got t-boned buy a guy that had appolo insurance. he clipped the front of my car after running through a stopsign at 50mph. Appolo insurance told me i did not keep a proper lookout. I laughed at the lady. She said there was nothing I could do. Boy was she wrong.I had a $500 car and ended up with $3500. If there would have been a camera there .It would have been cut and dry.

 

[BlackoutDrunk]

Fighting a ticket is an option because of the human element. Tickets written by a policeman will always be contested because its a my word against your word issue. But the camera on the other hand will be proof of what is actually going on. In Chicago they take a series of photos as U enter and continue thru the intersection. Its going to be clear what happened so remember driving is a priviledge not a right that can be revoked by the state if warranted.

You're correct that driving is not protected under the constitution and that was not the point I was trying to make, but due process is protected and not being able to fight a ticket is wrong. There are situations and instances that cameras do not catch. You can show me a picture but I can tell you a hundred different stories as to how that picture came to be. As soon as the human element is taken out of our judicial system that goes against the very fiber of what our judicial system is supposed to be. We are supposed to have the option be tried by a jury of our peers and last I checked a camera doesn't own a home in my neighborhood. The word of law abiding tax paying citizen should be worth something.

I also have a problem with random roadblocks and "safety checks" but that is for another thread. Missouri: Police Roadblock Harassment Caught on Tape

 

[RmvBfrFlght]

. . . so remember driving is a priviledge not a right that can be revoked by the state if warranted.

I always laugh when I hear or read that. Sorry, traveling is a right. No matter the means of conveyence. And is protected by the Constitution of the United States.

RemoveBeforeFlight

 

[sailbrd]

Anybody who thinks these things are a good idea is insane.

They are there for one reason and one reason only... to generate revenue. If they ever stop generating enough revenue as red light cameras they can be turned into speed cameras.

Now how would you like them?

And, statistically, they slightly reduce side impact collisions while greatly increasing rear end collisions. So it's not about safety.

There is a reason some places are taking them down... some city leaders, believe it or not, do not let greed trump facts.

Absolutely correct. If they do not produce enough revenue they shorten the yellow light. There is a proven way to decrease the number of red light runners, lengthen the yellow! Ask any traffic engineer.

 

[Jerryl]

Was in traffic this weekend and I was stopped a the green light. Traffic was backed up and the car (in front of me) was in the middle of the intersection, STOPPED! Guess what? The car got flashed! I wonder if they will get a ticket.

 

[gnxtc2]

Here in the Republic of NJ, at one time they installed radar cameras. That only lasted about 1-2 months. The radar cameras could not be tested nor calibrated as we LEO are supposed to do everytime we turn our radar units on.

We don't have red light cameras here in NJ. I was T-boned in my truck by a girl that ran a red light. It was a he-said she-said story but when she hit me, she pushed me into the truck next to me also. The truck next to me and myseld were in the intersection when the collision happened. She cried that we both ran the light .

The topic of people slamming on their brakes on camera intersections, don't tailgate. Here in NJ, you can get a summons for running the yellow/amber light.

People today don't have any accountability of their actions.

Billy T.
gnxtc2@aol.com

 

[whitehot84]

Some of you people sound like you got your license at Auto Zone.
When you took a written test did it say "a yellow light means 1) stop, light is turning red. 2) hit the gas and get through before the light turns red, 3) hope no one is looking and continue on.
You are not supposed to enter an intersection unless you can pass all the way through. If there are cars in the intersection you have to wait until they clear before continuing.
When you get flashed you have entered the intersection after the light turned red or were in the intersection when it turned. See above.
It would be nice if the police departments had resources enough to sit at major intersections but then all these tickets would be fought. The camera don't lie.
Answer..........Don't run red lights.

 

[2QUIK6]

Jerryl, we are starting to get them here in Ft.W now and several other surrounding cities. The way they work here is if you are already in the insection before it turns RED, the camera will not catch you.
There are sensors a few feet in front of the stop line..if you cross those sensors with more speed than can reasonably be used to stop the car before the stop line ONCE THE LIGHT IS RED, not yellow, then the camera takes your picture. So if you are already passed the stop line before the light hits RED you should be ok. The cameras are designed to catch those folks that are blatenly passing thru the light once it hits red. The courts would have their hands full if they were set to catch you if you passed the line when yellow and it hit red when in the middle...although its against the law technically, it would not be something that causes accidents because you are already in the middle of the intersection before anyone elses light turns green.
At least thats the way it was explained on dozens of times on the local news channels here when they started putting them in. I'd think they would be the same across Texas.


You can always glue a leaf to your plate blocking some numbers..mother nature stuck it there

 

[Jerryl]

....... You are not supposed to enter an intersection unless you can pass all the way through. If there are cars in the intersection you have to wait until they clear before continuing. ...........

