Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
10/20/2017 1:01:18 AM
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 9/8/2005 11:32:55 PM EDT
Camera generated red light running ticket mailed to you.........what do you think?

has anybody gotten one?
if you get one will you plead NOT guilty?
do you think this is "big brother" at his worst

or are you OVERJOYED that maybe, just maybe people will quit running lights.........
Link Posted: 9/8/2005 11:34:06 PM EDT
my advice is to not run the redlight..........
Link Posted: 9/8/2005 11:36:19 PM EDT
Sounds like good advice, I didn't get one

I have heard that the pilot program was being started in DT Houston......
Link Posted: 9/8/2005 11:36:29 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Jace:
my advice is to not run the redlight..........



About right.

How about sending a picture of cash equal to the fine?
Link Posted: 9/8/2005 11:36:36 PM EDT
It IS Big Brother at work (maybe not at its worst, but definitely nefarious),

and it ain't a simple "don't run the red light."

I've seen these things trigger on the yellow, which didn't change to red before the poor bastard made it across.
Link Posted: 9/8/2005 11:45:47 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Keith_J:

Originally Posted By Jace:
my advice is to not run the redlight..........



About right.

How about sending a picture of cash equal to the fine?




That seemed to work out well for some joker.....

Until the coppers mailed him back a pic of handcuffs
Link Posted: 9/8/2005 11:57:32 PM EDT
Some cities will do anything for revenue...
Scottsdale AZ, for example, has that bullshit...
But I'll say it's more sporty than a damn "wheel tax"...

myit
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 12:07:20 AM EDT
In Houston, I will look behind me when I go through the end of a yellow light
there will be at least one or two cars going through the intersection behind me
and these are vehicles that were not tailgating me, the light is waaay past turning red..........

I think Houston will make a BUNCH of money with this "endeavor"
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 12:22:46 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 22bad:
In Houston, I will look behind me when I go through the end of a yellow light
there will be at least one or two cars going through the intersection behind me
and these are vehicles that were not tailgating me, the light is waaay past turning red..........

I think Houston will make a BUNCH of money with this "endeavor"



No kidding. I was nearly killed by such a red light runner back in 2002. The other guy wasn't as lucky as me...had I been a foot further in the intersection, I would not be here. He was doing 70 MPH plus.


Link Posted: 9/9/2005 12:26:54 AM EDT
Had it here for years, seems to work reasonably well, couldn't tell you what the stats for drop in loss of life was thought.

I had to laugh the other day, camera went off as some guy braked too late and drove about... 3 feet over the line, bet he was pissed off when that fine arrived!

/PHil
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 1:07:23 AM EDT
To many people abuse driving with deadly results, Law enforcemnt tried it "our way" and people still run redlights despite heavy traffic enforcment.I like it if it keeps people scared thats fine, I know if I ever have to run a red in an emergency I can pay the $100.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 1:12:16 AM EDT
It is a money making scam!

They put them in here a few years ago. Turns out they were zapping some people on a yellow. The cameras were all timed to flash at 2.5 seconds, but some of the yellows were 3 seconds. Thousands of people got bogus tickets.

A few years ago I was stopped at a light, I saw a camera flash on a guy I know 100% the light was still green. I bet he got a ticket, even though it was some sort of camera malfunction. He probably paid it because it was cheaper than taking the day off of work.

Supporters claim that it reduces accidents. I have seen several rear end crashes at these things because a person slammed on their brakes to avoid getting zapped. The person behind them slammed on the gas to make it thru the yellow. Then traffic the other direction slams into them both. Major carnage!

Don't believe the lies. The company that runs the cameras gives bribes to all the politicians. These thing will not stop red light runners. They put them at the worst intersection in town, and there are just as many runners and just as many crashes. A better way to solve the problem would be .5 seconds of all red. That won't make any money for the city, so it is a hard sell.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 2:01:33 AM EDT
Do a little searching on the net and I think you'll find that there have been cities who shortened the yellow light time in order to make more money; that accidents have actually INCREASED when that was done, especially rear-enders; and that in some instances around 50% are either tossed or dismissed because the picture is not clear enough to verify the plate.

I have personal knowledge of a relative getting a ticket based on photo enforcement where the alleged violation (by someone else, actually) occurred about 500 miles distant, when the vehicle in question had never been out of the immediate area here. A little research showed that the agency was actually using a computer to "read" the plate numbers and the photos were not actually viewed by humans before the citation was spit out of the computer. It was eventually dismissed based on a written, lengthy protest.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 2:13:19 AM EDT
OMG! The gov't is attempting to enforce the law! They are intruding on my rights to break the law!

