Fox 4 news red light videos

[L8 APEX]

They showed some of the video from the red light cameras. Evidence I would like to have if someone hits me. Garland quoted 50-70% reduction in accidents! We have a few cameras in D'ville. But there is a bad light at Main and Camp Wisdom folks run everyday when I am headed home. I stopped in the intersection once and two jacktards turned into oncoming traffic to snake around me. They could clearly see their red light when I pointed up at it and still completed the intersection. I'm gonna plant one of them in the railroad tracks one of these days:flaming: .

[PoorSvtman]

also alot of intersections have what look like cameras, but they are mearly just there for motion so at 3am you dont have to sit at a light for 20 mins. But they bot look the same lol...

I like the idea of them.. For accidents and such... Should help cut down on the amount of people that run redlights...

[gbgary]

We have a few cameras in D'ville.

i've seen the one at cockrell hill and wheatland, where is/are the other(s)?

[Ohmsby]

As I understand it most of the redlight monitoring is done by an outside contractor and it is at their discression which intersections to target. Typically the highest volume not necessarily the most dangerous.

If you pay the ticket it is not a moving violation if you challenge it can become one (this may vary city to city) The data for accident reduction is skewed at best and like most statistics has been manipulated to favor those who will benefit from it.

No doubt red light running is a huge problem but I think this is becoming a revenue stream for citie's and a handful of private firms.

D Magazine had a great article on this very issue.

[Moonshine]

i've seen the one at cockrell hill and wheatland, where is/are the other(s)?

So far, the only other intersection is Wheatland/Cedar Ridge. More to come, with 67/Cockrell Hill and 67/Danieldale as the likely next ones.

[Moonshine]

As I understand it most of the redlight monitoring is done by an outside contractor Correct. and it is at their discression which intersections to target.Incorrect. The City has the say on which intersections get cameras. Typically the highest volume not necessarily the most dangerous. Also incorrect, although the highest volume of red light violations is also usually sysnonymous with the highest number of wrecks.

If you pay the ticket it is not a moving violation Correct again. if you challenge it can become one (this may vary city to city) Incorrect.The data for accident reduction is skewed at best and like most statistics has been manipulated to favor those who will benefit from it. Time will tell on this one. They've told us to expect a 25% reduction in violations within the first 6 months, and another 25% reduction in the next 6 months, with a total long term reduction of 50%. We shall see.

No doubt red light running is a huge problem It is, particularly in terms of property damage, expense, and injuries to innocent folks who get smacked by someone with no insurance who runs a red light.but I think this is becoming a revenue stream for citie's and a handful of private firms. It is, although many will not be surprised to see the legislature change the law so that the revenue goes to the state to be applied to school finance.

D Magazine had a great article on this very issue.

My comments in red above.

[98Cobra]

Good clarifications, Brian. I knew all of that except the thinking that the state might capture all of that money for school finance. That kind of pisses me off. Instead of putting the money back into public safety, by funding safer roadway design for instance, they might use it to bail themselves out of a problem they should have solved years ago. Great. :mad:

FWIW, I am against RLCs - there are too many examples of the problems they cause, or how they fail to meet expectations to make them worth the while.

http://www.talonclub.com/forum/showpost.php?p=94456&postcount=16

[Ohmsby]

The red light issue is one that needs to be delt with because it inherently cause's some of the worst types of impact.

I have several issue's with them. Data show's that lengthening the time of the Yellow light has a similar impact on the number of collisions.

Some suggest that the Traffic engineers shorten the length of yellow light time to increase the number of infractions thus actually creating more rear-end type collisions. This has happened and resulted in civil litigation with ACS a subsidiary of Lockheed-Martin.

In some area's of the country ACS has gotten up to 50% of revenue such as it's relationship with the District of Columbia. This resulted in a class action lawsuit which suggested that one's right to due process was violated under the fifth ammendment.

These camera's also gather an amazing amount of additional data. Such as where you and your car are and what's in the car and who else may be in the area at any given time. I certainly think we may have some protection's afforded to us by the Fourth Ammendment if this information is gathered and stored in any way.

One cannot have their accuser in court (ie the camera). As a result, the right confront one's accuser (habeas corpus) is violated.

I don't want to come off a some anti big brother freak but it is obvious that these camera's will be used for much ore than red-light issue's.

