Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Tuesday November 25, 2014
Home Forums WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
NASIOC
Here you can view your subscribed threads, work with private messages and edit your profile and preferences Home Registration is free! Visit the NASIOC Store NASIOC Rules Search Find other members Frequently Asked Questions Calendar Archive NASIOC Upgrade Garage Logout
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC General > News & Rumors > Non-Subaru News & Rumors

Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!
Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-21-2009, 12:27 PM   #1
AVANTI R5
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 73805
Join Date: Nov 2004
Default Red Light Camera/Study Shows Right Turn on Red Crashes are Rare

Quote:
Red light camera supporters insist that the devices are needed to prevent the common and deadly T-bone style of accident at intersections. In practice, however, automated ticketing lenses are more often positioned to photograph a different type of violation, one that rarely causes accidents. A review of US Department of Transportation statistics shows that an average motorist could drive a billion miles -- the distance from Earth to Jupiter and back -- before being involved in an accident that resulted from a motorist making a rolling stop on a right-hand turn.

Despite the rarity of such incidents, municipalities like Schaumburg, Illinois have used red light cameras to generated more than $1 million from right-on-red tickets. Of the 10,000 photo tickets issued since November, only about 200 involved the straight-through type of violation used to justify the devices. Likewise, Duncanville, Texas with a population of 38,500 used a set of four cameras last year to generate 44,000 tickets worth $3.3 million. The private contractor in charge of the ticketing program defines a "violation" as passing the stop bar painted on the pavement at any speed greater than 2 MPH. Because of the design of the monitored intersections, motorists often must pull into the crosswalk past the stop bar to see cross traffic before initiating a turn. That means even when motorists fully stop before turning, they can be mailed a ticket.

Such a strict attitude appears out of proportion to the danger posed by right-turn accidents. The 2001 National Highway Transportation Safety Administration report entitled "Analysis of Crossing Path Crashes" examined 1998 data from the General Estimates System (GES) and Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) accident databases to conclude that of about 6.33 million crashes that year, about 1.72 million involved one vehicle cutting into the path of another. Of this amount, only 5.7 percent or 99,000 were classified as right-turn into path (RTIP) crashes, the least common type (Table 3-1). The category still included incidents unrelated to what might happen at an intersection, such as accidents that happened while making a right-hand turn out of a driveway or alley.

The number of right-turn accidents shrunk further to just 20,000 when narrowed to collisions taking place at intersections with traffic lights (Table 3-2). Of these, only 4.1 percent, or 2378, were caused by the violation of the traffic signal (Table 4-1).

Cities often justify these ticketing methods by saying they are protecting pedestrians and cyclists, but these numbers are small as well.

"The majority of fatalities did not occur at or near intersections," the report stated.

Of the small number of fatalities that did happen at an intersection, only 10.9 percent happened during a right turn (Table 5-5). Such accidents were forty times less likely to occur than a collision with another automobile. The text of the 2001 report is available in a 700k PDF file at the source link below. View more red light camera accident studies.
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/26/2693.asp
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
AVANTI R5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2009, 12:57 PM   #2
STi-llborn
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 153632
Join Date: Jul 2007
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Florida
Default

I ****ing HATE how its private companies that issue these tickets. At least let the money go towards improving roads, or something productive.
STi-llborn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2009, 01:03 PM   #3
veightkiller
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 78967
Join Date: Jan 2005
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: vancouver B.C
Vehicle:
2011 335i
Black

Default

^^^word
veightkiller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2009, 12:58 AM   #4
daveyboy
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 35419
Join Date: Apr 2003
Default

Redlight cameras are nothing more than a revenue generating scam--especially when they also give speeding tickets.
daveyboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2009, 01:52 AM   #5
Superglue WRX
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 106275
Join Date: Jan 2006
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: San Jose, CA
Vehicle:
New Chevy SUV
Government Motors White

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by daveyboy View Post
Redlight cameras are nothing more than a revenue generating scam--
Well, it's not like red light runners should be getting away with it either.
Superglue WRX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2009, 04:07 AM   #6
AVANTI R5
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 73805
Join Date: Nov 2004
Default LA Speed Trap Cops Busted for Corruption