Link Posted: 9/9/2005 2:26:46 AM EDT

Originally Posted By prk:
Do a little searching on the net and I think you'll find that there have been cities who shortened the yellow light time in order to make more money; that accidents have actually INCREASED when that was done, especially rear-enders; and that in some instances around 50% are either tossed or dismissed because the picture is not clear enough to verify the plate.



Indeed. This is EXACTLY what happened in San Diego. They shortened the yellow lights to increase revenue and the capper on it all. Lockheed Martin got a cut of every ticket.

Granted they have, within the past few years, gone back and rewritten teh LM contract and supposedly retimed the lights.

I do not trust a computer to make a jugdement of whether a person has broken a law, or is deserving of the full penalty for breaking a law. Put officers at intersections and people stope doing it.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 4:22:55 AM EDT

Originally Posted By mejames:
It is a money making scam!



Are all moving violations money making scams?



They put them in here a few years ago. Turns out they were zapping some people on a yellow. The cameras were all timed to flash at 2.5 seconds, but some of the yellows were 3 seconds. Thousands of people got bogus tickets.



I don't know the specifics, but do the cameras flash at a car entering the intersection when the light goes red, or does it pick up a car in the intersection when the light goes red?



Supporters claim that it reduces accidents. I have seen several rear end crashes at these things because a person slammed on their brakes to avoid getting zapped. The person behind them slammed on the gas to make it thru the yellow. Then traffic the other direction slams into them both. Major carnage!



So you are blaming a camera for someone who slams on the gas to beat a yellow, and they clearly have a car in front of them that they don't know if they are going to hit the gas or not?

And to boot, you say that after the wreck happens in the intersection, cross traffic that is waiting at the light, or coming down the road, is so mesmorized that they crash into the big wreck?

What ever happened to simply stopping at the light?
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 4:26:13 AM EDT
Drive a truck and leave the tailgate down, problem solved. Along with slightly better gas mileage.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 4:32:28 AM EDT
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 4:34:49 AM EDT
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 4:36:49 AM EDT

Originally Posted By The_Beer_Slayer:
the problem with those cameras are they are not managed by the cities but usually by independant companies.

there have been MANY cases of yellow lights shortend to increase the chance of "catching" cars. the companies get a percentage of all fines as well.



This has caused many lawsuits where the Plantiff has won them all.

Also we have the right to face our accuser in court. The camera fail that test as well.

This comes and goes.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 4:43:03 AM EDT
Help! I am being photographically oppressed!

Actually I think it's a good thing. From what the Chief of Popo said, it would be at
the most dangerous intersections.

If they work out the yellow light snafu and it only
tags someone actually running the red, I am all for it.

Link Posted: 9/9/2005 4:49:08 AM EDT

do you think this is "big brother" at his worst


YUP!
+1
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 4:53:57 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Da_Bunny:

do you think this is "big brother" at his worst


YUP!
+1



NOPE
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 4:54:20 AM EDT
My wife got two tickets in Charlotte, NC in one day. The first time was when the police were directing traffic around an accident. The second time she didn't make it far enough across the intersection before the camera went-off because of slow moving traffic.

Here's my problem with them. She had three other older women in the car as witnesses. We drove to Charlotte to contest the tickets and were told that there was no procedure for doing so. We talked to quite a few people in the Charlotte-Mecklenburg police, and they all said my wife did the right thing. She could have been arrested and had her car impounded if she did not follow the direction of the officer, but there was nothing they could do about the red light ticket. Even though the officers and the judge we talked to knew they were in the wrong and they admitted to serious problems with the system, they could do nothing about the fine. She and her friends haven't been back to Charlotte to go shopping since then. That's their loss (and my gain since she stopped spending money there).z
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 5:00:22 AM EDT
It wasn't me driving that car, your honor, it's my twin brother. I was at a poker game with 4 of my friends.
Honest.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 5:00:57 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/9/2005 5:01:46 AM EDT by DScott]

Originally Posted By 22bad:


do you think this is "big brother" at his worst





Why sure it is, but it's the only reasonable response when so many people act like somebody's "little brother".
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 5:19:58 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Fenian:
It wasn't me driving that car, your honor, it's my twin brother. I was at a poker game with 4 of my friends.
Honest.



Does it show the driver's picture?

Do they change the statute to say that the registered owner of the car is responsible for all red light violations?

If not, you use the SOD defense (Some Other Dude). It wasn't me.

R.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 5:23:28 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Mall-Ninja:
It IS Big Brother at work (maybe not at its worst, but definitely nefarious),

and it ain't a simple "don't run the red light."

I've seen these things trigger on the yellow, which didn't change to red before the poor bastard made it across.



Techanically, you shouldn't enter an intersection when the light is yellow.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 5:25:09 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Keith_J:

Originally Posted By 22bad:
In Houston, I will look behind me when I go through the end of a yellow light
there will be at least one or two cars going through the intersection behind me
and these are vehicles that were not tailgating me, the light is waaay past turning red..........