I may mis-quote him but Ben Franklin summed it up best when he said
"If we restrict liberty to attain security we will lose both"

Some issue's fire me up thanks Terry I should get back to work

[Tex Arcana]

I may mis-quote him but Ben Franklin summed it up best when he said
"If we restrict liberty to attain security we will lose both"

Best quote today. :tu:

As for the cameras: I read a story somewhere, where a city in Canada installed them. Not only did the city NOT get the revenues they projected to get (because the company built in hidden processing and other fees), to the tune of close to 80% less than projected (iirc); but the city's police department had to fudge the accident numbers to continue to justify the expenditure, which was discovered when the canadian government decided to do some auditing of this situation, and discovered via data obtained from the insurance companies that the number of red-light runners went up precipitously AND the number of accidents increased precipitously as well.

Point is, we have companies getting involved, and they are going to make the money instead of the cities; they are also going to cheapt the system (shorten the yellows) for as long as they can get away with it.

And, I think, in the long run, this will be another in a long line of light-enforcement failures; and this won't be corrected until they take control of said lights themselves, and police them themselves, and keep the yellows' durations where they need to be, to WARN of an impending red light.

[Moonshine]

The red light issue is one that needs to be delt with because it inherently cause's some of the worst types of impact.

I have several issue's with them. Data show's that lengthening the time of the Yellow light has a similar impact on the number of collisions. Noever seen any data along those lines, but I'd be interested to.

Some suggest that the Traffic engineers shorten the length of yellow light time to increase the number of infractions thus actually creating more rear-end type collisions. I can't fathom any reputable traffic engineer who would be willing to do so.This has happened and resulted in civil litigation with ACS a subsidiary of Lockheed-Martin.

In some area's of the country ACS has gotten up to 50% of revenue such as it's relationship with the District of Columbia. Actually, depending upon the type of contract most vendors get more than 50% of grosss proceeds, because they own/install/maintain the equipment, and they perform most of the adminidtrative functions as well. This resulted in a class action lawsuit which suggested that one's right to due process was violated under the fifth ammendment. Don't see how you could claim a constitutional tort on this.

These camera's also gather an amazing amount of additional data. Such as where you Can't ID driver in most cases. and your car are Your car is on a public road. Is it's location supposed to be a secret? and what's in the car Again, cameras generally don't show that close view. and who else may be in the area at any given time. I certainly think we may have some protection's afforded to us by the Fourth Ammendment if this information is gathered and stored in any way. Please explain how taking a photo of a vehicle on a public road becomes a 4th amendment issue? There's no seizure taking place.

One cannot have their accuser in court (ie the camera). As a result, the right confront one's accuser (habeas corpus) is violated. There's no accuser, nor right to confront one, and no habeus corpus issue because this is not a criminal action.

I don't want to come off a some anti big brother freak but it is obvious that these camera's will be used for much ore than red-light issue's. True. We used a red light camera to get a more accurate description of a robbery suspect's vehicle when he ran a red light after commiting the robbery.

I may mis-quote him but Ben Franklin summed it up best when he said
"If we restrict liberty to attain security we will lose both" I completely agree with Ben, but fail to see how taking a picture of a car in a public place is a restriction on our liberty.

Some issue's fire me up thanks Terry I should get back to work

Although extremely conservative I'm also a very strong civil libertarian, and I just don't see how red light cameras can be claimed to infringe on our rights in any way. Remember, driving a vehicle on a public road is not a right, it's a priveledge granted by the state.

[tiffo60]

i see it as a RIGHT to drive on public roads, after all it is a free country and we pay taxes to keep these roads maintained, could be just im young and dumb and full of @#$^,

[Tex Arcana]

Although extremely conservative I'm also a very strong civil libertarian, and I just don't see how red light cameras can be claimed to infringe on our rights in any way. Remember, driving a vehicle on a public road is not a right, it's a priveledge granted by the state.

A privelege we earn by taking the tests. However, it is our RIGHT to due process and right application of the law. I think this is borderline at best.

[Ohmsby]

Brian, we have not had a chance to meet but thanks for the opposing view that's what makes it fun.

The yellow light time data can be seen at several sites one is www.motorists.com/ma/armey,html (http://www.motorists.com/ma/armey,html) or www.thenewspaper.com/rlc/reports/rlcreport3.asp (http://www.thenewspaper.com/rlc/reports/rlcreport3.asp)

It seems somewhat crazy to think someone would intentionally shorten the yellow light to gain revenue. It seems to be happening though www.theagitator.com/archives/006293.php (http://www.theagitator.com/archives/006293.php)

The case in D.C was argued with respect to the Fifth ammendment and I am sure we will see many Fourteenth ammendment arguments at the state level. Procedural due process certainly allows us some of the things this process denies us.