Quote:
The mayor and police chief of a federally-funded Louisiana speed trap town were arrested Wednesday on felony corruption charges. A Tensas Parish grand jury indicted Waterproof Mayor Bobby Higginbotham for felony theft, malfeasance in office, payroll fraud and using public funds for personal use. Waterproof Police Chief Miles Jenkins faces three felony counts for receiving bonuses for meeting traffic ticket quotas and altering traffic citations. The activities of both officials were fueled by federal taxpayer dollars. In 2007, Higginbotham received $37,500 from the US Department of Agriculture Rural Development’s Community Facilities Program for the purchase of two police cars fully equipped with the latest speed detection equipment. Higginbotham ordered Miles to use these vehicles to prey on State Highway 65 travelers as the speed limit dropped without warning to 45 MPH within the town limits.

“They have the nicest police cars in Louisiana,” one commenter on the National Motorists Association Speed Trap Exchange website observed. “However they are the most unprofessionally dressed cops I’ve ever seen.”
Even before the arrival of the new cruisers, Waterproof earned 37 percent of its budget from speeding tickets, according to a 2007 report by the Louisiana Legislative Auditor. Higginbotham and Jenkins are out on bond awaiting trial. Louisiana State Police officials say the investigation into their activities is ongoing.
AVANTI R5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2009, 04:09 AM   #7
AVANTI R5
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 73805
Join Date: Nov 2004
Default UK/Road Cops "Powerless"


Councils, not police, now responsible for enforcing road signs



Quote:
Traffic police are being forced to turn a blind eye if motorists ignore road signs which ban cars, U-turns and other illegal manoeuvres.

That’s because the boys in blue “no longer have the legal power to enforce some moving traffic offences”, according to
the Metropolitan Police.

This power now lies with Transport for London and local councils instead. However, a police spokeswoman added that officers could still intervene under general powers “where driving is blatantly of a poor standard or endangers other road users
http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/au...powerless.html
AVANTI R5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2009, 09:55 AM   #8
Mike Wevrick
RIP 1/19/64 - 7/23/11
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 24654
Join Date: Sep 2002
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: saraseager.com
Vehicle:
1957 Taggart Comet
atlasshruggedpart1.com

Default

Quote:
The private contractor in charge of the ticketing program defines a "violation" as passing the stop bar painted on the pavement at any speed greater than 2 MPH. Because of the design of the monitored intersections, motorists often must pull into the crosswalk past the stop bar to see cross traffic before initiating a turn. That means even when motorists fully stop before turning, they can be mailed a ticket.
404 sympathy not found. You are supposed to fully stop at the stop bar, then pull forward until you can see clearly, then make your turn. I hate people who roll through the stop bar and/or crosswalk and only stop when they are almost in the the road. In many cases you can't tell if they are going to stop or not.
Mike Wevrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2009, 10:43 AM   #9
daveyboy
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 35419
Join Date: Apr 2003
Default

^
so should tickets be issued for going 1 mph over the speed limit? I mean come on, this is ridiculous. Crosswalks are often yards from the actual intersection. There are so many more important problems out there than to ticket people that came to a full stop, but the nose of their car was past a fricken white line that isn't even close to protruding into the intersection. Pure greed and people with way too much time on their hands... .
daveyboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2009, 10:47 AM   #10
Mechie3
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 120152
Join Date: Jul 2006
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Indy
Default

^^ Does the light work that way? What if you stop at the line, then creep forward. If it detects you moving more than 2mph past the line while the light is red will it still give you a ticket?
Mechie3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2009, 11:22 AM   #11
BOY
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 232
Join Date: Sep 1999
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Ft Wayne, IN
Vehicle:
99 RS-T RIP
02 Forster-S

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by daveyboy View Post
^
so should tickets be issued for going 1 mph over the speed limit? I mean come on, this is ridiculous. Crosswalks are often yards from the actual intersection. There are so many more important problems out there than to ticket people that came to a full stop, but the nose of their car was past a fricken white line that isn't even close to protruding into the intersection. Pure greed and people with way too much time on their hands... .
In essence, YES. The point of a speed limit is just that, its the maximum allowed speed on that road and if you exceed it, you are in violation and subject to fines. Stopping on the stop bar, rolling stops, etc are also perfectly valid ticketable offences.

