TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Red light cameras too good for their own good?

Red light cameras too good for their own good?

Isn't that ironic?!

quote:

Red light cameras too good for their own good? Some cities rethink devices as drivers pay heed, reducing fine revenue By Alex Johnson Reporter MSNBC updated 6:59 p.m. CT, Thurs., March. 20, 2008 Last week, Dallas officials reviewed the numbers and decided that a quarter of the cameras they had installed to catch motorists running red lights were too effective. So they shut them down. ...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23710970

You can't be serious?!

This points to every rumour / stereotype about cops always laying more fines at the end of the month to get quotas and such. They've already spent the money to buy and install the cameras too! Why just let them sit there?

Fuck, the roads are safer! You're saving money in hospital costs and lives!

What more could you want? Oh yeah - money.

reminds me of the smoking tax..... less people are smoking so now the revenue from the tax is not as much as they thought...

Police should install cameras at EVERY major traffic light, but they dont have to monitor each one, only the ones where there's significant violations or random checks. I have a solution to the problem - the catch is, most of these cameras dont have to be monitored for areas with very little traffic violations, and not all the time. But taking them off is such a dumb idea. They should just leave the cameras there and not monitor them, and people will think that they're still operational and not speed.

Or even better, for greater public security - install many "fake" cameras all over. You'd know the effect of this

Re: Red light cameras too good for their own good?

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Isn't that ironic?! http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23710970

omg

How stupid is that.

this just goes to show that traffic laws really are not primarily intended to provide for the safety of the public; rather, the main purpose, at least from dallas' point of view, is to tax the driving population.

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium Police should install cameras at EVERY major traffic light, but they dont have to monitor each one, only the ones where there's significant violations or random checks. I have a solution to the problem - the catch is, most of these cameras dont have to be monitored for areas with very little traffic violations, and not all the time. But taking them off is such a dumb idea. They should just leave the cameras there and not monitor them, and people will think that they're still operational and not speed. Or even better, for greater public security - install many "fake" cameras all over. You'd know the effect of this

Dude, if they're redlight camera's the camera's themselves are automated - no donut eating pig is there watching people run reds and trying to take their picture like you're shooting at Duck Hunt.

It's free money.

Until the public actually slows down and gets safer which was the reason they were installed anyways, right?

the red light camera's are bullshit for a few reasons.

1. the only real deterent for bad driving in ontario is fear of insurance rate hikes. Fines are one thing, but a major ticket can cost you hundreds and thousands of dollars per year in insurance premiums. Red light cameras can not prove who was driving the vehicle so all that happens is the owner of the vehicle gets a nice 140 bill in the mail.

2. As it is an automated system, its programed with a threshold. I got a red light ticket back in november of this year in ottawa. The ticket said i crossed the stop bar 0.06 seconds after the light turned red. thankfully i am armed with an MTO GDM manual and a MUTCD book, so i was able to show to the judge that the intersection was designed below standard and that the traffic signal heads were not mounted at the propper height and he canceled the ticket for me. Point being, the TAC manual specifies that driver perception reaction time is set to 2.5 seconds, and if that is the spec that is used to design the signal timings and road geometry for safety, why are they issuing tickets for hitting the intersection 0.06s late?


this whole system is a cash grab, same as average speed cameras or photo radar systems. they dont punish individuals, it punishes owners. Since no one can be held accountable, its just a cash grab.

quote:

Originally posted by colonelcrisp the red light camera's are bullshit for a few reasons. 1. Red light cameras can not prove who was driving the vehicle so all that happens is the owner of the vehicle gets a nice 140 bill in the mail.

that because your public officials are stupid. each car should have a primary driver listed against it and its guilty until proven innocent, ie someone fills in a statdec admitting to the offence.

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium Or even better, for greater public security - install many "fake" cameras all over. You'd know the effect of this

We have that all over our motorway network. Well not face cameras but camera casings. The thing is at any one point in time there will not be more that two or three cameras installed but you can never know where they are so you always pay attention when driving past one of these.

