Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 2/1/2011 3:24:18 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 3:25:15 AM EDT
Uh oh...
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 3:25:46 AM EDT


I am sure that is true. I am equally sure I still don't like them.

Link Posted: 2/1/2011 3:29:15 AM EDT
Another study showed that simply flashing the yellow light during the transition from gree to red was far more effective on reducing crashes and people running the red.

But hey, there's no revenue in flashing yellow lights.
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 3:32:01 AM EDT
Fatal t-bone type crashes I would expect. The doors of a car and restraints inside are designed for head on.

That said, I bet there's more "fender bender type following too closely guy in front doesn't want a ticket" type crashes.

Of course, none of this would matter if people would just chill the hell out when they are in their cars.
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 3:32:09 AM EDT
I'm sure I'm in the minority here when I say I like them. I don't run red lights, and don't particularly relish the thought of some dickhead in an 8K pound SUV impaling me on his bumper while I am bicycling or riding a motorcycle.
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 3:33:46 AM EDT
Bullshit.

Link Posted: 2/1/2011 3:34:31 AM EDT
And gun control saves lives..
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 3:34:57 AM EDT
So would driving 5 MPH everywhere you go.

Drop the speed limit to 5MPH , its for the chilrens
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 3:38:01 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/1/2011 3:39:22 AM EDT by JDJR]
I like em. Just another tool for cops that can't be everywhere to enforce law.

I also like those speed deals where they set up a radar and photograph plates.

Don't like it? Change the law. until then Don't break the law.
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 3:43:18 AM EDT

Originally Posted By JDJR:
I like em. Just another tool for cops that can't be everywhere to enforce law.

I also like those speed deals where they set up a radar and photograph plates.

Don't like it? Change the law. until then Don't break the law.

Yea we should have CCTV everywhere cause you know cops can't see everything. England has the right idea.
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 3:44:37 AM EDT

Originally Posted By JDJR:
I like em. Just another tool for cops that can't be everywhere to enforce law.

I also like those speed deals where they set up a radar and photograph plates.

Don't like it? Change the law. until then Don't break the law.


Link Posted: 2/1/2011 3:44:40 AM EDT
More studies have shown that by just keeping the yellow light lit longer and a little more time before changing the cross traffic light to green also prevents crashes.
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 3:46:06 AM EDT
Realy the last survey I saw said "rear impact crashes increased" where there is a known camera, and a yellow light is really a grace period...
But hey big brother is watching..........and it's really all about the auto insuranse cos. they fund that stuff ,and radar, so they can raise your rates.......
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 3:51:18 AM EDT
Big surprise there its put out by the Insurance Institute
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 3:51:29 AM EDT
Originally Posted By TacticalMOLONLABE:

Originally Posted By JDJR:
I like em. Just another tool for cops that can't be everywhere to enforce law.

I also like those speed deals where they set up a radar and photograph plates.

Don't like it? Change the law. until then Don't break the law.

Yea we should have CCTV everywhere cause you know cops can't see everything. England has the right idea.


Laws that are not enforced or with lack enforcement are not worth paper they are printed on and we slip into lawlessness. If technology enables better enforcement it's win for rule of law. Indeed I have no problem with CCTV in public spaces either,
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 3:58:16 AM EDT

Originally Posted By JDJR:
Originally Posted By TacticalMOLONLABE:

Originally Posted By JDJR:
I like em. Just another tool for cops that can't be everywhere to enforce law.

I also like those speed deals where they set up a radar and photograph plates.

Don't like it? Change the law. until then Don't break the law.

Yea we should have CCTV everywhere cause you know cops can't see everything. England has the right idea.