Quit your whining and follow the rules of the road or get a ticket, pretty simple. Remember, a drivers license is not a right.
BOY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2009, 12:43 PM   #12
Godmal
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 4934
Join Date: Mar 2001
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: LITH, IL
Vehicle:
2007 White STI LTD
Grey Mazda 5

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BOY View Post
In essence, YES. The point of a speed limit is just that, its the maximum allowed speed on that road and if you exceed it, you are in violation and subject to fines. Stopping on the stop bar, rolling stops, etc are also perfectly valid ticketable offences.

Quit your whining and follow the rules of the road or get a ticket, pretty simple. Remember, a drivers license is not a right.
True, but is it still ok for the gov't to write the laws so they are enforced purely to generate revenue?
Godmal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2009, 02:20 PM   #13
BOY
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 232
Join Date: Sep 1999
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Ft Wayne, IN
Vehicle:
99 RS-T RIP
02 Forster-S

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Godmal View Post
True, but is it still ok for the gov't to write the laws so they are enforced purely to generate revenue?
Either that or raise taxes on everyone... If I'm smart enough not to get a ticket b/c I follow the rules why should my taxes be raised to help government increase revenue for projects that (theoretically) benefit me and my family. Now if you can't come to a complete stop before turning right on red... well, as Darwin said: "survival of the fittest"... or is it "better you than me"?
BOY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2009, 03:31 PM   #14
daveyboy
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 35419
Join Date: Apr 2003
Default

You must be one of those with too much time on their hands--make a bunch of sandwiches and feed the homeless. Just because something is a law does not mean that it is for the benefit of society and may be bordering on draconian... .
daveyboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2009, 07:53 PM   #15
Superglue WRX
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 106275
Join Date: Jan 2006
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: San Jose, CA
Vehicle:
New Chevy SUV
Government Motors White

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by daveyboy View Post
You must be one of those with too much time on their hands--make a bunch of sandwiches and feed the homeless. Just because something is a law does not mean that it is for the benefit of society and may be bordering on draconian... .
How does not stopping where you're supposed to benefit society in anyway besides rewarding complacency? In all seriousness, how stubborn do you have to be to proclaim that coming to a complete stop is much too bothersome for you? When did a stop sign become downgraded to a suggestion?
Superglue WRX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2009, 09:51 AM   #16
BOY
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 232
Join Date: Sep 1999
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Ft Wayne, IN
Vehicle:
99 RS-T RIP
02 Forster-S

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Superglue WRX View Post
How does not stopping where you're supposed to benefit society in anyway besides rewarding complacency? In all seriousness, how stubborn do you have to be to proclaim that coming to a complete stop is much too bothersome for you? When did a stop sign become downgraded to a suggestion?
thank you.
BOY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2009, 04:40 PM   #17
Vostok 7
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 30209
Join Date: Nov 2002
Chapter/Region: NWIC
Location: Get a real car.
Vehicle:
Do you need to
read this in Braille?

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Superglue WRX View Post
How does not stopping where you're supposed to benefit society in anyway besides rewarding complacency? In all seriousness, how stubborn do you have to be to proclaim that coming to a complete stop is much too bothersome for you? When did a stop sign become downgraded to a suggestion?
Stop signs became a suggestion when "Yield" came to mean "speed up and cut off whoever is in the other lane".

Vostok 7
Vostok 7 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2009, 04:51 PM   #18
Skunkers
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 115480
Join Date: May 2006
Location: St. Pete, FL
Vehicle:
2002 RSX-S
Desert Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vostok 7 View Post
Stop signs became a suggestion when "Yield" came to mean "speed up and cut off whoever is in the other lane".

