Red Light Cameras: 10-28-03 Atlanta to join the fray

AEB

Senior member
Jun 12, 2003
681
0
0
THis is similar to photo radar which i think is a good thing, however up here (alaska) people voted it out because they were getting to many speeding tickets
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
I can't imagine why acting on just one violation is "Good" - I think everyone is entitled to at least one mistake during the course of a 12 or 24 month period.

CA, for instance, allows you to attend driver's school for any minor traffic infraction during an 18-month period. If you attend and complete the school (which is punishment in itself), pay the original traffic fine and an additional nominal adminstrative fee, they mask the ticket from your DMV record. Insurers never even see it.

On top of that, most CA insurers will grant you "good driver status" if you have no more than 1 minor traffic infraction during the most recent 3 years. I'm not sure how other states handle this topic, however I think CA has a pretty good system going.

Mind you, the above does not apply to major violations such as drunk driving, etc.
 

Corn

Diamond Member
Nov 12, 1999
6,389
29
91
I can't imagine why acting on just one violation is "Good" - I think everyone is entitled to at least one mistake during the course of a 12 or 24 month period.
I've been T-boned twice by assholes running red lights. GOOD!!!!!
 

kjacobs

Senior member
Feb 10, 2001
437
0
0
GOOD! I was involved with local commisioners about them before we moved. If anybody complains about "loss of freedom" or invasion of privacy or some other crap, do they also object to video cameras at ATMs or department stores, or convenience stores? No. All of the above are there to protect the INNOCENT and convict the GUILTY. PERIOD.
 

43st

Diamond Member
Nov 7, 2001
3,197
0
0
The camera is being tested at the intersection of North Highland and Ponce de Leon avenues
I lived two blocks South from that intersection (by the bike path) on Ponce before I moved to New York. That intersection is very dangerous for some reason, it easily had 2+ accidents at it per week. Maybe the cameras can also be used in documenting those accidents for police?!? That would probably be a good thing.
 

roboninja

Senior member
Dec 7, 2000
268
0
0
I have no problem with traffic light cameras; running red lights is bad. But photo radar, on the other had, is overkill. I believe that your driving speed simply needs to match that of the surrounding vehicles. If everyone is going 65 in a 50 zone, it is safer to also go 65 rather than try to follwo some 50 "limit".
 

rjain

Golden Member
May 1, 2003
1,475
0
0
Seriously. If you don't want to ever be seen by the government, don't go outside.

Photo radar will probably notice that it's just being a very inefficient move camera if everyone is doing 65 in a 50 and either all the crap will be tossed into the trash or the designers were smart and have the thing adjust to the general flow of traffic.
 

Tab

Lifer
Sep 15, 2002
12,145
0
71
Originally posted by: roboninja
I have no problem with traffic light cameras; running red lights is bad. But photo radar, on the other had, is overkill. I believe that your driving speed simply needs to match that of the surrounding vehicles. If everyone is going 65 in a 50 zone, it is safer to also go 65 rather than try to follwo some 50 "limit".
You came to this illogical conclusion how exactly?
 

Lucky

Lifer
Nov 26, 2000
13,126
1
0
Originally posted by: kjacobs
GOOD! I was involved with local commisioners about them before we moved. If anybody complains about "loss of freedom" or invasion of privacy or some other crap, do they also object to video cameras at ATMs or department stores, or convenience stores? No. All of the above are there to protect the INNOCENT and convict the GUILTY. PERIOD.


stupidest post ever!
 

gistech1978

Diamond Member
Aug 30, 2002
5,047
0
0
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: konichiwa
They've been in decatur for almost two years now; nothing new around here...
Did I hear on the local talk radio that Decatur is making $80,000 month on the revenue from the cameras???
if that is the case, something is definitely rotten in Decatur, GA.
its basically like a speed trap, then. which some states have laws saying that no more than x% of the city or town's revenues can come from speeding tickets.


 

chess9

Elite member
Apr 15, 2000
7,748
0
0
Running a red light is a very serious affair. Innocent people get killed every day by that kind of conduct. It's time we started tieing a whole slew of civil rights to proper driving conduct, e.g. the right to own a firearm. Do we want guys who can't keep their temper in traffic owning firearms? I don't.

-Robert
 

roboninja

Senior member
Dec 7, 2000
268
0
0
Originally posted by: Tabb
Originally posted by: roboninja
I have no problem with traffic light cameras; running red lights is bad. But photo radar, on the other had, is overkill. I believe that your driving speed simply needs to match that of the surrounding vehicles. If everyone is going 65 in a 50 zone, it is safer to also go 65 rather than try to follwo some 50 "limit".
You came to this illogical conclusion how exactly?
So you are saying that, even if all traffic around you is going 65 in a 50 zone, it is still safer to go the posted 50 mph? Have you ever driven a car?

 

konichiwa

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
15,077
2
0
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: konichiwa
They've been in decatur for almost two years now; nothing new around here...
Did I hear on the local talk radio that Decatur is making $80,000 month on the revenue from the cameras???
Maybe; I couldn't say. I try to stay equally clear of Decatur and talk radio ;)
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,894
46
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: roboninja
Originally posted by: Tabb
Originally posted by: roboninja
I have no problem with traffic light cameras; running red lights is bad. But photo radar, on the other had, is overkill. I believe that your driving speed simply needs to match that of the surrounding vehicles. If everyone is going 65 in a 50 zone, it is safer to also go 65 rather than try to follwo some 50 "limit".
You came to this illogical conclusion how exactly?
So you are saying that, even if all traffic around you is going 65 in a 50 zone, it is still safer to go the posted 50 mph? Have you ever driven a car?
He didn't see a tiny Ford Festiva filled with people going maybe 40 mph on the Interstate get run over by a Semi like I did not too long ago. Can you say Road Pizza?

In defense of the truck driver, it was not his fault, all traffic was moving along at at least 60-65 mph in all 5 lanes, cars had time to bail and swing around the slow idiots in the middle lane, the truck had no where to go.


 

Lucky

Lifer
Nov 26, 2000
13,126
1
0
Originally posted by: kjacobs
Why? No reason, huh? Just your opinion.
Yeah, it is my opinion. I think it's pretty stupid to compare cameras you electively visit (ATM, convienence store) that are privately owned and operated, to red light cameras that are in some cases unavoidable and have been proven in many cases to be unreliabled and/or a scam because of the way they are privately managed. They are used against you and you have no method of contesting them or confronting your accuser, how about that?
 

43st

Diamond Member
Nov 7, 2001
3,197
0
0
Originally posted by: Lucky
Originally posted by: kjacobs
Why? No reason, huh? Just your opinion.
Yeah, it is my opinion. I think it's pretty stupid to compare cameras you electively visit (ATM, convienence store) that are privately owned and operated, to red light cameras that are in some cases unavoidable and have been proven in many cases to be unreliabled and/or a scam because of the way they are privately managed. They are used against you and you have no method of contesting them or confronting your accuser, how about that?
LOL, it's hard to call a camera a liar that's for sure. You can always go back to the intersection and confront your accuser if you feel so inspired. Just don't expect it to talk back. :)
 

Chris A

Golden Member
Oct 11, 1999
1,431
1
76
It has been proven in the past that some cities when money was tight they would shave a few seconds off of the yellow light in order to catch a whole bunch more. Plus the private company that runs these gets a portion of the cash they generate. True you cant argue against a photograph.
 

bambam

Senior member
Oct 28, 1999
652
0
0
I am on the side of the using the cameras in Atlanta ( especially metro -Cobb, N.fulton, Gwinnett ) who now seems to have the rudest drivers who ignore the traffic laws .
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,894
46
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: bambam
I am on the side of the using the cameras in Atlanta ( especially metro -Cobb, N.fulton, Gwinnett ) who now seems to have the rudest drivers who ignore the traffic laws .
I have to concur, it has gotten to the point of more idiotic drivers in Atlanta than sane drivers. As my wife says, it's Mad Max out there.

People have brought this onto themselves. However, since this is an automated process with no recourse against the accuser, I do not believe the infraction should not go on Official records such as points on the License and reported to Insurance Companies.

There also should be as I say again with so many "Technology" based issues where there is an opportunity for abuse that there should be a Public Oversight Committee in place to watch over the shoulder of the Private Company that is running the Revenue Device for a Public Entitity.



 

Lucky

Lifer
Nov 26, 2000
13,126
1
0
Originally posted by: Chris A
It has been proven in the past that some cities when money was tight they would shave a few seconds off of the yellow light in order to catch a whole bunch more. Plus the private company that runs these gets a portion of the cash they generate. True you cant argue against a photograph.
which was my point.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY