You can skew statistics to muddy-up the truth anytime you want, we've all seen it. The truth is if you follow the speed limits, give yourself the proper amount of space in front of you and drive courteously, you reduce your chances of having an accident. Hopefully you influence other drivers at the same time. By the way, I'd much rather take my chances in a rear-end collision than a t-bone anyday.

 

Since accidents will always happen regardless of what type of enforcement scheme is concocted, I'll take a FREE country over a tyrannical but safe one anytime.

Post #13:

http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c6-c...t-tonight.html

 

Red-light cameras raking in cash - Chicago Tribune
Jul 12, 2009 ... Take Penny Avenue and Main Street in East Dundee, where a new red-light camera is expected to be switched on soon. Data showed 36 rear-end ...
archives.chicagotribune.com › Archives › 2009
Red-Light Cameras Just Don't Work
Regarding rear-end collisions caused by red-light cameras, due to people ... of red light cameras are probably going to yield higher rear-end accidents, ...
http://www.ridelust.com/red-light-ca...just-dont-work
Los Angeles Red Light Cameras Lead To Increased Accidents
1 post - 1 author
David Goldstein: “Do you think the red light camera caused the accident? ... there that will show an increase in rear end accidents in these intersections,” ...
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c6-c...accidents.html - Cached
L.A. red light cameras clicking for safety or revenue? -- latimes.com
May 19, 2008 ... In Los Angeles, officials estimate that 80% of red light camera tickets ... increase less serious rear-end accidents caused by people making ...
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c6-c...,5321069.story
WP: D.C. Red-Light Cameras Fail to Reduce Accidents - Democratic ...
7 posts - 6 authors - Last post: Sep 24
Furthermore, running red lights is only one cause of accidents in ... breaks when the light changes to red thus causing a rear-end accident ...
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c6-c...d.php?az...all...
Red light cameras don't work :: Adam Kalsey
Not only do red light cameras not reduce traffic accidents, ... an overall increase in property damage and fatal and injury rear-end collisions. ... concluded that Red Light Cameras cause accidents as well as Ontarios and pre-dates it. ...
kalsey.com/2009/10/red_light_cameras_dont_work
traffic "safety" cameras are dangerous
Oct 17, 2002 ... "There have been studies that show that red-light cameras can cause an increase of rear-end accidents, but there aren't any hard numbers yet ...
www.notbored.org/aaa.html -

 

I wonder why there isn't a unique mark on the highway, which is designed such that if a car hasn't passed it, and traveling at the speed limit, then you have time to brake to a stop -- and should do so. If you're past the mark/line/symbol, then you continue, and the lights are timed such that you'll clear the intersection.

In stop and go traffic, you'll have to make a judgement call, but at least you'll be slow and not cause an accident. You could even have a double mark, like two solid yellow lines across the road, that say you'll clear after this mark if doing the speed limit. There'd be another set of dashed lines that designate a "safe" zone if doing 10 mph under the speed limit.

If you're going over the speed limit...never mind, you won't be doing that. And you'll still clear the intersection before the red. But maybe not before the speeding ticket.

 

First off, I'm not a fan of the cameras or the attempted increase in city revenue streams. However, having seen my share of red light accidents AND rear end accidents, it ain't the cameras that are causing more accidents. Its the idiot drivers who are not reacting appropriately who are causing additional accidents. If you suddenly stuck a cop visibly at the same intersection for a month, issuing more tickets, you'd have people reacting the same way.

I can see where it might be the other changes made at an intersection that would cause more accident issues.
For instance:People slam on their brakes in a lot of different circumstances. IT ALWAYS COMES DOWN TO THE DRIVER BEHIND. They are the ones who should and must control the distances involved. That is the law, not Disneyland.

 

Yes, its the law. But only in Disneyland does everyone obey it. We are talking about the real world here.

We have young inexperienced drivers that text and have all sorts of distractions. The point is those who believe the government has your best interest at heart with the cameras sounds like someone that is naive and should live in Disneyland.

Another point is some drivers see the camera and slam on the brakes when they could safely and legally go through the intersection when seeing a yellow light. This can cause a serious accident. On the other hand blowing a red light can also cause serious accidents.

Point you ask? Do not tell me the cameras are there for safety. If you believe the goverment puts them there for your safety. I have a nice piece of land for you at 1313 S Harbor Blvd
Anaheim, CA. PM me for a great price.

 

Yeah pretty much what he said, where ever I am sitting with a radar unit. The red light thing, don;t run them, you could get yourself killed bro.

 

Huh?? Did the OP say he wanted to run lights?

 

Whoa!!! I am the OP. I never implied that I was looking to run straight through RED LIGHTS. I was looking for something to remind me to come to a complete stop while making a right turn on Red.

I was in Naples Florida last week and these cameras are all over. The fine is $125. You must come to a complete stop behind the whiteline before turning. Just driving around town could cost you big dollars.

 

It is a shame how some have put words into your post. It is never a bad thing to know when big brother is watching you. And, with the red light camera intersections they are so unsafe it is good to know where they are so you can be prepared to stop if someone slams on their brakes in front of you as soon as the light turns yellow.

 

Hey, I live in Naples!! Big Brother Headquarters!!!

 

I did not read the entire thread but I thought I would share this.

In the city I travel everyday they have video cameras at various intersections in addition to red light cameras. The video shows who almost made a full stop on red then a ticket gets issued. The video shows who's bumper crossed the limit line before stopping and then a ticket gets issued.

It has gone beyond the red light runners which I had mixed feelings about due to the slippery slope theory. Now the slope has slipped and video has introduced what I see as nothing but added revenue for the city. Speed cameras are illegal where I live, defined as an illegal speed trap so far but there has been talk about changing that law. The lope continues to slip.

 

According to Illinois state study, red light cameras actually cause MORE accidents and not less:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/c...,2590486.story

 

IMO the red light camera will do nothing to improved safety. What may help with safety would be to have long yellows followed by all lights staying red for at least 3 seconds. A camera will not keep the person not paying attention, ie talking on the phone, texting, fiddling with the radio, etc... from running through an intersection with a red light. About the only thing that would actually prevent Red Light running being from a deliberate act to inattention would be to have barricades that would come up that would hold back a vehicle on impact from entering the intersection at the posted speed limit. Other than that just use you eyes and pay attention when approaching intersections. I Always when sitting at a red light make sure that all the traffic is stopped or stopping before proceeding when my light turns green even if I have to sit at that green light for a couple of extra seconds.... That saved me just about a month or two ago from being broadsided by a flatbed truck while in my Vette at an intersection. They would have hit me in the drivers door and I seriously doubt that they ran it on purpose. If there had been a camera there and I hadn't looked, all it would have done was snaped a pic of the drivers face just before impact!

Mark

 

Perhaps you are a former LEO and perhaps the area you worked is the reason why your opinions differ from EVERY LEO I have ever known. I worked as a LEO in FL for 7 years and have recently moved to a more aggressive Federal Position. Traffic still presents a gateway for us though. You bring up 1 example from "the second largest Police Dept in the Country to my 73??? There are laws... Following too Closely, Speeding, Careless Driving. In FL as long as your front tires break the line before the red, you are good to go unless you obviously accelerate to do so. Stupid ignorant drivers are out there. If they can't afford the fine, then obey the law. Slow down. Here the fine is $231 and I have NEVER let a Red Light Violation go. I do, however, agree that they are not placed there for safety. They use that guise to mask the attempt to collect more revenue.... good. I don't blatently run through intersections even on green when driving in Emergency Mode. Everyone has the duty to drive with due regard. There will be freak accidents. I'll take you rear end from who knows when and raise you a red light 28 days ago. Both vehicles traveling near 20mph. Veh 1 ran the light and struck veh 2 causing vehicle 2 to flip onto its roof..... 20MPH!! The Driver of vehicle 2 was paralized. Her young son was killed. I have been forced to take a life 3 times in 7 years, its my job. My point to others is Red Lights can easily cause you to take a life. Drive with Due Regard for all attendant circumstances. You agreed to when you got your license.

 

Red light cameras are pure revenue generating mechanism for cities. Proven over and over not to decrease accidents. Those that do not have $$ will slam on breaks when lights turn yellow, thus causing accidents. I am sure no one here claims running red lights is ok. We are just saying that red light cameras cause more problems than they solve. Plus, it's a private company that issues you a ticket. Not a police officer. I am surprised you do not think of that as bad.

 

Yellow is supposed to mean stop provided it is safe to do so. That is a judgment call - and cameras have no judgment.
A camera that is aggressively timed (which is suspicious in itself) does not factor in whether I can see that the tailgater behind me is not paying attention, or whether I'm driving in the first rain of two months and the entire road is briefly covered in raised oil, or whether the intersection timing itself was botched and fails to work properly with the posted speed limits, or any of all manner of other factors (and edge-cases) that can go into a judgment of whether it is going to be safe to hit the brakes when the light goes orange.

Drivers don't trust the cameras to have good judgment, and so drive erratically around them. Blaming the drivers for this is simply an error; drivers are what you're working with - faults and all - the problem is the use of road equipment that causes people to drive more erratically instead of less so.

I like the idea of red-light cameras, but what we're seeing in the real world in many areas is parameters being set so that enhancing safety is clearly not just not the priority, but actually sacrificed in order for cash. When that is the case, and the motives aren't owned up to, all the safety talk becomes just a nasty lie and a cover-up; insult as well as injury.

 

Having a red light detector is not so you can blow red lights. I find that being alerted to a red light detector makes you more alert to local drivers that will lock up their brakes on yellow knowing a red light detector is there.

 

If you read the OP's question and response his intent was not to blow lights. He as I would like to know where the cameras are as I believe the red light camera intersections are more dangerous then ones without them.

Of course there are laws and people should follow them. You just appear to be somewhat naive to why many laws are on the books. Obviously running a red light is against the law and dangerous. But sometimes when government fixes one problem it creates many more.

I look at government with a skeptical eye and do not put a blind trust into it. Some citizens do not care what government does until they wake up in a socialist or communist country. If you are fine with cameras intended for revenue and not safety that is your decision.

I'm sure we can find cases in which both red camera has saved a life and caused a life to be taken.

 

Again, it's simple ...

Q: Is the locale willing to increase the Yellow Light time?

A1: If Yes, then I have no problem with cameras and camera-based enforcement.

A2: If No, then I have to question their motives.

Increasing Yellow Light times -- again and again -- reduces accidents. It's the most proven method of reducing accidents. When combined with known cameras, the combination makes people stop, as well as always gives them the time to stop, without question.

The only accidents left are those where people weren't paying attention at all (and increased Yellow Light times reduce that) and those who purposely run the lights. Increasing Yellow Light times does not increase the number of people who run them.