Laws that are not enforced or with lack enforcement are not worth paper they are printed on and we slip into lawlessness. If technology enables better enforcement it's win for rule of law. Indeed I have no problem with CCTV in public spaces either,

Yea and they should put CCTV into peoples homes because they could be smoking pot in them.. I mean we wouldn't want to slip into anarchy!
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 4:08:19 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 4:16:35 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/1/2011 4:16:46 AM EDT by Gator]
Originally Posted By madmathew:
Big surprise there its put out by the Insurance Institute


Hardly an impartial study - more tickets/points on driver's licenses, more revenue.
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 4:19:08 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
The study concludes that the cameras have reduced the rate of fatal crashes by 24 percent in 14 large cities that introduced red light cameras between 1996 and 2004.


http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/02/01/study-finds-red-light-cameras-cut-fatal-crashes/?test=latestnews


They used bad data. Read about Car and Drivers report showing how the yellow light duration is cut shorter than is safe to trap more motorists.
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 4:21:34 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 4:22:30 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Danner130:
Another study showed that simply flashing the yellow light during the transition from gree to red was far more effective on reducing crashes and people running the red.

But hey, there's no revenue in flashing yellow lights.


Link Posted: 2/1/2011 4:46:25 AM EDT
Realy its a "win-win" for the auto insurance companies....and people have shot the cameras, that's a win/lose.....
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 4:51:54 AM EDT
Originally Posted By JDJR:
Originally Posted By TacticalMOLONLABE:

Originally Posted By JDJR:
I like em. Just another tool for cops that can't be everywhere to enforce law.

I also like those speed deals where they set up a radar and photograph plates.

Don't like it? Change the law. until then Don't break the law.

Yea we should have CCTV everywhere cause you know cops can't see everything. England has the right idea.


Laws that are not enforced or with lack enforcement are not worth paper they are printed on and we slip into lawlessness. If technology enables better enforcement it's win for rule of law. Indeed I have no problem with CCTV in public spaces either,


Getting a blowjob in some states is still illegal, what are you gonna do about that??
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 6:17:12 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Chairborne:
I'm sure I'm in the minority here when I say I like them. I don't run red lights, and don't particularly relish the thought of some dickhead in an 8K pound SUV impaling me on his bumper while I am bicycling or riding a motorcycle.


I agree with you, I get sick and tired of self important asswipes running red lights.
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 6:23:30 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Chairborne:
I'm sure I'm in the minority here when I say I like them. I don't run red lights, and don't particularly relish the thought of some dickhead in an 8K pound SUV impaling me on his bumper while I am bicycling or riding a motorcycle.



Count me on this as well.

Link Posted: 2/1/2011 6:23:58 AM EDT
It is irrelevant whether red light cameras do or do not save lives. They are intrusive devices which place machines in control of humans. Use of technology in this way needs to cease.

The government could decide any manner of things have some sort of health benefit and force us to use them. Where does it end?

Control, that's all it is.
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 6:26:06 AM EDT
But some disagree.

Gary Biller, executive director of the National Motorists Association, a Wisconsin-based drivers' rights organization, disputed the institute's finding that the cameras have reduced deaths. He cited previous studies — questioned by the institute — that found that the cameras increase crashes, including rear-end collisions.

As for calling the cameras a low-cost solution, Biller added: "They're not low cost to the motorist."



Link Posted: 2/1/2011 6:27:54 AM EDT
Originally Posted By ScopeScar:
It is irrelevant whether red light cameras do or do not save lives. They are intrusive devices which place machines in control of humans. Use of technology in this way needs to cease.

The government could decide any manner of things have some sort of health benefit and force us to use them. Where does it end?

Control, that's all it is.


If they ban fast food restaurants we would not have so many overweight people. They could fine you for not eating homemade meals every day. Think of the children!!!!
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 6:29:34 AM EDT
Originally Posted By ScopeScar:
It is irrelevant whether red light cameras do or do not save lives. They are intrusive devices which place machines in control of humans. Use of technology in this way needs to cease.

The government could decide any manner of things have some sort of health benefit and force us to use them. Where does it end?

Control, that's all it is.


My hometown installed 3 a couple years ago. In the first 9 months they had already generated over one million in revenue.

The fine is $75.00 with the cith only getting $25.00 of it.

They have since installed close to a dozen more and are adding them as fast as they can.

Houston on the other hand decided to remove all of theirs in 2010.