These camera's will have the ability to search a vehicle and thus it is arguable that it circumvent's some fourth ammendment rights.

All of us have seen or used Google earth and if I can see my casa from space with my computer for free I am almost sure the technology exist to see more.

The Habeas Corpus argument can be related to Brown vs. Vasquez The supreme court "recognized the fact that the writ of habeas corpus is the fundamental instrument for safeguarding individual freedom against arbitrary and lawless state action"

I am happy you are catching the bad guys with the camera's but it speaks to my point that we are already starting to use the technology for identity of individuals and their actions.

Although I may not have a legal expectation of privacy in a public place we need to be very careful it does not take long to find a slippery slope.



"First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the communists and I did not speak out because I was not a communist.
And then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.
And then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me."

Pastor Niemoeller, arrested by the Nazis during World War ll

[98Cobra]

Brian, check some of the links in the post I linked to. Some interesting data.

While I do not have a problem with a photo of your car being taken on the public street, I do have a problem with where that photo goes, how long it is kept for, who has access to it, etc. There is a marked difference between a pedestrian snapping a photo of your car on the road and the government doing it.

I think the fact that it isnt a criminal offense or rather one that does not accrue points on your license proves how wrong it is. If I run a red light and get caught by the camera, its $75 and no points. If I run the same light and an officer stops me, it could be $200, plus points off my license. How fair is that?

As far as due process, how do I challenge the "testimony" of a computer system? How can I, John Q. Public, hope to prove that my ticket was falsely issued? (Not to mention at $75, they are hoping you will just pay it rather than deal with the annoyance.)

[PUMP]

I think that this has been posted here before, but it bears repeating:
Ben Franklin quote:
"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security"

[Tex Arcana]

Brian, check some of the links in the post I linked to. Some interesting data.

While I do not have a problem with a photo of your car being taken on the public street, I do have a problem with where that photo goes, how long it is kept for, who has access to it, etc. There is a marked difference between a pedestrian snapping a photo of your car on the road and the government doing it.

I think the fact that it isnt a criminal offense or rather one that does not accrue points on your license proves how wrong it is. If I run a red light and get caught by the camera, its $75 and no points. If I run the same light and an officer stops me, it could be $200, plus points off my license. How fair is that?

As far as due process, how do I challenge the "testimony" of a computer system? How can I, John Q. Public, hope to prove that my ticket was falsely issued? (Not to mention at $75, they are hoping you will just pay it rather than deal with the annoyance.)


Plus, to pull a hard-left for a moment: the case of AOL releasing all it's search data to the public (similar to what the government got slapped for); and all the cases of businesses throwing away customer's private information (SS#s, CC#s, DL#s, etc) into unsecured receptacles. These illustrate what can happen when information falls into the wrong hands, and how we can be compromised. Who's to say some fa-fa-flunky doesn't sell the info to spammers or credit thieves? Or some bureaucrat orders things "cleaned up", and someone unscrupulous ends up with the info?

Of course, I think the "legitimacy" of these things is the most important part of the argument, and it needs to be addressed very soon.

This does bring to mind the case of speeding cameras in Japan: they put them up back in the mid- to late-80's, and they stayed up just long enough for a very important Japanese minister to get caught speeding--and caught with a woman in the car who was NOT his wife. :eek2: Very shortly after that happened, they came down. Who's to say some politician doesn't swing some clout in a similar situation? :rll:

[gbgary]

i was struck by the post that said if you pay the ticket it's not a moving violation. it is if a cop sees you...why not in this case?

[TP Derrick D]

WISH THEY WERE UP IN MORE PLACES !!!! People can think what they want and feel they way they do but given a chance and used properly they work.Like it was stated on this same subject last year or whenever, they use them in Germany when I was there in the mid 80's. They deter people from running lights. IF YOU CHALLENGE,you go to court, YOU GET A BLOWN UP PICTURE SHOWING YOUR CAR, LIC PLATE NUMBER,YOUR MUG SHOT AND ALL YOUR PEARLIE WHITES !! for a fee of course. But there ,the citizens don't make a mockrie out of the justice system and what "freedom" and "rights" means. You might be thankful for them if someone ran a light and injured or killed a love one and its your word against their word or the over-priced lawyer of some little rich kid or politician that's trying to get them off.

[Lyfisin]

i was struck by the post that said if you pay the ticket it's not a moving violation. it is if a cop sees you...why not in this case?

I 'think' it's because when a cop pulls you over, there's not doubt it's you.

On a camera one, they only get a picture of the plate and there's no way to tell who's behind the wheel so it's a civil penalty given to the owner of the vehicle.

I could be way off here. :hammer:

[98Cobra]

In the bill authorizing municipalties to use RLC systems, the state legislature would only permit them to be used in the manner indicated (monetary fine only, not to exceed $75, and no points). Why they did that can be debated, but thats the reason.

As for the thoughts about Germany utilizing them successfully....don't make me break Godwin's Law dang it! Its taunting me! :D

[Tex Arcana]

WISH THEY WERE UP IN MORE PLACES !!!! People can think what they want and feel they way they do but given a chance and used properly they work.Like it was stated on this same subject last year or whenever, they use them in Germany when I was there in the mid 80's. They deter people from running lights. IF YOU CHALLENGE,you go to court, YOU GET A BLOWN UP PICTURE SHOWING YOUR CAR, LIC PLATE NUMBER,YOUR MUG SHOT AND ALL YOUR PEARLIE WHITES !! for a fee of course. But there ,the citizens don't make a mockrie out of the justice system and what "freedom" and "rights" means. You might be thankful for them if someone ran a light and injured or killed a love one and its your word against their word or the over-priced lawyer of some little rich kid or politician that's trying to get them off.

If the system is administered fairly, I can go along with that. But it's been shown already that the corporations running them don't care about "fair", and will tweak the systems to increase revenue, even to the detriment of safety.

Also, I'm sure that in Germany they don't shorten the yellow light duration to increase violations, either. :hammer: And, atop that, I would guess that their lights are administered by the local government, not a corporation that is out to turn a profit at any cost.

The thing in Germany I like most is the Autobahn: not just because of the "no speed limits" thing; but also for their variable-speed-limit setup, based on traffic volume and road conditions. And, of course, their "slower traffic keep right" rule that is actually ENFORCED.

[Tex Arcana]

In the bill authorizing municipalties to use RLC systems, the state legislature would only permit them to be used in the manner indicated (monetary fine only, not to exceed $75, and no points). Why they did that can be debated, but thats the reason.

It's simple: low enough fine, no points, means fewer contested tickets and more money in the coffers. :hammer: Profit uber alles, don't'cha know. :rolleyes:


As for the thoughts about Germany utilizing them successfully....don't make me break Godwin's Law dang it! Its taunting me! :D

DO IT!! DO IT NOWWW!! :rll:

[98Cobra]

The thing in Germany I like most is the Autobahn: not just because of the "no speed limits" thing; but also for their variable-speed-limit setup, based on traffic volume and road conditions.

I believe that less than 50% of Germany's autobahn is unrestricted at this point.

edit: 65% are restricted.

[Tex Arcana]

I believe that less than 50% of Germany's autobahn is unrestricted at this point.

edit: 65% are restricted.
Yes, and the restricted sections have variable speed limits based on conditions. AND the left lane is still reserved for faster traffic. :)

[TP Derrick D]

That just goes to show how poorly this country is run and that not everything about it is better than others. Also how citizens refuse to accept that and most anything else UNCLE or BIG BROTHER wants to change. If the laws were enforced and people abide by them , they work. I seen it with my own two eyes over a 4 year period, didn't read it in some magazine or newspaper. But then again the citizens there abide by the law. By the way, the cameras are in cities and residential areas, not the autobahns.

[Tex Arcana]

That just goes to show how poorly this country is run and that not everything about it is better than others. Also how citizens refuse to accept that and most anything else UNCLE or BIG BROTHER wants to change. If the laws were enforced and people abide by them , they work. I seen it with my own two eyes over a 4 year period, didn't read it in some magazine or newspaper. But then again the citizens there abide by the law. By the way, the cameras are in cities and residential areas, not the autobahns.
I agree, civilization cannot exist without rule of law.

As for the autobahns: certain sections have cameras, because that is how they determine the need to change speed limits on the fly. :cool:

[TP Derrick D]

I agree, civilization cannot exist without rule of law.

As for the autobahns: certain sections have cameras, because that is how they determine the need to change speed limits on the fly. :cool:
I haven't been there since 1989 so I know there has been changes. I was talking about cameras that snap the picture of cars running red lights. I think the Autobahn cameras you're talking about is like out Tx-DOT and news station cameras we have here that show accidents and traffic congestion.Two different things.

[Tex Arcana]

I haven't been there since 1989 so I know there has been changes. I was talking about cameras that snap the picture of cars running red lights. I think the Autobahn cameras you're talking about is like out Tx-DOT and news station cameras we have here that show accidents and traffic congestion.Two different things.
Except that these are constantly monitored, and the monitoring station has links to the electronice speed limit signs, and they can change the speed based on traffic conditions, even to closing a lane if necessary. They are WAY ahead of us on that score.

