Red light camera

[Jeremy]

I've not really been following this thread closely as it's a subject that's been done to death here - or at least, it's been done to death on the subject of speed cameras, but I don't think I've ever really heard anyone moaning about traffic light cameras before. Surely only a complete and utter idiot would drive through a red light and then complain that they'd been caught breaking the law. Fair enough if the cameras are so badly set up that they cannot accommodate reasonable behaviour (ie. an appropriate time delay before the camera activates depending upon the speed of the traffic passing it), but if the camera is being 'reasonable' (and that's the test for all laws, I think) then I'm really not sure you can complain - there are surely very, very few situations where it can be safe or responsible to drive through a red light rather than waiting 20 seconds or so for it to change to green.

Now, speed cameras are a different thing. Again - if they are operating 'reasonably' (ie, in a situation where it is dangerous to speed) then you've got no cause for complaint. The problem though is that speed cameras on the whole are not yet clever enough to be able to judge when they are being reasonable - most speed cameras are 'dumb', and keep doing the same thing whatever the time of day, weather conditions, amount of traffic etc. Some (mostly on motorways here) are actively controlled and linked in to the variable speed limits systems on such roads - but those ones are still quite rare.

And then you get average speed cameras, which are all over the place here now. As annoying as they are, the philosophy behind average speed cameras really does seem to be 'safety-based' rather than 'revenue-earning based', which I suppose you have to respect.

Jeremy

[kyle4501]

What I'd like to see is the green light begin to flash before it goes yellow.
If you're worried that will encourage some to speed up, include a traffic light camera & a speeding camera to deal with that abuse.

As for me, I would appreciate the extra warning so I can make fewer hard stops. Hard stops are abusive to equipment.

I'd rather abuse my equipment by choice, not necessity. 

[Len Silva]

If the lights are timed properly, and you are at the speed limit, there is no reason for a hard stop.

Now, I have an idea that I think is of great value.  I have written to the Highway Department and the DOT with no response.  What do you guys think?

My idea is a distinctive line painted across the road at a specific distance form the stop line based on the speed limit and safe stopping distances.  The idea is that if you have crossed the line before the light turns yellow, you should be able to safely make it through the intersection before it turns red.  If you have not reached the line when the light turns yellow, you should be able to stop safely.

[kyle4501]

If the lights are timed properly, and you are at the speed limit, there is no reason for a hard stop.

Now, I have an idea that I think is of great value.  I have written to the Highway Department and the DOT with no response.  What do you guys think?

My idea is a distinctive line painted across the road at a specific distance form the stop line based on the speed limit and safe stopping distances.  The idea is that if you have crossed the line before the light turns yellow, you should be able to safely make it through the intersection before it turns red.  If you have not reached the line when the light turns yellow, you should be able to stop safely.

In my car, there is never a problem, but have you ever pulled a 8000+# trailer? Sure you can stop that quick, but it places a lot of extra strain on the brakes to do so.
I like to transition between accelerator & brake - NOT toggle between mashing either to the floor. 

I think the line that already exists is ignored with such frequency that any other lines will only confuse the idiots further.

[belfert]

Well I had an early experience with camera traffic control! Back in the 90's I borrowed a friends rollback (yes Brian some people do have friends they trust!) to go to MO and pick up a mustang I'd bought off

I agree that people do loan out vehicles and my father has used my vehicles a few times.  The way people were bitching and moaning about loaned out vehicles here locally you would have thought they never drove their own vehicle.  The reality is it was just an excuse to get out of a ticket and to shut down the red light cameras.  I just don't think that loaning out vehicles happens near as often as attorneys make it out to be.

I don't have an issue with red light cameras if government and the contractors don't do things on purpose to generate revenue.  Based on what I see every day they can make plenty of money within existing parameters.  I think the problem is eventually folks start obeying the law and the revenue generated goes down.  Government needs that revenue so they start changing things.

[Lin]

I would think it was reasonable if a video or sequenced camera activated once the light turned red and only vehicles that could be shown to enter the intersection after the light was already red could be cited.  None of this "hadn't cleared the intersection" stuff.  Yellows should be extended to avoid causing panic stops too.  Further, if it really safety oriented, than the cameras should be removed from any intersection where accidents increase.  Speed cameras are outrageous since many speed limits are set way below what is a safe speed.  I judge a safe speed by what the Highway Patrol drives since we all know that they would not drive at an unsafe speed.  Anyway, maybe if a speed camera was set at 10 mph above the posted limit it would be a little reasonable.  I-10 near us has a speed limit of 65mph.  That's reasonable for the bus.  It is not reasonable for a car.  I figure that it's a good speed limit for the right lane, and each lane to the left of that should be increased by at least 5 mph.  When you get to the extreme left lane, there should be a minimum speed of 70-75 mph.

Oh yeah, if there is not a clear picture of the driver's face, the ticket should be trash.  I'd call that "reasonable doubt", and it is not the citizen's job to supply an possible alternate guilty driver.  That's like saying, "A crime was committed and you are being charged with it, but if you can give us someone else, we will prosecute him instead of you."  Legal innocence does not depend on finding a substitute, it depends on lack of irrefutable evidence.

[eddiepotts]

I think the lights are timed for my 18' truck. That's great and all but that idiot second car that you normally see come behind you through the yellow light is the other 22' of your bus. in my city we do not have public transportation so I am one of the only buses. The speed limit of 45 down main street is great for stopping my truck in a reasonable manner before a light turns red. When your in a bus your having to get the equivalent of two vehicles through the same light. I know all the do gooders that think the cameras are great do not pull over and call 911 when the fail to get their beast to stop or get it through before the light turns red to get the ticket your opinion makes them feel they deserve. How do you sleep at night knowing you got away with it and the rest of the world are paying penalties for it because of a camera that could not see all the details of a situation. You cant call it a fine because it is attached to the vehicle and not the driver. You can't go to jail for not paying but you can't get new registration for that vehicle until the penalty is paid. I am not talking about rush hour traffic, most of us drive slower in these conditions. But at midnight when we are pulling out the lights are triggered from someone coming off a side street. With that being said there is no timing of speed to make the lights it is just a split second change.

[kyle4501]

. . . . But at midnight when we are pulling out the lights are triggered from someone coming off a side street. With that being said there is no timing of speed to make the lights it is just a split second change.

BINGO!
That is where the flashing green comes in to alert the drivers of an impending signal change.
Those who would run the caution will have more time to speed up so they clear the intersection before opposing traffic enters.

That's my story & I'm sticking with it!

[wal1809]

InLin Silva I have to disagree completely.  I have been a cop for 22 years and I can tell you without a doubt it is nothing but a revenue for cities.  Allow me to put a new twist here to explain.  Cities can buy manhole covers, power poles, traffic signs, stop signs ect.  Every  traffic control device can be purchased.  The only one they can't purchase is the red light cameras.  They have to rent them for a whole lot of money.  I have a problem with that, a big one.  If the cities could buy them fir a one time payment at a fair value and the monies recieved were used for social programs I would have no problems.  Take the money and put it to use for specificc purposes like feeding hungry children, helping mental illness facilities, what else can we name that is severely lacking.  Or should we give the money to the general fund of the city where it can spent on none of these items.  It is a cash cow and angers me to no end.

To be clear the police don't operate these cameras.  The only part my department has is verifying the red light violation.  Incidentally our sergeants are paid overtime to review these.  They si in the office for time and a half watching the videos.  That is $45 bucks an hour.  They love it because the get to collect on the rape of the citizen's pocket books.

The price of the fine is $75 bucks.  Take a day off work to fight the fineand it costs you more.  That is why it is a low fine.  Weeding those out that would fight the fine but don't for it is not worth it.

As far as accident prevention:  BS. It has been proven the red light cameras have the opposite effect.  Accidents numbers have grown in those intersections. 

As far as you reffering to us who do not like he red light scam as idiots.  Your right we are idiots for putting up with that crap for a minute.     

[Tim Strommen]

...I would think it was reasonable if a video or sequenced camera activated once the light turned red and only vehicles that could be shown to enter the intersection after the light was already red could be cited.  None of this "hadn't cleared the intersection" stuff...

In California, I have seen the "cleared the intersection" tickets successfully argued.  The law here is CVC 22526, and as stated in Section F of that code: "This section shall be known and may be cited as the
Anti-Gridlock Act of 1987".

Regarding Yellow lights under this code, section B states: "A driver of a vehicle which is making a turn at an intersection who is facing a steady circular yellow or yellow arrow signal shall not enter the intersection or marked crosswalk unless there is sufficient space on the other side of the intersection or marked crosswalk to accommodate the vehicle driven without obstructing the through passage of vehicles from either side."

It is up to the officer's mood at the moment of ticket issue, but the spirit and intent of the law was to prevent people from sitting in an intersection once the light turns red - thereby blocking other traffic from moving through the intersection.  You may be able to fight a ticket under this code if you can prove in court that there was in fact sufficient space on the other side of the intersection for your vehicle, and that you were expeditiously moving towards it (albeit within the speed limit).

Further reading shows, Yellow lights are defined as: "Circular Yellow or Yellow Arrow:
21452.  (a) A driver facing a steady circular yellow or yellow arrow signal is, by that signal, warned that the related green movement is ending or that a red indication will be shown immediately thereafter.
(b) A pedestrian facing a steady circular yellow or a yellow arrow signal, unless otherwise directed by a pedestrian control signal as provided in Section 21456, is, by that signal, warned that there is insufficient time to cross the roadway and shall not enter the roadway."

Only under RED are you directed that entering the intersection as a motor vehicle is prohibited: "Circular Red or Red Arrow
21453.  (a) A driver facing a steady circular red signal alone shall stop at a marked limit line, but if none, before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection or, if none, then before entering the intersection, and shall remain stopped until an indication to proceed is shown, except as provided in subdivision (b).  (b) Except when a sign is in place prohibiting a turn, a driver, after stopping as required by subdivision (a), facing a steady circular red signal, may turn right, or turn left from a one-way street onto a one-way street. A driver making that turn shall yield the right-of-way to pedestrians lawfully within an adjacent crosswalk and to any vehicle that has approached or is approaching so closely as to constitute an immediate hazard to the driver, and shall continue to yield the right-of-way to that vehicle until the driver can proceed with reasonable safety.  (c) A driver facing a steady red arrow signal shall not enter the intersection to make the movement indicated by the arrow and, unless entering the intersection to make a movement permitted by another signal, shall stop at a clearly marked limit line, but if none, before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection, or if none, then before entering the intersection, and shall remain stopped until an indication permitting movement is shown.   (d) Unless otherwise directed by a pedestrian control signal as provided in Section 21456, a pedestrian facing a steady circular red or red arrow signal shall not enter the roadway. "

(Source for California Vehicle Code was CA DMV site: www.dmv.ca.gov, taken today: 7/14/2010)

...What I'd like to see is the green light begin to flash before it goes yellow...

...Yellows should be extended to avoid causing panic stops too...

I believe in Europe, they double the time of the Yellow, and flash it for the last half of its duration before turning Red, indicating that your yellow time is almost up.

-T

[belfert]

How exactly do speed cameras work?  I know they have them all over in Britian.  If one is going 56 MPH in a 55 MPH zone would I automatically get a ticket?

I've seen websites that show speed cameras destroyed by vandals.  There have to be some pretty angry folks out there to so some of the damage I have seen.

[Lin]

"It is up to the officer's mood at the moment of ticket issue, but the spirit and intent of the law was to prevent people from sitting in an intersection once the light turns red - thereby blocking other traffic from moving through the intersection.  You may be able to fight a ticket under this code if you can prove in court that there was in fact sufficient space on the other side of the intersection for your vehicle, and that you were expeditiously moving towards it (albeit within the speed limit)."

Therefore, since the camera cannot make a decision that the officer can, it is a flawed system, sort of scam for achieving summary convictions and revenue gain.  I would bet that the companies that sell the service and equipment do so on the basis of revenue projections rather than safely concerns.  Further, it should not be up to me to prove there was space on the other side of the intersection, but should be up to the accuser to prove there was not.  If an officer says so, it could have some significance.  The camera does not even try.



"I believe in Europe, they double the time of the Yellow, and flash it for the last half of its duration before turning Red, indicating that your yellow time is almost up."

There you go.  An attempt to make sense.

[Busted Knuckle]

How exactly do speed cameras work?  I know they have them all over in Britian.  If one is going 56 MPH in a 55 MPH zone would I automatically get a ticket?

I've seen websites that show speed cameras destroyed by vandals.  There have to be some pretty angry folks out there to so some of the damage I have seen.

Brian the speed cameras are set up just like an officers radar gun. What ever the "pre-determined" unacceptable speed is, is programmed into it and it sets of the alarm on the radar and starts flashing what the speed of travel is and has an audible alarm in a patrol car, and triggers the camera to take the picture in a speed trap!

Gee whiz who'd thought that 75 in a 55 was too fast? It was late @ night with hardly any traffic! On a controlled access 4 lane hwy!
  BK 

[Tim Strommen]

...Therefore, since the camera cannot make a decision that the officer can, it is a flawed system, sort of scam for achieving summary convictions and revenue gain...

But wait...  I think I just got misquoted (incorrect context)...  Regarding the above reply - I was referring to the CVC 22526 pertaining to "entering an intersection during a yellow and clearing the intersection before a red".  The Anti-Gridlock Act of 1987 gets misused often in CA, if the cop is in a b**chy mood - it should only be issued to cite drivers who are obstructing other rights of way through an intersection if the driver did not have enough space to get through the intersection when they entered an intersection during a yellow.  You've seen these bright people, their light is turning yellow so they jump in the intersection – then their light turns red, and yours turns green.  Only because they didn't have enough space to get out of the intersection – now you, the car next to you and all of the cars behind you get to wait while that "intellectual champ" gets to shrink down in their seat while those waiting eyes burn on them (horns-a-honkin)...

...Further, it should not be up to me to prove there was space on the other side of the intersection, but should be up to the accuser to prove there was not...

It is your (or your attorney's) responsibility to defend yourself, not the prosecution's, I was suggesting how you might do that.

...The camera does not even try...

Cameras don't issue tickets for not clearing an intersection before the light turned red – they issue based on the car entering after it turns red.  This is easy to prove with a sequence of images (video, or time stamped photos).

-Tim

[Lin]

Tim,

I know you were referring to the cops mood provoked abuse, but I nevertheless felt that at least the police can use discretion.  The camera reduces it to a black and white (or color) decision.

It is true that it is my job to defend myself but, if the quaint innocent-until-proven-guilty thingy applies, then it is the states job to prove there was no room rather than mine to prove their was.  They should have the burden of proof.

If the camera is set to take a picture of you entering the intersection after the light turns red, it is not the same as the camera taking a picture of you merely being in the intersection when the light turns red.