Vostok 7
This. It seems like US drivers are getting worse as times go on. Nowadays where I live, flipping on your turn signal means "quickly speed up beside me so I can't get over like I'm politely signalling to do". And this is no exagguration whatsoever. Seriously, like ~80% of the time if someone is in the lane next to me and I signal to get over they will speed up.
Skunkers is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2009, 05:07 PM   #19
Calamity Jesus
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 44501
Join Date: Oct 2003
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: in a minefield of caddishness.
Vehicle:
1984 "Skeletor from
"He-Man"

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skunkers View Post
This. It seems like US drivers are getting worse as times go on. Nowadays where I live, flipping on your turn signal means "quickly speed up beside me so I can't get over like I'm politely signalling to do". And this is no exagguration whatsoever. Seriously, like ~80% of the time if someone is in the lane next to me and I signal to get over they will speed up.
Dynamite clears holes in traffic too.
Calamity Jesus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2009, 05:08 PM   #20
jhargis
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 110304
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Crestline, CA
Vehicle:
2004 Volvo S60R
No more Subie

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Wevrick View Post
404 sympathy not found. You are supposed to fully stop at the stop bar, then pull forward until you can see clearly, then make your turn. I hate people who roll through the stop bar and/or crosswalk and only stop when they are almost in the the road. In many cases you can't tell if they are going to stop or not.
For the most part, agreed.

One issue I could see here is with cars that you're not familiar with driving. Somebody used to driving a Previa may well hang the nose over the bar a few inches in a large sedan with a bigger hood simply because they're used to driving using a different perspective. If somebody is running a red light, they're going to be moving at some decent speed like 99.9% of the time, often well over the speed limit to beat that yellow. So going an inch over the bar at 3mph seems like getting way into the technicality range for added revenue generation.

It also becomes a big problem when the city decides to time their yellow light to be extremely short knowing that people will be more likely to try to get through on the yellow and catch a red light ticket. We've gained quite a few red light camares where I live, and big surprize, I've could swear a lot of the yellows have gotten absurdly short. I always slow to stop for a yellow, but even when you're at the speed limit, slowing for a yellow in a short period of time while trying to keep you passengers from shooting through you windshield might cause you to go over the line by a few inches. By my logic, a short yellow is far more dangerous than a more generous yellow. People will hit the brakes not to get stuck in a short yellow, and if the driver behind them does not have the reaction time or braking system to stop as well, they end up running right into the person that is stopping to avoid the red light ticket. Why do I mention this? Because I saw it happen a couple of months ago in the lane right next to me!

In my mind, the vast majority of red light's that I've seen run are very blatant, and often at high speed. And there are plenty of those type of drivers on the road. So go after the people who are intentionally breaking the law, not somebody minding their own business who accidentally puts their nose 2 inches over the bar in the name of "safety."

The technology used is pretty precise, you can program in a range of error and make that a large range or a very narrow range to catch the technicalities. But the people who are really intentionally driving unsafely tend to be blowing even the most reasonable amount of wiggle room out of the water.
jhargis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2009, 07:27 PM   #21
Superglue WRX
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 106275
Join Date: Jan 2006
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: San Jose, CA
Vehicle:
New Chevy SUV
Government Motors White

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jhargis View Post
For the most part, agreed.

One issue I could see here is with cars that you're not familiar with driving. Somebody used to driving a Previa may well hang the nose over the bar a few inches in a large sedan with a bigger hood simply because they're used to driving using a different perspective. If somebody is running a red light, they're going to be moving at some decent speed like 99.9% of the time, often well over the speed limit to beat that yellow. So going an inch over the bar at 3mph seems like getting way into the technicality range for added revenue generation.

It also becomes a big problem when the city decides to time their yellow light to be extremely short knowing that people will be more likely to try to get through on the yellow and catch a red light ticket. We've gained quite a few red light camares where I live, and big surprize, I've could swear a lot of the yellows have gotten absurdly short. I always slow to stop for a yellow, but even when you're at the speed limit, slowing for a yellow in a short period of time while trying to keep you passengers from shooting through you windshield might cause you to go over the line by a few inches. By my logic, a short yellow is far more dangerous than a more generous yellow. People will hit the brakes not to get stuck in a short yellow, and if the driver behind them does not have the reaction time or braking system to stop as well, they end up running right into the person that is stopping to avoid the red light ticket. Why do I mention this? Because I saw it happen a couple of months ago in the lane right next to me!

In my mind, the vast majority of red light's that I've seen run are very blatant, and often at high speed. And there are plenty of those type of drivers on the road. So go after the people who are intentionally breaking the law, not somebody minding their own business who accidentally puts their nose 2 inches over the bar in the name of "safety."