[TP Derrick D]

Except that these are constantly monitored, and the monitoring station has links to the electronice speed limit signs, and they can change the speed based on traffic conditions, even to closing a lane if necessary. They are WAY ahead of us on that score.


Cool, thanks for the update Tex....and yes they are WAY ahead of us on things like that,even the mandatory seat belt law was in effect there at least 20+ years and I don't know how many before I first got there but wearing them just recently went all 50 states here. When I came back from Germany I was so used to wearing seatbelts I was doing it automatically even tho it was not mandatory to do so here at that time. Now it is and drivers have adjusted to it, just as they will if the cameras or anything else was put in place,administered fairly and does not make a "fat rat" out of a few individuals.

[Ohmsby]

dead horse beating in 3...2....1

Study Shows Right Turn on Red Crashes are Rare
The most common type of photo ticket issued for a practice that rarely causes accidents.

http://www.thenewspaper.com/rlc/pix/cpccover.jpgRed light camera supporters insist that the devices are needed to prevent the common and deadly T-bone style of accident at intersections. In practice, however, automated ticketing lenses are more often positioned to photograph a different type of violation, one that rarely causes accidents. A review of US Department of Transportation statistics shows that an average motorist could drive a billion miles -- the distance from Earth to Jupiter and back -- before being involved in an accident that resulted from a motorist making a rolling stop on a right-hand turn.

Despite the rarity of such incidents, municipalities like Schaumburg, Illinois have used red light cameras to generated more than $1 million from right-on-red tickets. Of the 10,000 photo tickets issued since November, only about 200 involved the straight-through type of violation used to justify the devices. Likewise, Duncanville, Texas with a population of 38,500 used a set of four cameras last year to generate 44,000 tickets worth $3.3 million. The private contractor in charge of the ticketing program defines a "violation" as passing the stop bar painted on the pavement at any speed greater than 2 MPH. Because of the design of the monitored intersections, motorists often must pull into the crosswalk past the stop bar to see cross traffic before initiating a turn. That means even when motorists fully stop before turning, they can be mailed a ticket.

Such a strict attitude appears out of proportion to the danger posed by right-turn accidents. The 2001 National Highway Transportation Safety Administration report entitled "Analysis of Crossing Path Crashes" examined 1998 data from the General Estimates System (GES) and Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) accident databases to conclude that of about 6.33 million crashes that year, about 1.72 million involved one vehicle cutting into the path of another. Of this amount, only 5.7 percent or 99,000 were classified as right-turn into path (RTIP) crashes, the least common type (Table 3-1). The category still included incidents unrelated to what might happen at an intersection, such as accidents that happened while making a right-hand turn out of a driveway or alley.

The number of right-turn accidents shrunk further to just 20,000 when narrowed to collisions taking place at intersections with traffic lights (Table 3-2). Of these, only 4.1 percent, or 2378, were caused by the violation of the traffic signal (Table 4-1).

Cities often justify these ticketing methods by saying they are protecting pedestrians and cyclists, but these numbers are small as well.

"The majority of fatalities did not occur at or near intersections," the report stated.

Of the small number of fatalities that did happen at an intersection, only 10.9 percent happened during a right turn (Table 5-5). Such accidents were forty times less likely to occur than a collision with another automobile. The text of the 2001 report is available in a 700k PDF file at the source link below. View more red light camera accident studies (http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/04/430.asp).


I'm just saying......

[98Cobra]

Holy old thread, batman. :)

[Ohmsby]

Yeah I just happen to catch it and thought the fact Duncanville was specifically mentioned made it relevant.

[dboat]

well at least there is now data to backup what we already knew.. these cameras are there to make money.. plain and simple.. but that is what they do and they do it well.. :flaming:

Dana

[98Cobra]

Saw this, thought I would share.

Just pay your fine, citizen, and stop breaking the law...

http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/news/maryland/031009_motorists_seeing_red_over_red_light_cameras

[Ohmsby]

So the power to ticket in this manner is manifesting itself into something more than the original intent. Amazing simply amazing I never would have seen that coming:hammer:

[gbgary]

Saw this, thought I would share.

Just pay your fine, citizen, and stop breaking the law...

http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/news/maryland/031009_motorists_seeing_red_over_red_light_cameras


that example is so extreme it's going to go a long way to getting them all banned. not smart.