That is what I did and agree with you 100%.
But, it is easier said than done sometimes.

Scenario;
You are driving your Buick around cruising doing 35 mph.
There is a semi trailer in front going through an intersection. You watch the semi slow down to make a turn and the light is green, which implies “OK to continue through the intersection” (Right?)
Just as you look at the semi, it slows down considerably in the middle of the intersection and come up on the back …….. You can no longer physically see the traffic light nor can you see traffic. You are now with your rear bumper just past the “stripes” and look up …… The light is yellow. …………

See it is not about running a red light. Those people are stupid and deserve what they get.
I am sure no one here has ever ran a light, not even accidentally.
This is about doing the right thing and getting caught in an honest mistake.

Kind of like taking your spouse on a hot date night. You make reservations at a very nice restaurant. They can not locate your reservation and with a 3 hour wait, you leave.
Now your spouse is upset, because she has was dressed up and you ended up at Denny’s and you go home, not getting any lovin'.

 

[bobc455]

When you took a written test did it say "a yellow light means 1) stop, light is turning red. 2) hit the gas and get through before the light turns red, 3) hope no one is looking and continue on.
You are not supposed to enter an intersection unless you can pass all the way through. If there are cars in the intersection you have to wait until they clear before continuing.

+1

You know how much better traffic would flow in the city of Boston if people would obey this? DON'T ENTER UNLESS YOU CAN EXIT!

And I'm not sure if this is universal, but in Mass I believe a yellow light means "stop if it is safe to do so".

-BC

 

[2QUIK6]

Jerryl, did you in fact get a citationin the mail for this, or are your thinking you will soon?
From what you described above in your last post, (already in the intersection on yellow), and from the way it was described on our local news, you should not be getting a citation, assuming your cameras work the way ours are supposed to..and I'd think they would being all in Texas but who knows. There would be too much room for error if they were giving automated citations for not making it out of the intersection before it turns red, thats why it was designed the way I explained, at least for our area. They are not designed to speed the flow of traffic, like described in above for Boston and I know NYC has those "XXXX" areas..caught in the X on red and you get a ticket stuff, but thats not the case here. They are to help prevent accidents.

 

[2GNS4ME]

Some places you can search by license plate and last name. I did wife got one in the mail and looked up her plate another one on the way

 

[Brer Rabbit]

Dont get mad,

Some places you can search by license plate and last name. I did wife got one in the mail and looked up her plate another one on the way

Just use that as an excuse to buy more go-fast parts for the Buick. The wife backed into a pole at the KFC and a week later I got my Alky kit! Her driving will improve trust me.

 

[Jerryl]

Jerryl, did you in fact get a citationin the mail for this, or are your thinking you will soon?
From what you described above in your last post, (already in the intersection on yellow), and from the way it was described on our local news, you should not be getting a citation, assuming your cameras work the way ours are supposed to..and I'd think they would being all in Texas but who knows. There would be too much room for error if they were giving automated citations for not making it out of the intersection before it turns red, thats why it was designed the way I explained, at least for our area. They are not designed to speed the flow of traffic, like described in above for Boston and I know NYC has those "XXXX" areas..caught in the X on red and you get a ticket stuff, but thats not the case here. They are to help prevent accidents.

I am not expecting a citation, but I make every effort to stay on the postitive side of life. THANKS for taking the time to explain.

 

[Electrajim]

Got into a situation at a intersection the other day.

An 18 wheeler ahead of me had to slow down to make a turn and brought traffice to a stop. I was the third car behind the truck, and got caught right in the middle of a "red light camera" monitored intersection.
Don't need to get into these situations, but sometimes they can not be avoided.
[/url]

Sure they can be avoided. I don't ride directly behind an 18 wheeler for starters.
I don't enter an intersection if there is any chance of getting "stuck" in the
intersection like you may have.

What if it was me BLOCKING an intersection (as you may have unintentionally), and you want to cross it, intersecting-wise when the light finally turns green. Well, you can't because I'm in your way blocking the intersection!!! Worse, it could be a firetruck or ambulance who can't cross, because "the car and truck in front of me made it, so why can't I"??
We have traffic signs in some places that say "don't block intersection", that aren't photo-enforced.

Here is a link about this. (not my part of town)
Intersection Congestion Leads To Police Ticketing Drivers - Miami News Story - WPLG Miami

Red-light-tickets are incentive not to block intersections, and allow other traffic to flow per traffic design.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but something tells me that you will handle that (and other) intersections differently and not be caught on film like you did.

Until you've been T-boned, or blocked from passing an intersection, you'll have a new found sympathy for keeping the photo enforced intersections.

I usually drive as fast as I can to outrun the flash of the photo. :biggrin:

ElectraJim