Red light cameras

[tobee43]

anyway to get more revenues is really the key here. i know cities are broke as so many towns are as well and they are going through anything to get more revenue. this is just one of them here in florida.

i have to admit i'm evening creating bi laws to add to HOAs allowing up to $500 fines PER DAY, for those in violation of certain situations, really it's all based on increasing review, and perfecting legal.

[anykey]

I live in a small town. I spoke to our police chief- and the current powers that be have no plans for any red light cams. My sister got one in IL- she paused but did not stop on red right turn- car behind her in a hurry- kids in car. I seen the video- and thought- she was shafted- you have to allow some leway to keep traffic moving. The other day a buddy got a ticker in DE- there was no way to stop one the ice- the city -did they salt??? Who knows. On a recent visit to Chicago-I was with my brother- a car slammed on her brakes on a yellow- we nearly smashed her car.

Consider this- I now am seeing drivers do the same thing in my remote area- they are mostly out of state and assume we have cams. Meanwhile locals are NOT expecting it.

[LadyInTheRed]

I live in a small town. I spoke to our police chief- and the current powers that be have no plans for any red light cams. My sister got one in IL- she paused but did not stop on red right turn- car behind her in a hurry- kids in car. I seen the video- and thought- she was shafted- you have to allow some leway to keep traffic moving. The other day a buddy got a ticker in DE- there was no way to stop one the ice- the city -did they salt??? Who knows. On a recent visit to Chicago-I was with my brother- a car slammed on her brakes on a yellow- we nearly smashed her car.

When you get behind the wheel, you are responsible for keeping in control of the vehicle, including being able to stop it when needed. If your car cannot make a complete stop on icy roads, it should not be driven on icy roads. If the car in front of you stops suddenly and you can't stop quickly enough to avoid a collission, you are either following too closey or are not paying enough attention. If instead of encountering a yellow light, that car had a child run in front of it, should they have just hit the child to avoid being rear ended by somebody who is following too closely? When a light changes, the driver must make a decision whether it is safer to stop or go through the light. Nobody else can make that decision for them, but other drivers should have sufficient control of their vehicle to react without colliding.

[anykey]

Red light cams are nothing but a cash machine. Locally we dont have them, and do not want them.

[sbatman]

DH and I have just recently changed a commute that passes through about 5 red light cameras if we went straight through. They are so crooked that we just take detours through residential neighborhoods to skip them. We drive slowly, so as to keep safe for all. If we have no choice and have to go through an intersection with a red light camera, it is much safer to go straight rather than trying to make a left, where most of the "gotchas!" are. So, we just meander down to the next, unmonitored, legal left turn and take it there.

[anykey]

I thought you dumped them in AZ?

[AngelinaCat]

Our Legislature in Florida is going to take up the fight this term when it goes into session. to either get rid of the cameras outright, or at least get the money going to the STATE, instead of the municipalities that have voted to install these things.

[justbroke]

I have exciting news for everyone. The University of Florida (USF) did a study on red-light cameras to determine if they actually "save" lives. The results are in; they do not. USF actually reversed their opinion that they reached in 2011. Even in 2013, USF found that the cameras only change driver behavior, not reduce fatalities.

At least one city, St. Petersburg, in the Tampa Bay area, has now vowed to look into whether they will install any more cameras or that they should even have them.

The bottom line is that it is revenue generating. In fact, the study points to cities/towns that reduced the yellow-light timing which actually increased accidents. But the towns/cities didn't care because they made more money on incursions.

This is the actual "NEW" report!

http://www.baynews9.com/content/dam/news/static/baynews9/documents/2014/01/Red-light-camera-study-usf-124.pdf

[AngelinaCat]

And the Jacksonville News, just announced that three more red-light cameras in Orange Park will become 'active' (issuing tickets) at midnight tomorrow!

http://www.wokv.com/news/news/local/more-red-light-cameras-go-enforcement/nc7gj/

[sbatman]

They dumped them on the Arizona state roads, but the cities still have them, some of which: Scottsdale, Phoenix, Tucson and others.