The technology used is pretty precise, you can program in a range of error and make that a large range or a very narrow range to catch the technicalities. But the people who are really intentionally driving unsafely tend to be blowing even the most reasonable amount of wiggle room out of the water.
At the risk of being Cpt. Obvious......

Rules Of Thumb for defensive driving:

- If you can't see the line/crosswalk in front of you, it's possible you've gone too far. If you sit in a low slung vehicle or one with a high hood, use your best judgment (better safe than sorry).

- If you're at an unfamiliar intersection approaching a yellow light, just assume you won't be able to safely make it through the intersection before it turns red. Prepare for a complete stop. This obviously wont work if your driving faster than the speed limit at which point you could put others at risk on your split second decision to stop or go.

If you stop safely and get rear ended, the person behind you is:
a) following too closely
b) traveling too fast
c) not paying attention to the road
d) Any or all of the above

Obviously paying attention to the situational will help maintain preparedness for these quick decisions and lower the risk of an accident or moving violation.

If people are too complacent to follow the rules, then they get what's comming to them. Whether it be penalties or fines or whatever.
Superglue WRX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2009, 07:37 PM   #22
Vostok 7
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 30209
Join Date: Nov 2002
Chapter/Region: NWIC
Location: Get a real car.
Vehicle:
Do you need to
read this in Braille?

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Superglue WRX View Post
At the risk of being Cpt. Obvious......

Rules Of Thumb for defensive driving:

- If you can't see the line/crosswalk in front of you, it's possible you've gone too far. If you sit in a low slung vehicle or one with a high hood, use your best judgment (better safe than sorry).

- If you're at an unfamiliar intersection approaching a yellow light, just assume you won't be able to safely make it through the intersection before it turns red. Prepare for a complete stop. This obviously wont work if your driving faster than the speed limit at which point you could put others at risk on your split second decision to stop or go.

If you stop safely and get rear ended, the person behind you is:
a) following too closely
b) traveling too fast
c) not paying attention to the road
d) Any or all of the above

Obviously paying attention to the situational will help maintain preparedness for these quick decisions and lower the risk of an accident or moving violation.

If people are too complacent to follow the rules, then they get what's comming to them. Whether it be penalties or fines or whatever.
Not to mention that rear-ending someone in most states is usually an automatic 100% fault on the driver who hits the back of the other car. Because really, if you're not paying attention or going too fast and hit someone, you deserve everything that can be shoveled on you.

Vostok 7
Vostok 7 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2009, 08:47 PM   #23
jhargis
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 110304
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Crestline, CA
Vehicle:
2004 Volvo S60R
No more Subie

Default

OK Mr. Perfect who has never ever crept past the line an inch. And follows every single active law down to it's crossed T's and dotten i's.

I agree, you can take everything in life down to it's tiniest technicality. And sure, that's fine. But you used to have human beings (police officers) that could differentiate right from wrong exclusively watching these things. The vast majority of officers aren't going to issue a ticket for creeping a tiny bit past the line, because there is no safety issue involved and generally no intent or action of "running" the light. I actually like red light cameras, but program in a little wiggle room A) for equipment tolerances and B) to catch the folks that are actually causing a dangerous situation. If they're under the banner of safety, then fine, hit people for doing things that are truly unsafe.

People are imperfect. Intersections designed by people are imperfect. Cars that people drive through those intersections are imperfect. But the system can be programmed for a tiny bit of wiggle room. If they blow through the red or come to a screeching halt with their whole car in the cross walk, then sure, crucify them. But the system can be set to be overly rigorous as well.

I don't like being rear-ended either... I've had it happen 3 times, and it's not fun. Never rear ended anybody myself though. Fact is that it does happen, and intersection design and light timing can aggrivate the problem though. My point is that some places would rather get more revenue than making the intersection safer.

In a debate, is your argument going to win over mine? Of course. Because the law is the law down to the letter. But even laws can be written with some wiggle room... and it's not neccesarily the camera that I don't agree with, I guess I just get frustrated with the modern world because with better and more precise technololgy and ever-increasing numbers of laws, you have to really adhere to the little technicalities with no room for human error, which is inevitabe. So ends my rant.