Add to that that our traffic fines are simply insane. Go a little to fast within city limits and you can easily loose 1000�. Thats two months pay right there. They are saying that this is to improve safety which everybody knows is bullshit...we have more accidents and deaths today when the fines are ten times what they were ten years ago and the number of people driving hasnt increased significantly so its clear that high fines arent doing shit to reduce accidents

Our traffic policy is, well i wouldn't say that its in the gutter since that would be a significant improvement over the actual state of it. And the current goverment is intentionally fucking it up more so it can score some political points with the idiots who they hope will vote for them. But im happy to say that the way things are going they wont last for much long.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN that because your public officials are stupid. each car should have a primary driver listed against it and its guilty until proven innocent, ie someone fills in a statdec admitting to the offence.

you do realize the burden of proof is on the crown. without photographic evidence or police eye witness testimony every case would be thrown out of court if they attempted to stick it to the registered primary driver.

quote:

Originally posted by colonelcrisp you do realize the burden of proof is on the crown. without photographic evidence or police eye witness testimony every case would be thrown out of court if they attempted to stick it to the registered primary driver.

So what's wrong with tzxing the car for the same violation?

Sure, as the owner you'd be pissed to get a bill in the mail from a red light or speed camera violation when you weren't driving. but wouldn't you know who had your car on that day and time? In Ontario, photo radar never cost you points on your license or insurance - it was simply a fine precisely because they couldn't prove who was in the car at the time.

Therefore, if you got this ticket in the mail, go after your buddy who borrowed your car that day for the fine. It's really quite easy.

At the end of the day it was all about money, not safety.

quote:

Originally posted by pmoisse This points to every rumour / stereotype about cops always laying more fines at the end of the month to get quotas and such. They've already spent the money to buy and install the cameras too! Why just let them sit there?

I'd say based on this article, that stereotype has now been proven.

quote:

Fuck, the roads are safer! You're saving money in hospital costs and lives! What more could you want? Oh yeah - money.

That's exactly how I feel. Such a shame really.

quote:

Originally posted by pmoisse So what's wrong with tzxing the car for the same violation? Sure, as the owner you'd be pissed to get a bill in the mail from a red light or speed camera violation when you weren't driving. but wouldn't you know who had your car on that day and time? In Ontario, photo radar never cost you points on your license or insurance - it was simply a fine precisely because they couldn't prove who was in the car at the time. Therefore, if you got this ticket in the mail, go after your buddy who borrowed your car that day for the fine. It's really quite easy.

the whole point is, a 100 to 200 dollar fine isnt enough to change driver habits. its not that much money. unless you start sticking it to a driver no one will give a shit. hence it just becomes a stupid cash grab by the city. This really pisses me off in ottawa since we elected lex luthor for mayor on a platform of 0% tax increases. Since he got elected, the dumbass has increased property taxes on average of 4.7% and now after our near record winter snowfall (over 4 meters this season) he wants to charge a further levy of 50 $ per household to cover teh costs of the winter maintenance (money he should have had in teh budget still had he not filandered the maintenance surplus of the last 5 years on bailing hte city out of the LRT project). o yea i almost forgot he is charged by the OPP with electoral fraud for rigging the municipal election. for everyones information it was lex luthor that brought in teh red light cameras.

^ Wow, that's a creepy mayor for sure.

Still though, if the Dallas article is any example, the cameras and associated tax does seem to have an impact on driver behaviour - at least at intersections where everyone knows there's a camera.

But hey, if you know there's a camera and you run the light anyways, you should pay the dumbass tax since you should know better. Or just drive more responsibly and give half the fine to me if you feel so strongly about pissing money away on avoidable fines.

In the 16 years I've been driving, I've done some pretty nutty things (Buffalo to Waterloo in a little under an hour for instance). Even still, I can't argue that fines like speeding and red light cameras are entirely avoidable if you're just being smart about it.

But seriously, is anyone really surprised by this? What I would like to see is a serious backlash from the tax payers for wasting their money on a project that they got rid of because it actually did what they said they intended it to do.

And if the police department wants more funding, perhaps they should try to get more allocated from the state, which might mean cutting back on irrelevant spending in other areas.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.