Red Light Runners

[SilvrT]

i guess it depends on the area. around here we've had some red light cams for a while in lansing. the owner of the car gets fined if they were not driving, guess they are gonna have to go get their pound of flesh from whomever was.

 

We also have intersection cams and that's how it works... the owner gets the ticket and it's up to them to deal with it if they weren't the driver.

 

Years ago we had Photo-Radar vehicles all over the province. They'd generally be GMC vans and they'd sit at strategic spots and get a pic of your plate as you went by, if you were speeding. These vans didn't even need to be manned. You'd then get a ticket in the mail. Same thing... if you weren't the driver, too bad. If it was a rental vehicle, the car rental co would send the ticket to you. This went on for years and it was pretty effective.

 

Several years ago a female friend of mine got an "intersection cam" ticket in the mail...it included a pic clearly showing her car going thru the intersection on the red light. She had to pay it. I'm not positive about this but I think that if you don't pay these things, because we have govn't insurance here, when you go to renew your insurance, the fees owed have to be paid at that time.

 

Personally I think these cams are a good thing and there should be more of them around here.

[Flyinfool]

The problem with the cams is that in the USA the constitution gives you the right to face your accuser. You can not question the camera in court.

The biggest problem is that some cities see this as such a profit center that they put in the red light cams and then shorten the yellow light to where it nealy impossible to avoid running the red without nearly locking the brakes the instant the light turns yellow and making a panic stop. If the road conditions are less than perfect there is no possible way to stop in time ,so the city knows that they will get at least one ticket with almost every cycle of the light.

 

I especially would not want to have to make that panic stop on a bike and HOPE that the car and driver behind me can match my stopping ability.

 

There is a big fight going on right now in Wisconsin as to whether traffic cams should be legal.

I for one am against them. They are to dangerous.

[Venturous Randy]

In the community of Piney Flats, TN, which is about 5 miles south of the Bristol Motor Speedway, during the spring NASCAR race was said to have issued 550 camera tickets for speeding at $100 a pop. That is a 45mph zone on a divided four lane highway. That's $55,000 for the week. Not bad revenue, even though I believe a big portion of it goes to the camera company.

RandyA

[Yamaman]

The problem with the cams is that in the USA the constitution gives you the right to face your accuser. You can not question the camera in court.

The biggest problem is that some cities see this as such a profit center that they put in the red light cams and then shorten the yellow light to where it nealy impossible to avoid running the red without nearly locking the brakes the instant the light turns yellow and making a panic stop. If the road conditions are less than perfect there is no possible way to stop in time ,so the city knows that they will get at least one ticket with almost every cycle of the light.

 

I especially would not want to have to make that panic stop on a bike and HOPE that the car and driver behind me can match my stopping ability.

 

There is a big fight going on right now in Wisconsin as to whether traffic cams should be legal.

I for one am against them. They are to dangerous.

 

You have nailed the primary issue exactly. Those cameras with the shortened yellow were not installed to make the intersection safer. They were installed to make money. Shame on whoever was in charge in that municipality.

[silent67]

I used to have to pass a private school to get to work. Most of the kids and parents dropping off kids would come from the opposite direction that I was going so they were turning and crossing the highway in front of me. It never failed that when the light changed that there would be another 6-8 cars continue on after their light had turned red. A few times they were unlucky enough for me to be at the head of the line to wake them up. I called the local PD a couple of times but they never did a thing about it.

Knowing the reputation of the school, they either thought they were privileged enough to drive through a red light or they were just blindly following the sheep ahead of them.

 

If they are like a lot of the local police around here, 1. If you are somebody important like a guberment official or 2. You have money ( rich ), you can get the police to do something. If you are just the average working smuck when you call the police and if they show up they act like you are bothering them and their response will be ( if there is an accident or theft ) you have insurance. They fill out a report and then leave. If you report something like you are talking about they will just ignore you all together. You got to be somebody to get something done.

[Guest seuadr]

You have nailed the primary issue exactly. Those cameras with the shortened yellow were not installed to make the intersection safer. They were installed to make money. Shame on whoever was in charge in that municipality.

sounds like a problem with local officals, not cameras at the intersection. The cameras we have here are actually seem to be longer yellows than normal lights.

 

while you can not confront a camera in court, it is definitally within the scope to consider confronting the tech. If the tech and equipment has been studied and shown to be reliable, then they must produce a video of your transgression. you could refute it at that point. On the other hand, if they have a video of you speeding by equipment that has been established as reliable, good luck refuting it be it a human being or a machine.

[Sailor]

I have no problem with the intersection cameras so long as they do not shorten the time on the yellow. Intersection cameras also reduced fraud. A friend of mine was a bus driver. He witnessed a mild fender bender at an intersection. Two East Indian gentlemen ran into each other at low speed. The police called my friend to testify in court. He was furious. Seven East Indians showed up all claiming to have been in the cars and all claiming whiplash. This was a common type of fraud against the insurance company. Intersection cams put an end to that type of thing. I had a real problem with the radar cams as the police merely used it as a cash cow. The cameras were set up at the bottom of long hills, even if you coasted you were likely slightly over the limit by the time you got to the bottom. They were also set up on long straight stretches of multi lane roads where there were no problems and speeds usually crept up a little. They never set it up in problem areas.

[SilvrT]

A friend of mine was a bus driver. He witnessed a mild fender bender at an intersection. Two East Indian gentlemen ran into each other at low speed. The police called my friend to testify in court. He was furious. Seven East Indians showed up all claiming to have been in the cars and all claiming whiplash.

 

U-ohhh.... the accident I witnessed Tuesday ... one of the drivers was .... ummmm ... well, not caucasian... :eek:

[Guest Swifty]

Here's a takeoff on light jumping...where I'm saving others just a little tiny bit of brake dust. The level intersection is out in the country between a county road and a provincial highway. I'm waiting at a red light to turn left onto the highway from the county road. There's no opposing traffic for me on the other side of the intersection. I make sure that the highway traffic are nowhere near enough to run their yellow light. I wait until the light for them turns yellow and I proceed to turn left just before their light turns red. When I'm halfway through the intersection the sensors note that I'm not waiting to turn left anymore and the light for the highway traffic switches back to green immediately, and the highway never gets a red when I'm the only one sitting at that light. I especially like doing it when I see truckers approaching and can only hope they notice it and appreciate it.

[SilvrT]

Got a really nice "thank you" letter from the insurance co for the info I provided them. I'd sure love to know the full outcome of the settlement ... was anyone charged?... who'd they deem to be at fault?... etc, etc

[MikeWa]

I copied this link from another post. I have always been dead set against red light cameras but now I am not so sure.

Mike

 

http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1418565565?bctid=70368898001

[Confused]

Here in the Dallas area, where way to many drivers have no license, no insurance, and more than likly do not speak english, when your light turns green, you wait 5 seconds look both then think about going with caution. Pretty sad.

[84xj1100]

Well, I gotta tell ya, as a Defensive Driving Instructor the concept of someone arguing that they didn't run a red is no big surprise. At the beginning of each class I used to have drivers rate themselves on a scale from one to ten, five being average (bare in mind that these folks were mandated by the province to attend this class because they all had a number of driving infractions on their records). The vast majority of them rated themselves between 7 and 9. That "attitude" was often changed when I asked how many of them had any driver training (vast majority had none), It was further changed when I described the six components required to get a licence most places in North America.

 

1. 16 yrs of age (pretty young to grasp the concept of being in control of a weapon - defined as anything that can kill or maime someone)

2. A written / multiple guess (in some places sign recognition exam for those who don't speak english) exam, based on common sense that anyone who was born and raised in North America would have no problem with

3. An eye exam - where at 16 your eyes are in the best shape they probably ever be in

4. Money - that any 16 yr old would be able to obtain one way or another

5. A vehicle - to take the practical test in, and

6. A practical test - where you have to impress an examiner for 10-20 mins

 

No where does it state ( to the best of my knowledge ) that training is "required" to obtain a licence (it's assumed that parents - with all there bad habits - are providing training and guidance) - for those Canadians that may read this - to the best of my knowledge, a course is required to get a gun licence....what's the difference - they're both weapons???

 

By the time I finish with these folks I have changed a few opinions but thjere are still those who refuse to admit they are "average" or in fact below average as a driver.

 

My little rant.......

[SilvrT]

Well, I gotta tell ya, as a Defensive Driving Instructor the concept of someone arguing that they didn't run a red is no big surprise. At the beginning of each class I used to have drivers rate themselves on a scale from one to ten, five being average (bare in mind that these folks were mandated by the province to attend this class because they all had a number of driving infractions on their records). The vast majority of them rated themselves between 7 and 9. That "attitude" was often changed when I asked how many of them had any driver training (vast majority had none), It was further changed when I described the six components required to get a licence most places in North America.

 

1. 16 yrs of age (pretty young to grasp the concept of being in control of a weapon - defined as anything that can kill or maime someone)

2. A written / multiple guess (in some places sign recognition exam for those who don't speak english) exam, based on common sense that anyone who was born and raised in North America would have no problem with

3. An eye exam - where at 16 your eyes are in the best shape they probably ever be in

4. Money - that any 16 yr old would be able to obtain one way or another

5. A vehicle - to take the practical test in, and

6. A practical test - where you have to impress an examiner for 10-20 mins

 

No where does it state ( to the best of my knowledge ) that training is "required" to obtain a licence (it's assumed that parents - with all there bad habits - are providing training and guidance) - for those Canadians that may read this - to the best of my knowledge, a course is required to get a gun licence....what's the difference - they're both weapons???

 

By the time I finish with these folks I have changed a few opinions but thjere are still those who refuse to admit they are "average" or in fact below average as a driver.

 

My little rant.......

 

I totally agree that driver training should be mandatory for new drivers or drivers who maybe immigrated here from another country.

 

I also feel that training should be mandatory for anyone who want to get a motorcycle licence.

 

I also feel that additional / specific training should be mandatory c/w an endorsement on the licence for folks who want to drive motorhomes and/or pull camper or other such trailers.

 

Further, such training (which currently exists but is not mandatory) should be revamped to include motorcycle awareness in the basic course.

[Guest seuadr]

 

Further, such training (which currently exists but is not mandatory) should be revamped to include motorcycle awareness in the basic course.

this is f'ing brilliant! :happy34::happy34:

 

i have often wished that people had to go through a teir system like they do in some countries in europe, both with bikes, cars, and trucks/motorhomes!