Last edited by jhargis; 02-23-2009 at 09:00 PM.
jhargis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2009, 09:16 PM   #24
Superglue WRX
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 106275
Join Date: Jan 2006
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: San Jose, CA
Vehicle:
New Chevy SUV
Government Motors White

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jhargis View Post
OK Mr. Perfect who has never ever crept past the line an inch. And follows every single active law down to it's crossed T's and dotten i's.

I agree, you can take everything in life down to it's tiniest technicality. And sure, that's fine. But you used to have human beings (police officers) that could differentiate right from wrong exclusively watching these things. The vast majority of officers aren't going to issue a ticket for creeping a tiny bit past the line, because there is no safety issue involved and generally no intent or action of "running" the light. I actually like red light cameras, but program in a little wiggle room A) for equipment tolerances and B) to catch the folks that are actually causing a dangerous situation. If they're under the banner of safety, then fine, hit people for doing things that are truly unsafe.

People are imperfect. Intersections designed by people are imperfect. Cars that people drive through those intersections are imperfect. But the system can be programmed for a tiny bit of wiggle room. If they blow through the red or come to a screeching halt with their whole car in the cross walk, then sure, crucify them. But the system can be set to be overly rigorous as well.

I don't like being rear-ended either... I've had it happen 3 times, and it's not fun. Never rear ended anybody myself though. Fact is that it does happen, and intersection design and light timing can aggrivate the problem though. My point is that some places would rather get more revenue than making the intersection safer.

In a debate, is your argument going to win over mine? Of course. Because the law is the law down to the letter. But even laws can be written with some wiggle room... and it's not neccesarily the camera that I don't agree with, I guess I just get frustrated with the modern world because with better and better technololgy and ever-increasing numbers of laws, the closer you have to adhere to the little technicalities. So ends my rant.
1) I never once proclaimed to be perfect, just applying common sense. I've gotten speeding tickets, got rear ended, etc. It had no bearing on what we can agree are basic fundamentals of driving. If people were perfect, no laws would be necessary.

2) The only issue I see here is the 2mph detection. I doubt it's that accurate and probably even trips the camera at even slower movement than that. The 2mph limit is pretty absurd to expect from people (people walk twice that fast). Unfortunately, most speedo's are an analog dial and can't accurately display anything lower than maybe 5 or 10mph. That is a fundamental problem that should be fixed. I would think 5mph is reasonable and safe.

BTW, I like the hidden LOL in there.
Superglue WRX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2009, 10:29 PM   #25
daveyboy
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 35419
Join Date: Apr 2003
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Superglue WRX View Post
How does not stopping where you're supposed to benefit society in anyway besides rewarding complacency? In all seriousness, how stubborn do you have to be to proclaim that coming to a complete stop is much too bothersome for you? When did a stop sign become downgraded to a suggestion?
Quote:
Originally Posted by BOY View Post
thank you.
You obviously didn't ready my post--I SPECIFICALLY mentioned coming to a complete stop. As an avid motorcyclist, I ESPECIALLY hate it when people roll through lights, run lights, turn on red, etc. My problem is that even if you make a complete stop, if your car breaks an invisible vertical plane, measured by a machine, at an arbitrary speed, you are guaranteed a ticket. As someone mentioned above, these are machines regulating imperfect human behavior. There is absolutely no discretion or margin for harmless error--but boy does it line the pockets of the company and the governing body.
daveyboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Red light cameras being voted on tonight in Fort Lauderdale Neek Off-Topic 58 02-23-2010 12:53 PM
Dash, hvac, and corner lights turn on when brakes are pressed 08sniper Electrical & Lighting 1 09-21-2009 06:06 AM
no right turn on red ticket dontgiva Southern California Impreza Club Forum -- SCIC 29 03-15-2008 12:45 AM
Red light cameras sure are high tech now! drkwtsn Mid Atlantic Impreza Club -- MAIC 26 09-10-2005 12:42 AM
Making unprotected right turn against red Newest Off-Topic 9 08-08-2005 12:12 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:30 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2014 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2014, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.