Stoplight Cameras
Does your town or city have these? They're about to install these in our town and the residents think it's an invasion of privacy.
I personally think it's a good idea.
Have you ever ran a light and received a ticket in the mail?
I personally think it's a good idea.
Have you ever ran a light and received a ticket in the mail?
0
-
quote:Originally posted by AZEX
Mythbusters didn't try this.
www.loover.com
They really do work. Interesting product.
tr fox, read this testimonial I C&P from loover's site:
Hi my name is [blank], I work for a Police Department in Arizona. " The Photo Radar Companies are trying to take our jobs. Photo Radar has little to do with law enforcement. Most of the tickets given at red lights wouldn't have been written if witnessed by a good cop. What they won't tell you is that the people running all these cameras and collecting all the money are private companies making millions issuing unjust citations." -- name withheld
This testimonial from a LEO backs up my previous post about the cameras being nothing but a money generating enterprise.[}:)]0 -
quote:Originally posted by dolfan
quote:Originally posted by AZEX
Mythbusters didn't try this.
www.loover.com
They really do work. Interesting product.
tr fox, read this testimonial I C&P from loover's site:
Hi my name is [blank], I work for a Police Department in Arizona. " The Photo Radar Companies are trying to take our jobs. Photo Radar has little to do with law enforcement. Most of the tickets given at red lights wouldn't have been written if witnessed by a good cop. What they won't tell you is that the people running all these cameras and collecting all the money are private companies making millions issuing unjust citations." -- name withheld
This testimonial from a LEO backs up my previous post about the cameras being nothing but a money generating enterprise.[}:)]
I appreciate your information but it doesn't change me mind. In all cases I know of with red light cameras, the photo that shows the car entering the intersection, well after the light has gone through yellow and then red, it also shows the car. So there should be no way that any camera company can stick someone with a ticket unless that car really and truly ran the red light.
This makes sense to me because there is no other reasonable way to handle the situation. And in regards to the camera's stealing cops jobs, for many decades I have noticed that very few cops want to sit on an intersection catching red light runners. They would rather sit with a radar gun and catch speeders. Speeders which I have already mentioned do not worry me as much as red light runners.
I finally wrote a letter to my town's police chief and complained about how his officers were spending all their time catching speeders when I felt the red light runners were more of a danger. He came back with some song and dance about how it is easier to prove speeding in court, as compared to a red light being run, because the radar gun showed the speed of the person who got the speeding ticket. He also went on to say about how hard it was for a police car to "hide" at an intersection and watch for red light runners because the runners would see the cop car and not run the red light (that time anayway).
Bottom line, it is just true that some people think they are "special" and should be able to endanger the innocent public by getting away with running red lights.0 -
Anyone here that is for this type of "police state" monitoring. Ask yourself how many laws you break every day that you will be liable for once everything is monitored. Do you exceed the speed limit? Do you make full stops at a stopsign? Do you make a full stop before right on red? Pass on the left? Stop 50 feet back from the schoolbus? Follow too close? etc, etc etc....
This is just like gun control. Starts out a little and ends up a lot. Yup, red lights are certainly legitimate places for this type of technology (just like those evil machine guns that are outlawed and hey, who cares, I don't have a machine gun!) - running them can and does cause accidents. That is beside the point, there will be NO END to this type of monitoring once it takes hold.
Is this really something that you want to support?0 -
quote:Originally posted by slipgate
Anyone here that is for this type of "police state" monitoring. Ask yourself how many laws you break every day that you will be liable for once everything is monitored. Do you exceed the speed limit? Do you make full stops at a stopsign? Do you make a full stop before right on red? Pass on the left? Stop 50 feet back from the schoolbus? Follow too close? etc, etc etc....
This is just like gun control. Starts out a little and ends up a lot. Yup, red lights are certainly legitimate places for this type of technology (just like those evil machine guns that are outlawed and hey, who cares, I don't have a machine gun!) - running them can and does cause accidents. That is beside the point, there will be NO END to this type of monitoring once it takes hold.
Is this really something that you want to support?
Most traffic accidents nationwide happen at controlled intersections. Simply because someone tried to steal the right of way and ran a red light. And most of those intersection accidents usually involve serious bodily injury simply because of the type of impact you will have by a speeding car (red light runners always seem to speed up when entering the intersection) hitting a slow moving car from the side. And this is really unfair to the dead victims who were killed by that red light runner because, since the intersection IS controlled, if everyone obeyed the control there could never be any collesions.