[eddiesvt02]

I live in Houston and here if you see a huge flash light at nite behind you, you might wanna say cheese bc they got you, most of the cameras are at separate pole not where the light is, most of them are on skiny pole in the corner,sometimes u dont run the red light and you will see the flash light, some times it goes on when you approach to the corner really fast and stop at the light,i guess has speed sensor or smtg,anyways thats here in Houston,i normaly go to Dallas every 2 weeks and i havent see those kind of cams there, maybe i havent got lucky yet

[Tex Arcana]

So the power to ticket in this manner is manifesting itself into something more than the original intent. Amazing simply amazing I never would have seen that coming:hammer:

It's all about the benjamins, my friend... when in doubt, follow the money, it will lead you to enlightenment... and perhaps an aneurysm from the stress it generates.

[03LightningRocks]

Let's start shooting them out. I would love to put a license plate on that says F#CK YOU and spend the whole day running through those things. They got me on one for turning right on red at 121 and custer. I did run right through it to beat the oncoming traffic...but that is not the point. It somehow felt like I had been violated. these things are officially BS and like I said...everyone needs to start using them for target practice.

[03LightningRocks]

I have another idea...everyone start slamming on their brakes when they come up on a yellow light. Just stomp it to the floor and slide right up to the light. After enough collisions they might rethink the madness.

[mikelemoine]

If only catching rapists, murderers and theives were as profitable. Maybe they should start fining criminals instead of jailing them. We'd save money on jails and the government would actually assign police officers to solve crimes instead of writing traffic tickets.

[Tex Arcana]

Let's start shooting them out. I would love to put a license plate on that says F#CK YOU and spend the whole day running through those things. They got me on one for turning right on red at 121 and custer. I did run right through it to beat the oncoming traffic...but that is not the point. It somehow felt like I had been violated. these things are officially BS and like I said...everyone needs to start using them for target practice.

There's a movement out there that simply puts a pair of Post-It notes over the camera eyes--in Scottsdale, they do it to the speed cameras they use out there, too. No possibility of vandalism charges, because by the time they get out there to pull the Post-Its off, they fall off on their own!! :)


I have another idea...everyone start slamming on their brakes when they come up on a yellow light. Just stomp it to the floor and slide right up to the light. After enough collisions they might rethink the madness.

That's already happening... the municipalities/police depts hide that data when they trumpet how well they work. :hammer:

[dboat]

There's a movement out there that simply puts a pair of Post-It notes over the camera eyes--in Scottsdale, they do it to the speed cameras they use out there, too. No possibility of vandalism charges, because by the time they get out there to pull the Post-Its off, they fall off on their own!! :)



That's already happening... the municipalities/police depts hide that data when they trumpet how well they work. :hammer:

Hey, who is this guy posting??? :evil

Tex, how you been?

Dana

[03LightningRocks]

My son got popped in Houston by a camera. His video looked like it was real close. I don't think a cop would have given a ticket for one that close. The whole thing just pisses me off.

[03LightningRocks]

Oh yeah...and Howdy Tex....long time no read.:cool:

[Tex Arcana]

Hey, who is this guy posting??? :evil

Tex, how you been?

Dana

Besides worn to a frazzle? I'm good. :tu: Yourself?

[Tex Arcana]

Oh yeah...and Howdy Tex....long time no read.:cool:

yeah, yeah... go take yer blood pressure meds, I can hear your BP rising from over here. :d

[dboat]

Besides worn to a frazzle? I'm good. :tu: Yourself?

me too.. moving back to Dallas.. will be there in a week.. want to get together for a beer?

Dana

[Tex Arcana]

me too.. moving back to Dallas.. will be there in a week.. want to get together for a beer?

Dana

Holy crap in a hat!! :eek: Did someone put a gun to your head?? :lol:

Yeah, YGPM. ;)

[dboat]

Holy crap in a hat!! :eek: Did someone put a gun to your head?? :lol:

Yeah, YGPM. ;)

No, we wanted to get back to Texas. This way the wife is closer to her family.. mine lives in Tenn and Ky.. so the distance for them is about the same as it was to Erie.. but this is where the job was.. if I didnt take this one, I would have moved to Austin with the current job.. we were looking around for something with a lake view but the only place we really liked had a ton of restrictions.. so we are now going to start looking for some acreage.. we want to do a home that can get us off of the grid and be relatively self sufficient.. we think things are going to get crazy..

