Cameras are a success in Quebec (for speeding & red lights)

[rmay635703]

Originally Posted by tasdrouille

Again, the problem is not the cameras, it's the people running them.

If the ticket is the same price as if given by an officer, if the yellow light duration is standard, and if the ticket is emitted only when the light turns red before your front wheel pass the stop line, where's the problem?

By your logic we could trust them to simply remove the yellow lights and turn directly to red and not give tickets unless you pass through the red light after a reasonable duration has passed.

Reality is THEY ARE NOT USED IN THAT WAY.

I rather have the yellow light back to the way it was when I was a kid,
L O N G.

These blasted insta flash yellow lights have always pissed me off for more than a few reasons.

As for attacking the city for misusing them why bother?

Its unwinnable, so don't give them to power to abuse in the first place.

[Clev]

Simple solution: have fines go directly to a charity, or the federal government. If cities had to pay for the cameras but didn't get the windfall, we'd see these cameras "for our safety" disappear in a matter of hours.

[Frank Lee]

I know!!! Use camera cash flow for school funding!

I can see it now: ad campaigns like "Blow a red... for the children!!!".

[Clev]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

I know!!! Use camera cash flow for school funding!

I can see it now: ad campaigns like "Blow a red... for the children!!!".

Okay, but it must go to the fed and then be handed back down to everyone equally. To avoid local corruption, it cannot go in any way to the local government making the laws and deploying the cameras. I originally thought, "road construction", but that means that the city will put in the cameras and then divert their regular road construction budget on other stuff, since the new "safety" revenue will go to the roads.

[RH77]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

I know!!! Use camera cash flow for school funding!

I can see it now: ad campaigns like "Blow a red... for the children!!!".

LOL! That's hilarious... but the children!

To answer Tas, if all were equal, I would now be for the camera system. Blown reds or the line of "piggybackers" would easily be eliminated.

But that can't be guaranteed here -- so the discontent continues.

I've noticed another side effect of their existence: "trigger foot". Since these are popping up all over the city, now any any intersection, I hit the brakes on a yellow. At lights that I could safely make, forget it. They've re-programmed me and it's not efficient

I just have to remember if I'm on the Missouri side (cameras) or Kansas side (no cameras).

RH77

[gone-ot]

Originally Posted by RH77

...the Missouri side (cameras) or Kansas side (no cameras).

RH77

...sounds like the vehicular safety "standardization" that we have here between Marana (small), AZ, and Tucson (big), AZ.

[taredog]

Originally Posted by Clev

Okay, but it must go to the fed and then be handed back down to everyone equally. To avoid local corruption, it cannot go in any way to the local government making the laws and deploying the cameras. I originally thought, "road construction", but that means that the city will put in the cameras and then divert their regular road construction budget on other stuff, since the new "safety" revenue will go to the roads.

Go to the fed? Handed back down equally? The "fed" is not corrupt? What fantasyland are you living in?

Oh never mind, I see it's California. Yeah, your model is something we should all aim for.

[taredog]

Originally Posted by Dieselman

In the Uk we've had red light cameras for a long time and they do reduce accidents caused by people jumping the red.
I'm curious about the duration of the amber light as all ours are a standard 3 seconds or longer. That gives plenty of stopping time at any legal speed.

How do red light cameras generate revenue for insurance companies.?

If you get a ticket for ANYTHING in the US or have an accident that is not your fault your insurance rates go up.

[taredog]

Here in Phoenix they seem to put up signs even for the mobile vans. There are some problems.

Red light/speed cameras:
One intersection I have driven through almost every week day for 10 years had the yellow shortened a lot when the camera went in. I cannot prove it, I never timed it but it was shortened considerably. The legal speed is 45mph and there is not enough time to stop if you are close. Fortunately I have entered the intersection before red turned on which is the rule here but stopping would almost be a panic stop. Along that line of thought there is another light at an intersection on my alternate route where the green from the side street when you are stopped at the light doesn't allow you to make it through the intersection before yellow, red are on. I noticed this is now on the list for a camera. Should be a good cash cow!