So what should be done to try and lessene the danger from red light runners? Would you object if a cop was stationed at every busy, dangerous interesection 24/7 and did nothing but write tickets for running red light? Would that be a violation of your driving rights?0 -
they're all over different parts of town here. I really don't like having a camera pointed at my face every time I'm stopped at a stop light. or the idea of "a need" to have cameras in the first place.
in fact, I was just thinking about this the other day. because a lot of the cameras I see, aren't pointed at the middle of the intersection to get the license plate of a car, or even at the line where you stop. they're aimed higher up, as if to get a picture of your face, and they could do that to the people in line behind you as well.
they're aimed so high up, they could get your license plate at the lower edge of the field-of-view, but not likely if you're already in the intersection, and why don't they point them directly at the intersection if that's what they're for? I think they're taking pictures of something else. or video.
I'm thinking about taking pics of some cameras to show what I'm talking about. an expose'.0 -
I don't stop for stop signs or traffic lights, unless there is cross traffic.
There are only 2 cars and 5 pickups in Sheridan, OryGun.
Doug0 -
quote:Originally posted by buschmaster
they're all over different parts of town here. I really don't like having a camera pointed at my face every time I'm stopped at a stop light. or the idea of "a need" to have cameras in the first place.
in fact, I was just thinking about this the other day. because a lot of the cameras I see, aren't pointed at the middle of the intersection to get the license plate of a car, or even at the line where you stop. they're aimed higher up, as if to get a picture of your face, and they could do that to the people in line behind you as well.
they're aimed so high up, they could get your license plate at the lower edge of the field-of-view, but not likely if you're already in the intersection, and why don't they point them directly at the intersection if that's what they're for? I think they're taking pictures of something else. or video.
I'm thinking about taking pics of some cameras to show what I'm talking about. an expose'.
From what I have read, the camera does not take continus pictures. For one thing, that would be so much data that no one would have the time or interest looking through all of it. I believe that the camera only takes a still picture of the rear of the car (license plate) when it detects movement in the intesection when the lights BOTH WAYS are red.
Funny thing. When I first started driving years and years ago, the intersection lights didn't have any delay built into them. By this I mean if you were intering the intersection on a green light, then it turns yellow and then red, the opposing traffic IMEDIATELY got their green light. There was no delay whereas the opposing traffic had their red light continue for a few seconds while the orginal red light lite red for a few seconds. IN other words, no intersection EVER experienced traffic going in both directions both having a red light (for a few seconds) like is done now.
People used to be more willing to obey traffic signals than they are now.0 -
Googled and came up with a listing of mainly UK news articles. 21 pages !!! seems a lot of folks don't like them.
http://www.thenewspaper.com/rlc/related.asp?page=1&T=0&S=6&K=0&V=0&X=0
Appears the favorite method in the UK is burning. Strict gun laws has saved hundreds of cameras.[:D][:D]0 -
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
quote:Originally posted by slipgate
Anyone here that is for this type of "police state" monitoring. Ask yourself how many laws you break every day that you will be liable for once everything is monitored. Do you exceed the speed limit? Do you make full stops at a stopsign? Do you make a full stop before right on red? Pass on the left? Stop 50 feet back from the schoolbus? Follow too close? etc, etc etc....
This is just like gun control. Starts out a little and ends up a lot. Yup, red lights are certainly legitimate places for this type of technology (just like those evil machine guns that are outlawed and hey, who cares, I don't have a machine gun!) - running them can and does cause accidents. That is beside the point, there will be NO END to this type of monitoring once it takes hold.
Is this really something that you want to support?
Most traffic accidents nationwide happen at controlled intersections. Simply because someone tried to steal the right of way and ran a red light. And most of those intersection accidents usually involve serious bodily injury simply because of the type of impact you will have by a speeding car (red light runners always seem to speed up when entering the intersection) hitting a slow moving car from the side. And this is really unfair to the dead victims who were killed by that red light runner because, since the intersection IS controlled, if everyone obeyed the control there could never be any collesions.
So what should be done to try and lessene the danger from red light runners? Would you object if a cop was stationed at every busy, dangerous interesection 24/7 and did nothing but write tickets for running red light? Would that be a violation of your driving rights?
As I stated, this is not about red light runners, it is about control and big brother that will not end until every part of your life is controlled and monitored. The legislaters that back this type of feel-good legislation are not capable of stopping this band wagon.
Not all problems have answers. And just like gun control, those that would pass a light, will still do it even with the cameras (as evidenced by the amount of revenue generated by this tactic).0 -
somebody should put a bag over their license plate and run the same red light like 20 times just to piss them off. 0 -
Uhhh, people get killed by nuts that don't know red means stop ! 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
41 comments