Dana

[Ohmsby]

Proposal to Track Uninsured With Red-Light Cameras Has Cities Seeing Big Money

Friday, March 27, 2009 http://www.foxnews.com/images/foxnews_story.gif
By Joshua Rhett Miller


Print (http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,510999,00.html)

ShareThis (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:void%280%29)

http://www.foxnews.com/images/522993/0_61_camera_320.jpg (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,510999,00.html#) AP

Jan. 27: A red light camera is seen at an intersection in Clive, Iowa.
#story .gallery_container p.caption{display:none !important;} #story .gallery_container p.strut{color:#000;} Jan. 27: A red light camera is seen at an intersection in Clive, Iowa.



http://www.foxnews.com/images/522993/0_41_camera_50.jpg (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,510999,00.html#)
http://www.foxnews.com/images/522993/0_42_camera2_50.jpg (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,510999,00.html#)




Running a red light may get more complicated — and more expensive — for some of the country's uninsured drivers.
Under a proposal by Chicago Alderman Edward Burke, cameras at 132 city intersections that currently enforce $100 red light violations would also be used to nab motorists whose cars are uninsured. Washington, DC officials told FOXNews.com it is willing to consider a similiar program.
Burke says the increased enforcement not only would make Chicago's roadways safer, but, at $90 per violation, would raise nearly $10 million a year for the cash-strapped city.
"I favor using these cameras to catch more than just motorists who run red lights," Burke said in January when announcing his proposal. "I believe it would also be a responsible use of these cameras to try and reduce the number of motorists who flaunt the law by driving without insurance."
Donal Quinlan, Burke's press secretary, stressed that the alderman's proposal to check for insurance coverage pertains only to vehicles already cited for red light violations. But in the interest of making money, he said, every scenario will be considered.

"I don’t think we're taking anything off the table," Quinlan said of the possibility of using cameras to check all vehicles for insurance coverage, regardless of whether they've run a red light.
"There certainly are different roads we could take to achieve higher revenue sources. I'm sure this will become part of the discussion as this proposal gets further consideration."
That has alarmed officials at the American Civil Liberties Union and AAA, who say the proposal appears to be more concerned with creating cash flow than safe traffic flow, and would bring Chicago a step closer to automatic law enforcement.
"This is being driven by revenue," said Jay Stanley, a national ACLU spokesman. "It's quite unseemly. The purpose of law enforcement is not to generate revenue — it's public safety. If all the talk is about revenue, I think it's a good indication that there's something fishy about this."
Stanley is also concerned with what he calls "mission creep."
"Today it's one thing, but tomorrow it could be another," Stanley said of how the red light cameras are used by authorities. "Automatic license plate scanning can be legitimate if it's for very narrowly-tailored purposes, but we don't want to see what we most strongly fear and oppose — technology for tracking innocent people going about their business."
Just last week, representatives from InsureNet, a Michigan-based company that provides instant insurance verification, told the City Council's Transportation Committee that by citing all vehicles that are uninsured — and not just those caught running red lights — up to $200 million could be generated if Chicago levied a $300 fine, well below the state fine of $500.
"$200 million would be a safe number," InsureNet President Jonathan Miller told FOXNews.com. "It should be more."
Using data entered into the National Law Enforcement Telecommunications System, an information-sharing network that links some 35,000 federal, state and local law enforcement agencies, Miller said InsureNet's system can verify "whether that hunk of metal" is covered in less than two seconds. The company would charge collection fees of up to 30 percent.
Justin McNaull, director of state relations for AAA, questions the feasibility of collecting heavy fines from uninsured drivers.
"There's a lot of moving parts to all of this and they really need to be thought through," McNaull said. "For people who can't afford to insure their vehicles, what's the likelihood of them paying a $300 fine?"
Ed Yohnka, spokesman for the Illinois chapter of the ACLU, said he's troubled by the lack of a public forum for Chicagoans to discuss the potential ramifications of the system.
"They didn't even pass this proposal before [InsureNet] said they could raise another $100 million," he said. "It shows the slippery slope of technology. The technology is there and the infrastructure is in place for all kinds of surveillance."
Chicago's Transportation Committee held Burke's proposal last week for further debate. No date has been set for a follow-up hearing, but Quinlan thinks it'll ultimately be perceived as another way to make roadways safer.
"If you're running a red light and also happen to be uninsured, we would consider it a positive tool in the city's arsenal to catch the uninsured driving on city streets," he told FOXNews.com. "These are public places. One would think this is something that would be a well-received public safety measure."
Nearly 14 percent of motorists nationwide drove uninsured last year, according to the Insurance Research Council, and that figure is expected to rise to 16.1 percent next year based on current unemployment rate projections. In Illinois, an estimated 15 percent of motorists were uninsured last year, well below the five states with the highest rates — New Mexico (29 percent), Mississippi (28 percent), Alabama (26 percent), Oklahoma (24 percent) and Florida (23 percent).
And although red light cameras are authorized in about half of U.S. states and used in more than 400 communities across the country, the debate on their usage is far from over. Just last week, Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour signed a law banning the use of red-light cameras, joining at least eight other states nationwide, including Alaska, Arkansas, Minnesota, Nebraska and West Virginia.
Studies by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety have found that camera enforcement has reduced red light violations in Fairfax, Va., and Oxnard, Calif., by roughly 40 percent, and by up to 50 percent internationally. Camera critics like Barbour, however, point to several studies in the past decade that found that the cameras actually increase the number of collisions at intersections where they are installed.
InsureNet officials say a lot is riding on what happens in Chicago. Big cities that already use red-light cameras — including Denver, Houston, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, New York and Washington — might want to follow suit. Metropolitan Police Department Assistant Chief Patrick Burke told FOXNews.com that the department would be "willing to explore" the possibility of using InsureNet's system to dole its $500 violation to uninsured motorists.
"However Chicago goes, that's how other big cities will go," Miller said. "The uninsured vehicle rate will drop very dramatically when this thing's in place."