I think Houston will make a BUNCH of money with this "endeavor"



No kidding. I was nearly killed by such a red light runner back in 2002. The other guy wasn't as lucky as me...had I been a foot further in the intersection, I would not be here. He was doing 70 MPH plus.





That stuff really scared me when I rode a motorcycle.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 5:26:52 AM EDT
If they didn't reduce the time the yellow was on it wouldn't be a problem.

DC did that.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 5:32:49 AM EDT
the ones around here where disconnected.


High Point, NC Disconnects its Red Light Cameras
In light of a court ruling, High Point, North Carolina disconnects its red light cameras.

At midnight, the red light cameras in High Point, North Carolina will be officially disconnected. The city's contract with Peek Traffic has expired, and in light of a Guilford County Superior Court ruling, High Point has chosen not to continue the program.

The judge's February 15 ruling required the city to devote 90 percent of the proceeds from the camera program to the Guilford County school system to comply with a state constitutional requirement. High Point now owes the schools about $1.5 million from past camera revenue.

If the ruling is upheld, twelve other red light camera cities in North Carolina will likely shut down their programs as well

Link Posted: 9/9/2005 5:34:55 AM EDT
i think its gay.

first of all you can see the cameras, so it doesnt prevent people from running lights except the ones where they have a camera. they do put dummy cameras at some intersections too tho.

its a no-point ticket anyway. its written to the registered owner but its no points because theres no way to prove who is driving.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 5:48:39 AM EDT
Few years ago in Queens, my wife got one in the mail. In NYC they send you three pictures with the summons, first is wide angle showing you before the white line with the light red, second is wide angle in the intersection, light red, and third is closeup of the plate.

There is no room for argument, pay the fine, move along. I laughed my ass off at my wife, and then 2 weeks later, the same freaking camera at the same intersection got me. Ihad followed a semi through, and never even saw the light. Guess I was tailgating too.

At least it is a no-points ticket, fine only, since they cannot identify a driver, only registered owner.

Last year there was a thread on this, with some suggestions for avoidance, including plate covers, and reflective coatings to foil the camera etc.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 6:08:27 AM EDT
I got one early this year. I took a chance on speeding up on a yellow, camera evidence was irrefutable: shows light red before truck entered intersection side by side with the red light closeup, then the same while truck was in intersection, the damned thing calculates your speed too.

Anyway it's a non driver license points offense, I paid the $50 and moved on.

jmarkma was right, if you have a pickup truck, driving with the tailgate down will obscure the plate. I made a copy of the offense picture and cut an outline of what my tailgate would have looked like with it down realized what plate would have been obscured.

I ran it in broad daylight so those flashbulb diffuser sprays wouldn't have worked. The license plate covers like the Eliminator are illegal in my state so that's not an option.

I considered other options: mud on the plate is free Another option might to hang the plate in your rear view window by suction cups or something and temporarily remove it when running a red, then putting it back on after running the red But that's a distraction. What's really needed is a James Bond type license plate selector with bogus plates at the push of a button!
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 6:17:39 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/9/2005 6:19:59 AM EDT by so2315]
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 6:36:28 AM EDT
A judge here in Greensboro, just told our wonderful city that they had to take the cameras down. Apparently any moving violation ticket money is required by state law to go to the public schools 100%. Greensboro City council decided to put in the cameras of which the camera company gets 50% of the ticket money, and the rest goes to the council.

A smart attorney sued the city for several million dollars they owed the school system for the camera companys 50% of the cut. Needless to say, no more cameras....

Nothing but a bunch of idots running the city and county here anyway. I am ready to move......
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 6:38:52 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Southrnshooter:
A judge here in Greensboro, just told our wonderful city that they had to take the cameras down. Apparently any moving violation ticket money is required by state law to go to the public schools 100%. Greensboro City council decided to put in the cameras of which the camera company gets 50% of the ticket money, and the rest goes to the council.

A smart attorney sued the city for several million dollars they owed the school system for the camera companys 50% of the cut. Needless to say, no more cameras....

Nothing but a bunch of idots running the city and county here anyway. I am ready to move......



In Houston they announced that any tickets from the camera would be an "administrative" fee and not a ticket per se. The amount would also be much less than if The Man pulled you over and wrote the ticket and it will not go against anyones driving record.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 6:47:28 AM EDT
www.ustraffic.net/aboutus.html

Company getting a cut of "safety enforcement" revenue.

Note that none of the management team is named on the company's website.... cockaroaches don't like the light...

Link Posted: 9/9/2005 7:19:25 AM EDT

Originally Posted By so2315:
PHOTOBLOCKER



Beat me to it! With cameras about to go up in a town nearby that is notorious for their speed traps, I am planning to try this stuff out. Not that I run lights, to the contrary. It's the yellow light tickets that I want to beat.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 7:53:43 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/9/2005 7:54:17 AM EDT by gunman0]
This topic comes up on the boards every few months. And people in non-red light camera areas always say it will make things safer. When in actual practice, studies show they cause more accidents than the stop. Rear-ending accidents go up due to people slamming on breaks to make the red light. There is no buffer, if the light is red for .01 seconds, you get a ticket. I saw my aunt's ticket, it was red for .02 seconds printed right on the ticket. And the ticket showed the pictures of a completely empty intersection, no other traffic anywhere in sight.

She paid it, as she was guilty, but of course now she is another one of those drivers who slams her breaks as soon as lights turn yellow, just waiting to be rear-ended.

And of course there are the court cases where they have proven that yellows have been shortened, in order to increase revenue. It's a scam. The government knows how to reduce red light accidents, the same way they always have. Longer yellow lights and/or longer all red pauses=less red light accidents.

The red light cameras are 100% about revenue, not safety.

The normal things the local governments do in cities they are planning on putting up red light cameras is release misleading or completely false statistics, as well as studies of the public's greatest fears while driving. Mysteriously red light runners is always number 1, when all independent public studies show drunk drivers, reckless drivers, cell phone users, teenage drivers, and many other things way above red light runners.

Next, the local news stations will pick up on these studies, and broadcast them, finding idiots to repeat the statement that red light runners are the most dangerous, so they can get on the news. I always wonder how many people they interview in order to get two or three that say their greatest fear while driving are red light runners. And of course anyone who says red light runners are their biggest worry, are thinking of blatant red light runners and getting T-boned instead of people who tailgate to make it through.

Then the local government will come to the rescue, with a new camera system, where the manufacturer installs and maintains the cameras, absorbing all costs, and the company only takes 40-50% of the revenue to reimburse themselves while the city gets the rest. Of course the city will not give points with the tickets, so people need not worry too much about malfunctions and errors with the automatic systems. Of course no points also means city gets more revenue from repeat offenders instead of their licenses being suspended for public safety, they can go on running lights and giving the city more money. The other reason for no points, is they know that more poeple will just pay instead of going to court to fight the ticket, i.e. more revenue.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 8:15:35 AM EDT
There is similar debate going on in the UK/Ireland about speed cameras. The red-light-photo thing isn't in place there, but speed cameras have been going on for a while.

There's certainly never any great doubt in the issue, they send you a photo with your ticket with the speed readout in the corner, more often than not it's from the front and you can identify the driver's face. They are, of course, appealable.

It -seems- that there's also a bit of give and take. For example, if the limit is 30mph, the camera can be set to go off at 40+.

The controversy isn't so much that the speed cameras are there, it's that they're causing accidents when people suddenly spot them and slam on the brakes. As a result, the British have started to paint the things a high-visibility yellow. The end result is the same, people will slow down, but accidents are reduced.

The other controversy is that the cameras are being placed in the wrong places. Instead of on twisty country roads, where driving too fast can genuinely be dangerous, they tend to go on the motorways where driving fast isn't an issue. Human British traffic enforcement always focused on the manner in which you drove more than the speed at which you drove, so it's a bit of a change.

Personally, I think the whole rear-ender thing is a bit of a red herring. Chances are that after you've rear-ended someone who stopped fast at a yellow light, you'll have learned a bit of a lesson by way of paying insurance costs that will prevent you from tailgating in future. The problem will sort itself out over time.

NTM
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 8:19:32 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/9/2005 8:20:24 AM EDT by elseed]
An article re: the Scottsdale photo radar ticketing system. My mom caught a couple of these and paid the revenuers through the mail. A LE friend of hers later said, "I wouldn't pay those."
Scottsdale Times article
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 9:13:59 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/9/2005 9:14:21 PM EDT by 22bad]

Originally Posted By cool-e:

Originally Posted By Southrnshooter:
A judge here in Greensboro, just told our wonderful city that they had to take the cameras down. Apparently any moving violation ticket money is required by state law to go to the public schools 100%. Greensboro City council decided to put in the cameras of which the camera company gets 50% of the ticket money, and the rest goes to the council.

A smart attorney sued the city for several million dollars they owed the school system for the camera companys 50% of the cut. Needless to say, no more cameras....

Nothing but a bunch of idots running the city and county here anyway. I am ready to move......



In Houston they announced that any tickets from the camera would be an "administrative" fee and not a ticket per se. The amount would also be much less than if The Man pulled you over and wrote the ticket and it will not go against anyones driving record.



Yup, when I was younger I believed them when they said stuff like that
Top Top