Red Light Camera

I don't agree. This is strictly about breaking the law for your personal convenience. If there is no traffic the other way do you routinely run red lights? How about if you can safely slip though the crossing traffic. There wouldn't be any danger there either, as long as you have a good eye.

While you are familiar with the timing of this particular light, traffic law does not let you use this information to disobey the signal. The laws are written this way to save people from themselves. What happens when the signal timing is changed? What happens if the next person times it differently than you?

In a similar vein, I know firearms well enough to safely shoot in my back yard. I have an excellent earthen bank which would make a very safe backstop. Regardless, I am not allowed to do so because I live in a village, with too many houses and people. While it would be perfectly safe for me to shoot, it is not generally safe to allow everyone to shoot, so the laws have been set to disallow the discharge firearms inside the village limits. Likewise with red lights. There is no normal (non-emergency) situation where running a red light is a good idea.

Tom

 

Somehow we have gone from safety to revenue generation in enforcements of crimes. My city repeatedly ran a commercial when enforcement started that their is no excuse for running a red light. When due process was brought up, they came back with the fact that these things are enforced in other places.

My real problem is that statistically the major offenders are police officers, and not one of them has actually had to pay a ticket in austin. I disagree that there is no excuse and would never blame these police officers without knowing about the incidents.

That is just low. It doesn't happen often, but you ca accidentally miss a yellow. In this case in the spirit of revenue they won't look at circumstances. In many cases cities have been caught retiming lights in order to catch people running them. This is a direct way the law has made some driving less safe.

Ouch. That's a lot for failure to come to a complete stop. I can't say the red light camera is a bad thing when ticketing such violations, as you may miss traffic, but that fine seems excessive, especially if no one but you was at the intersection.

 

If a "real" policeman were at the intersection, and you were -IN- the intersection when the light turned red, you'd get a ticket for running a red light.
Red light cameras only take your picture if you ENTER the intersection when the light is red.

I see nothing to fight. You ran a red light.

There is more. A speed or red light camera results in no points on your license and no effect on your insurance. Bonus two.

It's an expensive road tax. You used the provisions therein, pay the tax.

 

x2. You got caught...suck it up and pay...it doesn't matter the timing of which you cross the line. You still violated the law, no matter how little or how large, you violated. But, i do understand your frustration that this is only a 0.33 sec violation. At the same time, i hate it when people hire lawyers (or whoever) to fight these things. You got caught...deal with it.

Unfortunately, we live in a society where we are NEVER at fault...there is always someone to blame for our troubles.

 

True, part of the problem is when they make the transition from yellow to red too short for the driver going the speed limit to stop in time safely and have to cross the intersection, and they get nabbed. In some cases, the timing is rigged.

 

The deletion of pix was in The Netherlands. Apparently you could request a pic, but they no longer sent them automatically with the ticket.

The CA ticket I got came with a URL and password, and online it had a few still pics (from front & rear) and 2 vids. Very high tech--probably why the fine was so high...

 

The site I posted Home - Fighting Red Light Camera Tickets has the following disclaimer:

Don't run red lights. It is a dangerous practice - Russian Roulette with a car. This website is inspired by the short-sighted cities that have chosen to "rig" their cameras and signals to maximize profits - and minimize safety.

My personal philosophy is if it was fairly enforced (they do get fairly enforced in some cases), pay up and if it wasn't fairly enforced, fight it.

Without all the facts available to us, only the OP can determine if it was fairly enforced.

 

And it was 7 AM on a Saturday. No excuse, but there was nobody else on the road.

When I got the ticket, I called the court and said there must be some mistake--it's not like I just ran straight through a red light. She said that was the minimum fine for red light infractions.

I've driven manual transmission cars all my life, and one bad habit you get into is not fully stopping for right on reds or stop signs, to avoid having to step on the clutch and shift into first gear.

After that expensive lesson, I'm very careful to be sure to fully stop when doing right on reds.

 

Agreed. Lawmakers can abuse the system, and those paid to enforce the laws can do so in haphazard or preferential ways. When that happens, it is our job as citizens to see things right, or replace the offending parties with those that will do a fair and equitable job. Democracy is a messy business.

Tom

 

You know what?
I admit when I was younger in open freeway and similar situations, I would speed. But never in situations where I thought I was endangering anyone, except maybe for myself.
On those occasions when I did get pulled over? I paid the ticket. I didn't complain.

The Police Officer I felt was doing his job. I was paying a penalty for as "Ricky Bobby" would say...wanting to go fast.

But speed trap camera's?

I hate those. And I feel in most cases they are just revenue generators and not really being used to promote safety. They always position them in "tricky" area's, like just off freeway exits where everyone is slowing down but maybe NOT at the posted 40 MPH quite yet..."Gotcha!"...Ching Ching...

As far as Red Light Cameras...well you either stopped or you didn't. We are dealing with Red, Yellow and Green there really is no Grey area.

That being said? I do think it's possible to accidently get caught crossing an intersection just as the light goes red...and I don't think it means the person is a bad or dangerous driver. Yes, you are suppose to always stop on red, but sometimes timing and spacing can be hard to judge. Most lights actually give you a second after they have turned red..before the opposing lights turn green because of this fact.

Don't jump all over me for this opinon. YES...stop at red lights. Try to anticipate red lights...if you have time for a judgement call try to error on the side of safety and conservative driving and do not proceed. By all means...