This is a good time for a I TOLD YOU SO

[tiffo60]

Anyone remeber the movie Demolition Man? Is that where we are headed?

[L8 APEX]

MDK all day baby:evilknana

[Tex Arcana]

How ironic... "1984" comes true, but not because Big Government wants it, but because special-interests (read: red light camera COMPANIES) needing MONEY want it. :hammer:

[Sandman]

Bye Bye red light cameras in Frisco.. for now.

http://friscoblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2009/05/friscos-red-light-traffic-came.html

Frisco Police Lt. Ray Jewett said the city's contract with Redflex Traffic Systems expires today, and there is no plan to renew it, considering legislation pending in Austin that could phase out the cameras.

"At midnight, the cameras go dark," Jewett told my colleague Ian McCann, who's working on a story for Wednesday's newspaper.

Some cities, including Plano, Irving and Richardson, are scrambling to extend their contracts for red-light cameras. But Jewett said Frisco officials decided to see what the outcome of legislation was before rebidding the city's contract.

Police Chief Todd Renshaw told the City Council last week that violations on the cameras peaked at 800 a month at two intersections but are now down to about 136 a month.

"Those cameras are saving Frisco lives," council member David Prince said at the time.

[BC Lightning]

they were putting up new cameras on the 75-mockingbird intersection today

[03LightningRocks]

Police Chief Todd Renshaw told the City Council last week that violations on the cameras peaked at 800 a month at two intersections but are now down to about 136 a month.

"Those cameras are saving Frisco lives," council member David Prince said at the time.

Wow...that is a pretty bold assumption Mr Big brother Prince is making. I wonder what the death rate at that intersection was before compared to after the cameras. I was not aware that Frisco had an intersection plagued by death. Whew...thank god for the Gubbamint. What ever would we do without them to watch over us all?:icon_rolleyes:

[my2002lightning]

It will be interesting to see the legislative result on this issue.


... considering legislation pending in Austin that could phase out the cameras.

[gbgary]

they won't be gone soon enough. i've gotten two in the last six months for not coming to a full stop during a right-on-red. you know...the rolling stop. :icon_mrgreen:

[Tex Arcana]

Wow...that is a pretty bold assumption Mr Big brother Prince is making. I wonder what the death rate at that intersection was before compared to after the cameras. I was not aware that Frisco had an intersection plagued by death. Whew...thank god for the Gubbamint. What ever would we do without them to watch over us all?:icon_rolleyes:

:icon_lol: Of course, no municipality would ever put up a light at an intersection until someone dies first. :rolleyes:

[98Cobra]

Good comment someone left near the bottom of that story...



What Frisco council member Prince and Chief Renshaw failed to mention were two major contributing factors to the reduction of red-light violations other than the cameras.
First, the tollroad construction was completed in Frisco which freed-up a lot of the traffic congestion. Secondly, the city of Frisco installed automated intersection software that can detect a car in the 'zone of indecision' and will hold a yellow or red cycle until the car is clear of the intersection.
The Dallas Morning News and local city councils have been very disingenuous in their endorsements and use of red-light cameras.

[my2002lightning]

I read that PHX is now using them for seat-belt violators and phone-txting. while driving.

The Obama and DOJ are going after Sheriff Joe, too. :rolleyes: