08-25-2009, 01:44 AM
|
#21 (permalink)
|
(:
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
|
I love it when everybody in the five-state area feels compelled to drive through my neighborhood. Really enhances that homey ambiance. :/
|
|
|
Today
|
|
|
Other popular topics in this forum...
|
|
|
08-25-2009, 03:14 PM
|
#22 (permalink)
|
EcoModding Apprentice
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 162
Thanks: 2
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by SVOboy
Yep, but everyone hates them because they infringe on our right to break the law I've always wondered why they don't just time people between getting a ticket at the toll booth and paying for it and say "hey look, you averages 78mph in a 65, here's a ticket"
|
French motorways do that for all articulated lorries. Thats why there are always many of them stopping for lunch/a nap in the last lay-by before the final toll booth!
|
|
|
08-25-2009, 03:34 PM
|
#23 (permalink)
|
Driving the TurboWeasel
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Steuben County, NY
Posts: 459
Thanks: 14
Thanked 18 Times in 17 Posts
|
Red-light cameras are a pointless idea since they're ATM's for local gov't. Having them flash you when doing a legal right-on-red is silly. We should outlaw them here and be done with it. Safety my arse!
__________________
2012 Chevrolet Cruze Eco 6MT
|
|
|
08-25-2009, 03:52 PM
|
#24 (permalink)
|
EcoModding Lurker
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 38
03 OZ - '03 Mitsubishi Lancer OZ Rally 90 day: 34.67 mpg (US)
Thanks: 7
Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts
|
I'll throw in my five cents:
Red light cameras suck. Period. Numerous studies have shown that they increase the accident rates at the monitored intersections because people slam on the brakes like crazy. (I don't have any links on hand but I can dig them up if so desired.) Instead of installing red light cameras follow the European example and replace intersections with roundabouts, people will be forced to slow down, traffic flow will be smoother, and less people will have to stop when traffic is only light.
Speed cameras: I'm not a big fan of them, but their application makes sense in some locations/under certain circumstances. In other cases their use/abuse as revenue generating tools does nothing for anyone's safety and should be strongly opposed. Let's start with an example of the later: I did a road trip through Finland and they have them every couple hundred yards on their major highways. Personally they drove me nuts because the highway was relatively empty and after a week in a car, I would've loved to be able to reach my destination an hour early every day by just going a few km/h over the speed limit instead of having to crawl along on a mostly empty road. I would've spent less time irritated on the road, driven with more focus and would thus have been a much happier and probably safer driver too, had it not been for the speed cameras. On the other hand there was an intersection near the town I used to live in, that was notorious for it's accidents, especially involving non-locals. It was a pretty dangerous and very hidden-until-the-last-second intersection indeed and all the warning signs put up barely helped any. After two speed cameras and accompanying signs were installed, accidents dropped dramatically. As I said above, I'm not a speed camera advocate and think that most uses, especially on highways, are preposterous revenue generating attempts that do very little for safety. Rather then setting up speed cameras, cities should focus on catching aggressive drivers that think they need to go 80 in 60 mph traffic by lane hopping and tailgating as much as possible (of course that wouldn't generate nearly as much revenue!). However, there are limited legitimate uses of speed cameras and as such they should not be completely ignored as a safety tool.
Last edited by Luxbg; 08-25-2009 at 03:55 PM..
Reason: typos
|
|
|
08-25-2009, 06:17 PM
|
#25 (permalink)
|
home of the odd vehicles
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Somewhere in WI
Posts: 3,891
Thanks: 506
Thanked 867 Times in 654 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by 99LeCouch
Unlike the US where there's no warning and the locals who operate them are often caught gaming the roads around the cameras to encourage tickets. Examples abound of yellow lights set dangerously short (2 seconds or less) and speed limits being lowered excessively.
|
This is my main complaint, driving through Chitcago the blasted things are on 45mph roads and the yellow doesn't last long enough to blink.
There should be a law (god forbid) on a fair and reasonable length of time for a yellow light, they used to last a good deal longer than they do now to get the intersections cleared.
|
|
|
08-25-2009, 06:23 PM
|
#26 (permalink)
|
Wannabe greenie
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Yorba Linda, CA
Posts: 1,098
Thanks: 5
Thanked 53 Times in 40 Posts
|
In California, they don't have to post signs at a camera intersection; they only need to post signs at the main entrances to the city.
|
|
|
08-25-2009, 06:41 PM
|
#27 (permalink)
|
EcoModding Lurker
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Uk
Posts: 17
Thanks: 1
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by RH77
Studies have shown that the yellow light duration decreases when these are installed. Revenue generators indeed (also for insurance companies).
RH77
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmay635703
and the yellow doesn't last long enough to blink.
There should be a law (god forbid) on a fair and reasonable length of time for a yellow light, they used to last a good deal longer than they do now.
|
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.?
|
|
|
08-25-2009, 06:54 PM
|
#28 (permalink)
|
Wannabe greenie
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Yorba Linda, CA
Posts: 1,098
Thanks: 5
Thanked 53 Times in 40 Posts
|
Quote:
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.?
|
The DOT has a 'standard' for yellow lights, but it's not an enforceable rule. Studies found that at red-light camera intersections, simply increasing the length of the yellow reduced red-light running dramatically--even more than the camera did--simply because people actually have time to either stop safely or pass through safely.
Insurance companies can raise rates because of tickets.
|
|
|
08-25-2009, 06:58 PM
|
#29 (permalink)
|
EcoModding Lurker
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Uk
Posts: 17
Thanks: 1
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clev
Insurance companies can raise rates because of tickets.
|
So it's not the camera creates the extra revenue, it's running the red light.......and being caught..
|
|
|
08-25-2009, 07:21 PM
|
#30 (permalink)
|
Wannabe greenie
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Yorba Linda, CA
Posts: 1,098
Thanks: 5
Thanked 53 Times in 40 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dieselman
So it's not the camera creates the extra revenue, it's running the red light.......and being caught..
|
No, it's getting flashed by the camera. There are plenty of ways to get cited by the camera, including an illegally short yellow, faulty camera system or even having the "time from red" set so short, the light hasn't even technically turned red yet. (There's a site that shows a camera ticket where one of the two signals was red (LED) and the other was still yellow (incandescent.))
|
|
|
|