[AngelinaCat]

I was at my veterinarian's office today making arrangements for my two little kitty boys to get neutered. While there, I watched the red light camera at the intersection this office is on, flash and nab at least three people at the intersection.

[justbroke]

Apparently, Jacksonville didn't read the USF report.

(I understand that many of these are actually owned and operated by Traffic Solutions, an Arizona-based company! They monitor and actually issue the infractions or monitor and then turn them over to a sworn officer for the specific municipality in which the camera is located. The infractions must each be reviewed and technically "signed off" by an officer. At least this is the latest procedure under Florida law. So these contractors actually get a chunk of the money and the cities/towns (and State itself) get the rest. The State of Florida gets a big chunk (as much as $100 per ticket) and not the city/town. In fact, there is some movement to reduce the State amount and get rid of the money going to the cities/towns and having the fines go into a State fund related to emergency services instead. We'll just have to wait and see what the State (of Florida) will do with this.)

[IBroke]

Since this is such a frustrating topic....say "che-e-e-e-e-e-ese"...

http://bilder.bild.de/fotos-skaliert...0,c=0.bild.jpg

[nioka]

I lived in Kingsport TN when they first started installing "big brother" cams. Politicians claimed these red light cams would slow down t-bone accidents. They did, but created far more tail-end accidents. They also failed to mention that each red light cam was bringing in $100k a month and they didn't pay a cent for the light. The lights were installed free by an Australian company with the agreement this company would take the profits from the first five years and then the lights belong to the township.

The local of economy of Kingsport was in freefall. The one mall was in dire straights and many businesses were struggling to stay afloat. Many times I would see the local TV news were they were asking for donations to bury someone's child who died prematurely or to help with food donations. TN is a very poor state with many residents relying on TN Care, Medicaid, for medical treatment. TN ranks number two in bankruptcies. If it were not for Remote Access Medical many Tennesseans would not have any medical care. Yet the politicians saw fit to allow $1 million per red light cam annually to be drained from the local economy. Making matters worse was that this money was going overseas. Topping that was these same politicians were bragging as to not needing to hire more police personnel because of the red light cams.

Tennesseans did rise up in protest but the courts sided with the red light cams.

Most of us here at BK forum are here because of debt problems. Some of it self inflicted but the majority were simply the victim of big business. We are born in debt and die in debt. We are nothing more than cows on the farm but instead of milk with give interest. Yet we continue to try to play the game until our chips run out.
These red light cams and other automated devices are nothing more than another method of extracting money from us. (I am not sure whether extract or extort is the correct word here). Many think that they won't get nailed but the percentage of you entering a light illegally goes up each time you enter that intersection. Sooner or later you will be distracted or have another vehicle on your rear bumper and you will be ticketed.

The thing to remember here that we are the ones who are electing those who support this extortion.

[bcohen]

Where I live, the biggest racket with the red light cameras is that when making a left turn, you are at the mercy of the driver in front of you to clear the arbitrary sensor line, which is far out in the intersection BEFORE the yellow left turn arrow disappears. It is much farther out into the intersection than the painted white "stop here" line. To add to this difficulty is the fact that the length of the yellow left turn arrow is noticeably shorter at camera-enforced intersections than it is at non-camera-enforced intersections.

I try to avoid making left turns at these intersections whenever possible, but now many of the surrounding residential streets have signs which say "local traffic only" and the police ticket people for cutting through in an effort to evade the camera scam.

I finally figured out the way to solve the camera problem when making left turns. I bought a piece of sheet metal, exactly the same size as a license plate, riveted several super-strong magnets to it, and spray painted it black. I keep it on the floor in front of the passenger seat. When I need to make a left turn at a camera-enforced intersection, I put the car into Park, get out and place my license plate cover, then after making the turn, I quickly pull into a business lot and remove it. My magic license plate shield just saved me over $500 (the cost of a ticket here) when a pedestrian darted into the road and I couldn't complete the left turn in time. The camera flashed, but fortunately, it didn't see my license plate. Anyways, what was I supposed to do? Run the guy over?