But if occasionally you find yourself crossing on a late yellow that just barely turns red on you? That' life...nobody is perfect.

So I take it back...maybe there is a grey area....

 

The spray stuff has been debunked on Mythbusters and other sites on the web. One thing the spray does very well is remove money from wallets.

 

I agree with this. There is a section of blocks with numerous stop light intersections in Portland that I hate to drive because the city has set up Red Light camera's and I swear they have the yellow lights timed to be as difficult as possible to judge.

The other aspect is it is varies with traffic flow. Many times I've been stuck driving that stretch with someone tail gating me, on my butt and had to try to make the split second safety decision of whether I wanted to risk a "red light" ticket...or risk stopping and having the guy tail gating me, hit me...

But I call that stretch City Money Alley...because I swear it's been timed to actually cause people to run the light...

 

The true question is do you believe police forces and governments should be taking away the rights of individuals while making the streets less safe for drivers?

Atlanta, Palm Beech, numerous studies have shown the cameras increase accidents. Most of the studies that show them going down have small print removing key data. Why do accidents go up? People slam on the brakes to not get a ticket, causing them to be rear ended. People don't just run red lights because its fun, as many of these laws seem to think.

Our police put out total spin that accidents are down 30%. Then quietly said the cameras haven't caused any more accidents. But even this is a lie. If you look at the dates the cameras went in, accidents went up, they included decreases that happened before the cameras. Why would the police misrepresent the facts. Well in 32colors link, you see that in california police forces are sending out fake tickets in a scam to get you to give them your money. The local and state government seem to be supporting this instead calling it the mail fraud that it is. Its about the revenue. You shouldn't run red lights, but you should not blindly advocate money machines that make us less safe.

 

I agree with Tom. If you get used to running this red because you know this delay, then you'll run a red where the delay is shorter, or they'll adjust this light to follow standards, or you meet the person going the cross way who watches your light turn red and figures they can start moving right away. Then you run the risk of not just getting a fine, but killing or maiming somebody, perhaps yourself.

I recently went too far forward at a right-turn-on-red situation and the light flashed so I knew it took a picture of me. I did come to a complete stop before progressing and there was no traffic anywhere around, so I'll see if I get a ticket out of it or not (they are supposed to be reviewed by a live person before issuing the actual ticket).

I won't be happy if I get the ticket, but if I had gone straight thru on a red, I would know I clearly deserved a ticket. Yellow means stop if you can (when you are more than x seconds from the intersection), red means you are stopped.

 

The cameras increase accidents because people are driving unsafely in the first place. All the camera does is encourage drivers to obey the law. If you have to slam on the brakes to stop at a red light you are driving too fast in the first place (assuming, of course, that the yellow is properly timed - if not we are into the previous discussion of cheating lawmakers). If a driver hits you from behind he is following too close. It is disingenuous and wrong to try and blame this on a traffic camera.

Eventually people will learn to drive or be removed from the road. In the mean time, an increase in accidents means that the cameras are doing their intended job.

Tom

 

The red light cameras here take two pictures in succession. So if you stop too far forward, or accidentally creep forward the second picture shows you still there, NOT running the light.

I've gone through amber lights here, I've gone through stale amber lights, but I haven't so far gone through a red. I have no tickets. It's pretty simple. Stop for a red light, stop if you can for an amber light. Don't go though the intersection when it's red unless you've stopped and are turning right (where legal - it isn't everywhere).

I think these cameras are justified. I'VE seen the way most people drive! Here, they have added speed sensors to the red light cameras. It's quite entertaining to sit at a red light and watch the morons speed through the intersection, camera flash going off (and watching them doing it going both ways). The cameras no longer use film. They are digital, and the results are downloaded wirelessly.

So don't speed on the Yellowhead Trail through Edmonton, and don't run the lights!

 

Tom your opinion is your opinion.
And I respect your opinion.
It's airtight impossible to mount too convincing of an arguement against being safe and stopping at red lights....

BUT...

I would dare you to come to Portland and try to navigate the stretch I'm talking about when it is congested without at least once being forced to make a split second decision as to hit the accelerator or hit the brake...and it has nothing to do with driver attitude, skill or desire to be safe.

So I just have to say...everyone that runs a red light as defined by a red light camera isn't necessarily a bad or unsafe driver. Even though running a red light is always bad and unsafe.

 

I have to agree with Tom on this. The City of Wilmington has installed numerous cameras at the intersections with the highest accident rates. The rates at these intersections have been reduced to the point that the number of tickets given dropped below the cost of the camera systems. The city decided to fund the difference due to the safety improvements.

Our camera system takes two photos as David Beale indicates. You have to be "in the intersection" when the light turns red so there is no yellow light infractions. I have hesitated to run through yellow lights and never received a ticket, even when I thought I had. So, you have to "run a red light" to get a ticket.

There is also a minimum speed before the camera will snap pictures. This is to allow for right turn on red, people getting caught in the intersection due to cars stopping on the other side of the intersection and for those that decide at the last minute to slam on brakes and back out of the intersection.

These systems have drastically reduced the running of red lights at the intersections where the cameras are installed and reduced the number of accidents. Especially the high speed accidents with the worst impacts. I wish I could say the same for all of the other intersections.

So, if you get a ticket, you broke the law and endangered everyone else in and around the intersection. Pay the ticket and quit blaming someone else and talking about violating rights!!