You do not get flashed here for right on red IF YOU ACTUALLY STOP before entering the intersection. A lot of people treat right on red like a yield sign. I had to evade one just tonight as she sailed right through, in to the left lane and back in to the right and was not accelerating at all. Totally oblivious to all other traffic. So if you STOP at the line, then proceed I doubt you will get flashed. Of course this will mess up your FE.

The red light cameras here do decrease red light running. And the resulting accidents. But I believe the yellow light time has been reduced due to the contract with the company running the cameras. That is so wrong.

Speed cameras on controlled access highways:

These seem to have tamed the 10% who wanted to get there 2 minutes earlier and the locals seem to deal with the fact that if you are 11 mph over the speed limit you will get flashed. Normal traffic at my commute time moves 10-15 mph under the posted limit. Very orderly. Almost makes me feel like I am back in Europe. The problem seems to be the cars who had to weave through traffic faster than it was moving. The drivers suddenly see the signs and have to jump on the brakes immediately to slow down to 10-20 mph under the posted limit (which they have no clue of ). This actuates the “brake light fear syndrome” which everyone here seems to suffer from. They see a brake light come on and immediately hit the brakes. For no reason as lifting the right foot early will usually slow you down in time.

Someone mentioned round-a-bouts or traffic circles. Oh yeah, Luxbg. I have driven many years in Europe and Asia and round-a-bouts do work, if the local drivers are smart enough to figure them out and obey the rules. They have tried that around here and in one case removed one because the drivers here are too self centered, stupid and unwilling to learn anything except point a to b while texting or talking or whatever else they “need” to do that is more important than driving.

A few years ago a traffic circle was built at 99th Ave and Lower Buckeye. There were no houses or stores in the area yet and almost no traffic. A BMW went screaming by me approaching this new circle and did a quick stop at the entrance to the circle. As I got closer I saw him talking in to his cell phone, throwing up his hands and finally as I approached him, turning left in to the circle (he did turn on his blinker) going the wrong way and exiting the wrong way on the street he wanted. I guess people here are just not ready for traffic circles. Last time I was through there I saw about 20 confusing signs about how to get through and yield signs at the entrances. Now that there are houses and businesses there the traffic has increased. Most people treat the yield signs as stop signs.

The yield as stop sign thing is strange since most people here treat stop signs as yield signs. Especially the people in neighborhoods who demanded them for “safety”.

I am not saying the people here are stupid, just that they are so self centered and inconsiderate to anyone else that they feel their personal rights come before any stupid traffic law.

Another new rule being talked about is the “late left turn” rule. The current law says when the light turns green (no left turn arrow light) you enter the intersection and proceed when safe. That used to mean after through traffic passed. Now it means when the light turns yellow, then red, then the three or four red light runners go through. City's want to make that a ticket able offense. More revenue. Installing a left turn arrow would be an expense. This could be an incredible cash cow, getting two to three cars every cycle. And don't talk about the going around the block That does work pretty well in some cities I have driven in. No left turns. Here most of the blocks with through streets are ½ mile in length. Some are one mile. That adds two to four miles just to turn left. The other intersections you deal with are just as congested.

So IMHO these cameras are a mixed blessing. They are preventing speeding and red light running but also creating dangerous conditions mostly due to the oblivious drivers here. The shortening of yellow light time which I believe is true and also believe is in the contracts under the guise of “making the traffic lights more efficient” is reprehensible.

[MazdaMatt]

Frank, do you fly a Rebel Flag on a pickup truck or something? You compare drunk checks to nazis? Around here it is called the R.I.D.E. program (Reduced Impaired Driving Everywhere), and people are all for it. If you're not drunk, you have no issue - period. I'd MUCH rather be stopped by ride on xmas eve and st. Patty's day and say "no officer, i'm not drinking, you have a good night, bye" then get smashed up by some drunk.

You're against seat belts, helmets and taxation of liquor and smokes to help fund anti-drunk driving campaigns and anti-smoking compagns? Frank, what kind of country do you have in mind? Everybody roaring aorund without helmets on motorcycles drunk coughing up black crap from their cancerous lungs? Oh, was that extreme? I guess we'll just settle for microchips. Again... stop being rediculous... its a red light camera. Don't run the light.