BigDozer66

Link Posted: 2/1/2011 6:33:32 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/1/2011 6:35:54 AM EDT by klinc]

Originally Posted By BigDozer66:
Originally Posted By ScopeScar:
It is irrelevant whether red light cameras do or do not save lives. They are intrusive devices which place machines in control of humans. Use of technology in this way needs to cease.

The government could decide any manner of things have some sort of health benefit and force us to use them. Where does it end?

Control, that's all it is.


My hometown installed 3 a couple years ago. In the first 9 months they had already generated over one million in revenue.

The fine is $75.00 with the cith only getting $25.00 of it.

They have since installed close to a dozen more and are adding them as fast as they can.

Houston on the other hand decided to remove all of theirs in 2010.

BigDozer66



A town here installed them a year ago for safety. A couple weeks ago there was an article in the paper saying 2 of them had to be moved because they were not making enough money.

The same article also said that fatal crashes went down a bit while rear enders went up drasticaly in these intersections.
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 6:36:12 AM EDT
We have them here.

We had speed vans here but not sure if they are still around.
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 6:50:32 AM EDT
Speed vans are unmanned and just FULL of expensive equipment.
Paintball guns are accurate enough to hit a speed camera lens at a good distance.
People in the UK are setting speed/cctv/redlight cameras on fire with gasoline.

Machines cannot (yet) fight back, just like you can't fight them in court.

I don't like them because the operating companies make so much money off them.

I am not particularly sure that they serve any safety purpose because I see all sorts
of unpredictable behavior at these intersections and unpredictability causes crashes
and death.
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 7:07:13 AM EDT
A recent study finds that traffic cameras reduce freedom in the United States.
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 7:10:32 AM EDT
tag
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 7:14:05 AM EDT
Originally Posted By forrest0872:
A recent study finds that traffic cameras reduce freedom in the United States.


How so?

Link Posted: 2/1/2011 10:13:43 AM EDT
Redlight cams would be tolerable, but the speed, seatbelt, cellphone, exhaust noise, broken windshield, nose picking big brother tickets need to go. There is so much extra shit they can add on to these cams. Lets say you pass one cam and get to the next a second too quick.................
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 10:25:27 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/1/2011 10:43:26 AM EDT by garwj]
Very scientific. Fatal crashes go down so it must be the red light cameras responsible.
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 10:28:05 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Tin_Star:
Originally Posted By forrest0872:
A recent study finds that traffic cameras reduce freedom in the United States.


How so?



Conceptually, it is because we are being treated like children by our elected authorities.

Freedom is not simply having rights, it is also exercising them.

People become mindful of small things - traffic cameras, code enforcement, petty fines, etc. - and extrapolate it to larger things. It is only by way of significant education that people even realize they retain as many rights as they do.

Gun laws are a perfect example. Have you ever had anyone ask you, "Wow, is that legal?" in reference to a rifle, accessory, or feature? They don't know about it, and so the average person simply assumes it is illegal. They maintain an "ask permission first" mentality when it comes to all things government.

Legislation and policy which serve primarily as means of supplemental revenue generation reinforce a subject mentality within the general population, leading to a de facto loss of freedom via inaction.
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 10:29:55 AM EDT
I wonder if adding another 2 seconds worth of delay between light changes would have similar results.
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 10:38:24 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/1/2011 10:40:59 AM EDT by CasualObserver]
Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
The study concludes that the cameras have reduced the rate of fatal crashes by 24 percent in 14 large cities that introduced red light cameras between 1996 and 2004.


http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/02/01/study-finds-red-light-cameras-cut-fatal-crashes/?test=latestnews


There are no words in the English language that accurately describe how little I care.

No fucking cameras.

Link Posted: 2/1/2011 10:38:27 AM EDT

Originally Posted By JDJR:
I like em. Just another tool for cops that can't be everywhere to enforce law.

I also like those speed deals where they set up a radar and photograph plates.

Don't like it? Change the law. until then Don't break the law.


Link Posted: 2/1/2011 10:40:44 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/1/2011 10:41:57 AM EDT by swingset]

Originally Posted By JDJR:
I like em. Just another tool for cops that can't be everywhere to enforce law.

I also like those speed deals where they set up a radar and photograph plates.

Don't like it? Change the law. until then Don't break the law.

Three cheers for private companies enforcing the laws with little or no oversight! Three cheers for the assumption of guilt, and you as a private citizen under the burden of proving innocence to pay a private company in lieu of actual law enforcement!!!

Yay freedom!

BTW, in Ohio every single municipality that has put the red-light scams to a referendum have voted them out. Every. Single. One.

Apparently, and appropriately, people don't like to be fleeced by RedFlex and their local government.

Luckily there are more people like me than you. Otherwise, this country would really fucking suck.
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 10:49:10 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/1/2011 11:06:30 AM EDT by nightstalker]
Unintended Consequence


$$$$ was the motivation


What a conundrum for cities that are dropping them because they're not very $$ productive after all

I saw where one city was going to keep them and give their paltry share to charity.!!!!! To prove it was public safety and not revenues.

http://articles.sfgate.com/2011-01-31/news/27093496_1_red-light-camera-charity-idea-local-charities
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 10:51:28 AM EDT
Glad they got rid of them in N.C. (at least in Charlotte)
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 10:52:01 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/1/2011 10:53:30 AM EDT by John_Wayne777]
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 11:25:13 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/1/2011 12:04:12 PM EDT by StarJumper]
Originally Posted By Wooddust:
Originally Posted By Chairborne:
I'm sure I'm in the minority here when I say I like them. I don't run red lights, and don't particularly relish the thought of some dickhead in an 8K pound SUV impaling me on his bumper while I am bicycling or riding a motorcycle.



Count me on this as well.



I love the guys on this board who basically say, "DON"T TOUCH MY 2ND AMENDMENT RIGHTS...... but you can have all my other rights, I don't need them and I want the .gov to protect me!" .....

pathetic...
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 11:27:14 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/1/2011 11:28:14 AM EDT by Usagi]
How much $$$$ did the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety get paid to publish that pile of steaming shit?



ETA: The reason that fatal crashes were less common at these intersections is because people are driving around them, and having their fatal crashes elsewhere.
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 11:41:01 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Usagi:
How much $$$$ did the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety get paid to publish that pile of steaming shit?



ETA: The reason that fatal crashes were less common at these intersections is because people are driving around them, and having their fatal crashes elsewhere.

Pay? They probably funded it. They benefit GREATLY by harsher enforcement by way of rates.

They jizz their shorts when LE has a new mousetrap, it's better for them than you and I.
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 11:46:36 AM EDT
Originally Posted By klinc:

Originally Posted By BigDozer66:
Originally Posted By ScopeScar:
It is irrelevant whether red light cameras do or do not save lives. They are intrusive devices which place machines in control of humans. Use of technology in this way needs to cease.

The government could decide any manner of things have some sort of health benefit and force us to use them. Where does it end?

Control, that's all it is.


My hometown installed 3 a couple years ago. In the first 9 months they had already generated over one million in revenue.

The fine is $75.00 with the cith only getting $25.00 of it.

They have since installed close to a dozen more and are adding them as fast as they can.

Houston on the other hand decided to remove all of theirs in 2010.

BigDozer66



A town here installed them a year ago for safety. A couple weeks ago there was an article in the paper saying 2 of them had to be moved because they were not making enough money.

The same article also said that fatal crashes went down a bit while rear enders went up drasticaly in these intersections.


Yeah, ours were installed for safety. When a local judge ordered them turned off the city's main argument in the appeal was, you guessed it, that the city stood to lose a huge amount of money from them being shut off. They're back in action.
Link Posted: 2/1/2011 11:48:14 AM EDT
They're NOT red light cameras they're MONEY cameras! Ever go through an unfamiliar intersection? Ever see the light change yellow and be caught right at that moment where you're not sure to slam on the brakes or mash the gas?

Now say you decide to mash the gas as you're right on top of the intersection. BUT.... Holy crap that's gotta be the shortest yellow light ever!!!

Then flash... flash... You now know why that yellow was so short. You just got yourself a ticket comming to you in the mail. Sorry guys. I hate these things with a passion.

Want to reduce accidents at high incidence intersections? Make the yellow duration LONGER...
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top