photoenforced traffic lights

YingYang

Member
Nov 30, 2002
100
0
0
Just wanted t see how many people in this forum believe that photoenforced traffic lights should be banned. In California the fine is $271 if you get caught running a red light.
 

BurnItDwn

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
26,322
1,836
126
Photoenforced traffic lights sound like a good idea to me (though i never run red lighto) ... maybe save the system some money ... no need for a cop to pull you over or anything, just a ticket in the mail. Though $271 seems pretty steep.
 

vegetation

Diamond Member
Feb 21, 2001
4,270
2
0
Bad idea because rarely cops are the one who assess the potential violations in photo traps. There is absolutely no judgment used to determine if a citation is warranted. For example, an ambulance may be coming up on a crowded intersection, prompting the right lane driver to make a turn on right; if there's no turn on right allowed, he/she is cited by the system instantly. To prove your innocence, you need to go to court, get the ambulance driver to testify, and possibly other witnesses. No cop in their right mind would ever ticket someone for doing this, in fact you would be ticketed for NOT moving aside for an emergency vehicle.
 

sharkeeper

Lifer
Jan 13, 2001
10,886
2
0
This is funny. The fine is ridiculous I agree. I know how these systems work. Trust me, everyone that gets a ticket from a photo enforced traffic signal deserves it plain and simple. If you don't run red lights, you will not get a ticket! In MD the fine is $75.00. I suppose with what the cost of living is in CA, $250+ is probably right! :Q

-DAK-
 

Bushwicktrini

Senior member
Jan 8, 2002
756
2
81
Originally posted by: shuttleteam
This is funny. The fine is ridiculous I agree. I know how these systems work. Trust me, everyone that gets a ticket from a photo enforced traffic signal deserves it plain and simple. If you don't run red lights, you will not get a ticket! In MD the fine is $75.00. I suppose with what the cost of living is in CA, $250+ is probably right! :Q

-DAK-

The fine is only $50 here in NYC so I don't think cost of living has anything to do with it. I know the cost as I have been caught 4 times :( all on what I thought were bougus ie the pic said that the light had been red for .33 of a sec how can I stop in .33 sec?. I now stop at the yellow not matter what
 

guapo337

Platinum Member
Apr 7, 2003
2,580
0
0
Originally posted by: Bushwicktrini
Originally posted by: shuttleteam
This is funny. The fine is ridiculous I agree. I know how these systems work. Trust me, everyone that gets a ticket from a photo enforced traffic signal deserves it plain and simple. If you don't run red lights, you will not get a ticket! In MD the fine is $75.00. I suppose with what the cost of living is in CA, $250+ is probably right! :Q

-DAK-

The fine is only $50 here in NYC so I don't think cost of living has anything to do with it. I know the cost as I have been caught 4 times :( all on what I thought were bougus ie the pic said that the light had been red for .33 of a sec how can I stop in .33 sec?. I now stop at the yellow not matter what

good idea on finally deciding to stop at red lights.. it's not a law for a stupid reason now, is it?

rolleye.gif
 

NogginBoink

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2002
5,322
0
0
Originally posted by: vegetation
Bad idea because rarely cops are the one who assess the potential violations in photo traps. There is absolutely no judgment used to determine if a citation is warranted. For example, an ambulance may be coming up on a crowded intersection, prompting the right lane driver to make a turn on right; if there's no turn on right allowed, he/she is cited by the system instantly. To prove your innocence, you need to go to court, get the ambulance driver to testify, and possibly other witnesses. No cop in their right mind would ever ticket someone for doing this, in fact you would be ticketed for NOT moving aside for an emergency vehicle.

That's what the court system is for. You go before a judge and argue your case.
 

Lucky

Lifer
Nov 26, 2000
13,126
1
0
stupid idea. Even worse when you look at the corruption that has followed the installation of these things.
 

Chess

Golden Member
Mar 5, 2001
1,452
7
81
they work here in Maryland, but the cost isnt that high, 271 wow thats a pretty penny gosh dang!
 

sharkeeper

Lifer
Jan 13, 2001
10,886
2
0
stupid idea. Even worse when you look at the corruption that has followed the installation of these things.

One thing I strongly disagree with is the shortening of the yellows on rural highways in Howard county! Yellows have been deliberately shortened so most people that would not stop for a yellow find a nice pic of their plates in the mail along with a bill for $75.00. :|

Yes, if your bumper is BEFORE the stop line when the light is RED, the system will activate.

-DAK-
 

Bushwicktrini

Senior member
Jan 8, 2002
756
2
81
Originally posted by: guapo337
Originally posted by: Bushwicktrini
Originally posted by: shuttleteam
This is funny. The fine is ridiculous I agree. I know how these systems work. Trust me, everyone that gets a ticket from a photo enforced traffic signal deserves it plain and simple. If you don't run red lights, you will not get a ticket! In MD the fine is $75.00. I suppose with what the cost of living is in CA, $250+ is probably right! :Q

-DAK-

The fine is only $50 here in NYC so I don't think cost of living has anything to do with it. I know the cost as I have been caught 4 times :( all on what I thought were bougus ie the pic said that the light had been red for .33 of a sec how can I stop in .33 sec?. I now stop at the yellow not matter what

good idea on finally deciding to stop at red lights.. it's not a law for a stupid reason now, is it?

rolleye.gif

It was not RED when I went thru it wise ass it was Yellow. And the last time I checked yellow meant slow down not stop. If you read my post you will see that I said I will STOP on the YELLOW. I find that the time that the photolight have between yellow and red is way shorter that the non-photolight and this is why the l had my pic taken. as I said in my post .33 of a sec on one ticket and .25 on another. I think that the light timing on photolights are rigged to set people up so I just stop on the yellow just in case.

 

NuclearFusi0n

Diamond Member
Jul 2, 2001
7,028
0
0
Originally posted by: shuttleteam
This is funny. The fine is ridiculous I agree. I know how these systems work. Trust me, everyone that gets a ticket from a photo enforced traffic signal deserves it plain and simple. If you don't run red lights, you will not get a ticket! In MD the fine is $75.00. I suppose with what the cost of living is in CA, $250+ is probably right! :Q

-DAK-
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2001-09-05-judge-nixes-red-light-cams.htm

Yes, because screwy companies installing cameras at intersections with short yellow light times is a GREAT way to make things safer (read: make tons of money for those in control) </sarcasm>
 

LiQiCE

Golden Member
Oct 9, 1999
1,911
0
0
Originally posted by: shuttleteam
I guess LM is getting greedy now that the X33 has been sidelined. :Q

-DAK-

Hey, we SOLD the business to another company, ok? ;)
 

freakflag

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2001
3,951
1
71
Originally posted by: YingYang
Just wanted t see how many people in this forum believe that photoenforced traffic lights should be banned. In California the fine is $271 if you get caught running a red light.


Big Brother is watching this thread.
 

mithrandir2001

Diamond Member
May 1, 2001
6,545
1
0
They should be unconstitutional because of due process.

The camera gets the license plate, not a positive ID of the driver. The ticket goes to the owner of the car, not the car. There's no due process. You need a cop at the light manually pulling people over.
 

sharkeeper

Lifer
Jan 13, 2001
10,886
2
0
They should be unconstitutional because of due process.

The camera gets the license plate, not a positive ID of the driver. The ticket goes to the driver, not the car. There's no due process. You need a cop at the light manually pulling people over.

In MD these tickets do NOT constitute a moving violation. No points. Just a fine like a parking ticket. The party that the car's registered to is responsible. If you let a friend borrow your car and they run a red light YOU will get the ticket and have to pay for it. That's the way it works here in MD.

-DAK-
 

Rogue9

Member
Mar 20, 2003
65
0
0
Originally posted by: mithrandir2001
They should be unconstitutional because of due process.

The camera gets the license plate, not a positive ID of the driver. The ticket goes to the driver, not the car. There's no due process. You need a cop at the light manually pulling people over.

I believe people have successfully contested them on those grounds - the police couldn't prove who was driving. Depends on how Nazi-like your area is, I think.
 

McCarthy

Platinum Member
Oct 9, 1999
2,567
0
76
I hate these for a number of reasons.

The corruption aspect. Companies go around and sell them to counties on a 'look at all the money you'll make' basis. Not done in the name of safety and creating situations where people are slamming the brakes to avoid getting nabbed by the system is a very real problem.

Privacy aspect. Yes, I understand it's a public street, take all the pictures of me driving my car that you wish. But what was uber paranoid crazy talk conspiracy theory stuff a few years ago is now general concern to millions thanks to the Patriot Act and the government collecting data that they don't know what they're going to do with. At present I don't know of tracking of vehicles being done, just snapshots of cars running the light...but tomorrow? Eh, whatever, 'nothing to worry about if you're not doing anything wrong', right? *groan...and see above posts where this rudimentary system is being abused*

The small car aspect. Yall with SUVs don't ever have to worry, but when you drive a subcompact you're pretty much screwed at some lights. On traffic controlled (rather than timed) lights I have to pull up, drive back, pull up again to trip the damn sensor and sometimes even that doesn't work. One night I spent 15 minutes sitting at a fuggin light because there was a cop sitting in a parking lot across the way. So when I'm coming home from work at 4am on empty streets I stop at the lights. I look around. I drive through. It's a fancy stopsign at that point. But not on camera monitored intersections. Guess I can jump out and hit the crossing light button to get the light to change when I can't trip the sensors.
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
What are you driving? A Mr. Bean-mobile?? My old Yamaha 750 was usually heavy enough to trip the sensor at most intersections.
 

Rogue9

Member
Mar 20, 2003
65
0
0
Originally posted by: conjur
What are you driving? A Mr. Bean-mobile?? My old Yamaha 750 was usually heavy enough to trip the sensor at most intersections.

I've never heard of a sensor based on weight. Most use an inductive sensor in the road that detects the presence of metal.
 

sharkeeper

Lifer
Jan 13, 2001
10,886
2
0
Guess I can jump out and hit the crossing light button to get the light to change when I can't trip the sensors.

Mount a cat flap upside down [above the license plate] with a button on the dashboard. When depressed, the flap falls in front of the license plate and the picture is useless. ;)

Seriously, if you have to get out of the car, put a piece of paper over the plate! :Q

I've never heard of a sensor based on weight. Most use an inductive sensor in the road that detects the presence of metal.

This is true. Plus lights will eventually change due to the clock. But you will sit there a while...

-DAK-
 

mithrandir2001

Diamond Member
May 1, 2001
6,545
1
0
Originally posted by: shuttleteam
Guess I can jump out and hit the crossing light button to get the light to change when I can't trip the sensors.

Mount a cat flap upside down [above the license plate] with a button on the dashboard. When depressed, the flap falls in front of the license plate and the picture is useless. ;)
Or use the remote trunk release, assuming the plate is attached to the trunk lid.

 

illusion88

Lifer
Oct 2, 2001
13,164
3
81
In my town, they installed them, but after about a week, ran out of money due to film costs. You see, they were cheep and went with traditional cameras, not wanting to pay for digital ones. So now the sit there like lame ducks.