|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Speed cameras to be implemented and red light cameras to be removed
On 10/15/2013 7:44 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
Frank Krygowski writes: On Monday, October 14, 2013 10:10:27 PM UTC-4, Nate Nagel wrote: You're in the UK... don't know how it is there, but here things are definitely predatory. Especially with the red light cameras, the yellow intervals are often well short of the ITE guideline, giving you a choice between panic stopping (and risking a rear-ender from the guy behind you who's not expecting you to do so) and making an involuntary donation to the highway fund. Fortunately at least some states (VA for one) are recognizing this and taking steps to keep the camera companies in check. (Oh, yeah, the cameras are generally operated by private, for-profit firms.) I happened to be browsing through some Ohio traffic laws. I found that Ohio has a law that states that if a red light camera is installed, the yellow light phase has to be exceed the normal (standard) yellow time by one second. That seems fair to me. That surely smells like a reaction to abuse, whether in Ohio or elsewhere. And I don't have a problem with a private firm makes some money by enforcing traffic laws. We can't afford to station cops at every red light, or have radar patrols on every road, so we now have near-zero enforcement, with predictable results: people who think it's their constitutional right to disobey the laws. Private law enforcement is a *huge* conflict of interest. If there have to be speed cameras, they should be run by a government, and someone should hold that government's feet to the fire to prevent revenue-seeking rule changes. Private theft vs government theft may be a distinction without a difference. "More cameras mean fewer T-bone crashes and more rear-end collisions. In other words, the safety issue cuts both ways. But the revenue issue goes in a single clear direction — from your wallet to City Hall's pocket. So it's not about the safety. It's about the cash." http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2...gle-collisions How significant is that cash? City of Chicago drew $72 million in revenue from red light cameras in 2012. No wonder yellow lights are shorter. -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Speed cameras to be implemented and red light cameras to be removed
On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 9:44:04 AM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote:
"More cameras mean fewer T-bone crashes and more rear-end collisions. In other words, the safety issue cuts both ways. I'd _much_ rather be hit from behind by a tailgater as I stop for a red light, than by a red light runner crashing into my driver's door. Assured Clear Distance liability is harder for the miscreant to weasel out of, and my injuries are likely to be much less serious. But the revenue issue goes in a single clear direction � from your wallet to City Hall's pocket. So it's not about the safety. It's about the cash." http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2...gle-collisions It's easy to find fact-free editorializing by people who want to disobey traffic laws. I am curious about how these cameras are applied in other countries. - Frank Krygowski |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Speed cameras to be implemented and red light cameras to be removed
AMuzi writes:
On 10/15/2013 7:44 PM, Radey Shouman wrote: Frank Krygowski writes: On Monday, October 14, 2013 10:10:27 PM UTC-4, Nate Nagel wrote: You're in the UK... don't know how it is there, but here things are definitely predatory. Especially with the red light cameras, the yellow intervals are often well short of the ITE guideline, giving you a choice between panic stopping (and risking a rear-ender from the guy behind you who's not expecting you to do so) and making an involuntary donation to the highway fund. Fortunately at least some states (VA for one) are recognizing this and taking steps to keep the camera companies in check. (Oh, yeah, the cameras are generally operated by private, for-profit firms.) I happened to be browsing through some Ohio traffic laws. I found that Ohio has a law that states that if a red light camera is installed, the yellow light phase has to be exceed the normal (standard) yellow time by one second. That seems fair to me. That surely smells like a reaction to abuse, whether in Ohio or elsewhere. And I don't have a problem with a private firm makes some money by enforcing traffic laws. We can't afford to station cops at every red light, or have radar patrols on every road, so we now have near-zero enforcement, with predictable results: people who think it's their constitutional right to disobey the laws. Private law enforcement is a *huge* conflict of interest. If there have to be speed cameras, they should be run by a government, and someone should hold that government's feet to the fire to prevent revenue-seeking rule changes. Private theft vs government theft may be a distinction without a difference. Maybe, but private collection is one additional step further away from accountability. Private traffic enforcement is the modern equivalent of tax farming. -- |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Speed Cameras vs. Red Light Cameras | His Highness the TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher[_2_] | UK | 0 | April 27th 11 02:06 PM |
Red light cameras? | Frank Krygowski[_2_] | General | 81 | April 26th 11 01:45 AM |
Red light cameras? | Frank Krygowski[_2_] | Techniques | 82 | April 26th 11 01:45 AM |
My prayers for red-light cameras have been answered! | Paul - xxx[_2_] | Recumbent Biking | 7 | September 29th 10 06:15 PM |
Red Light Cameras could be trouble for Bicyclists | Rick[_10_] | Techniques | 22 | February 4th 10 12:19 AM |