Posted on 05/12/2011 12:31:33 PM PDT by a fool in paradise
In the five months after Houston voters forced city officials to turn off a camera surveillance system that fined motorists for running red lights, traffic accidents at those 50 intersections with 70 cameras have decreased 16 percent, according to recently released data.
The drop in accidents surprised Houston police administrators who say a possible explanation is the unusually dry weather during recent months has made driving conditions safer. They also wonder if years of electronic monitoring have made Houstonians better, if not more cautious, drivers.
Assistant Chief Brian Lumpkin said he had assumed accidents at those intersections were increasing since HPD is still receiving raw data from the camera vendor indicating motorists were running lights with much greater frequency at many intersections...
(Excerpt) Read more at blog.chron.com ...
If there are fewer drivers, then how is it light runners are significantly “up”? Are they that far up?
Are gas stations noting a sharp decline in gas purchases? Wouldn’t that cause prices to drop?
They are more nervous and brake happy knowing that if they get photoed a $175 traffic ticket will head their way.
More people are becoming aware that red light cams do end up causing more accidents at intersections. All it is to city governments is for revenue enhancement.
Big government and big business working together to screw you out of your hard earned money because even the red light camera company gets a percentage!
You are blaming an object for your foot pressing the brake pedal. Humans decide how to act, not cameras.
The whole thing is a total scam to create revenue.
Saw that kind of thing in Turkey 5 years ago. Makes all kind of sense if your motive is assuring smooth, safe traffic flow.Shorten the green light cycle by a few seconds, extend the yellow by a few seconds and count down from 6 or thereabouts. Maybe 1.5 seconds of yellow light for every 10 mph of the posted speed limit.
I'm all for it. But the cynic in me says that the reduced driver uncertainty would lead to fewer bad decisions, leading to lower city revenue from tickets. And that might be the actual motivation of some of our "representatives."There was a big brouhaha recently about iPhones remembering their owners' locations. I think that officials responsible for traffic rules & regulations should carry a device which records their movements, so that the public can see if they obey the laws they impose on the rest of us. Down to the last jot and tittle, so they would have to either reform their driving into complete ninnyhood, or else enact more reasonable legislation/regulation.
Police union is trying to claim that the push to end red light cameras is to increase police presence at traffic lights to make more court money for lawyers trying to get people out of red light tickets. Can’t they hire a lawyer to fight a red light CAMERA ticket as well?
And one of the guys (not sure if it’s this one) who started the legal fight to end red light cameras also fought an earlier measure that required drivers with 3 or more glass nicks in their windshield to get the glass replaced. The glass (and body shop) lobby was not pleased to see that law end.
So let’s get this straight, its the fault of the camera that made the idiotic Houston drivers run red lights and sometimes rearend someone who did the right thing and actually stopped for the red light?
Reading further into the report it says they still have the cameras on and are videoing more red light runners now that they know the tickets aren’t being issued.
The problem with the red light runner cams was that the “ticket” was a civil penalty not a criminal penalty and obviously was not harsh enough. I guarantee if they made red light running a 3 strikes your out (pull tags off car and pull DL), this stupid and very dangerous red light running would stop.
Defending red light running is mighty pinheaded.
Strange how those other causes suddenly disappeared when the cameras were first installed and the accident rates went up.
I'm sure it's all coincidental.
And you would never get a ticket if you made the experienced decision to stop while it was yellow since you felt you could not clear the intersection. I do it all the time and applaud your decision to do so. It’s just not worth the cost or the chance of a t-bone.
I never issued a summons to a person if they were on the back half of the intersection and clearing it, only if they were just entering it at red. That’s blatant, and clear to the other motorists as well.
I feel that yellows could be extended or have a two second breather where the whole intersection sits at red while stragglers clear. This may reduces accidents. Some places have tried roundabouts as well. Roundabouts slow the traffic, but no one really stops.
If cities want to fine motorists for this, make it something reasonable ($20?) and show exactly where the fine money goes. It must be used for something worthwhile, like victim’s advocacy, or as part of the budget for police EQUIPMENT only, no raises or benefits increase. Those items should come at the purview and agreeance of the city council.
Human behavior (acting) is heavily influenced by external stimuli. The entire purpose of these cameras (besides revenue) is to change peoples behavior. So to say these cameras have no influence on the behavior of drivers is not accurate.
Never heard anymore lame-azz excuses for the data that doesn’t really fall in their favor...
I think we need to remind them that the people have voted these revenue generating abominations into oblivion...
They need to be taken down and rendered inoperative in this city yesterday...The fact that they are still being used to “study” is just what we also did not want to have happen...
They need to get over it, and get rid of them...If they need revenue, then do it the old fashioned way...Catch ‘em...
I believe it actually influences the behavior of the proponents...They believe they are doing the public a service,when in fact they are nothing more than cashiers at a grocery store...
Paper or plastic, is about the only concept they can understand...And when the customers don’t want that, they tell them what they want, and the believers don’t do it...Guess what happens...
They also wonder if years of electronic monitoring have made Houstonians better, if not more cautious, drivers.”
Obviously this “they” person has not driven in Houston.
Suppose that proceeding through the intersection would give one a 5% chance of getting a $200 ticket, but slamming on the brakes would have a 0.25% chance of causing an accident in which the other driver would be found at fault, and in which the likelihood of severe injury would probably not be too great. Are you suggesting that drivers who find themselves in such a situation should simply brave the ticket? It seems to me that the cameras would make what would otherwise be irrational behavior (causing a 1 in 400 chance of an accident for no good reason), rational.
[Mis-pasted quoted text in last post]
In the nearest town up here, the ‘don’t walk’ lights for pedestrians on the cross streets flash (usually between 4 and 7 times) before the traffic light changes to yellow. It gives pedeatrians time to clear the cross street before the signal changes. If you can see those, you generally have a countdown timer to the light change.
>>You are blaming an object for your foot pressing the brake pedal. Humans decide how to act, not cameras.<<
Absolutely! And the presence of the camera is one of the environmental factors that causes human reaction. You know, like when you see a radar cop, no matter how fast you are going you instinctively take your foot off the gas. :)
Same thing for some people.
You don’t understand what a “red light runner” is. You are out of your element here. I’ve been following this since we didn’t have these cameras in the US. I’ve been following the stats. Go to youtube and search “red light camera” and see what you find. Even though the purpose of these cameras is “claimed” to be to stop red light runners, most of the tickets (over 60% are written for making a free right turn and not coming to a complete stop with rollback. That is not a safety ticket.
Watch the videos. Seriously.
Oh, and in some parts of California you can be at an intersection where there is clearly no traffic for miles in any direction. But if you almost stop, and maybe even very slowly coast for five or six feet before taking your free right, you will get a $350 to $425 ticket in the mail.
That is ridiculous.
>>Defending red light running is mighty pinheaded.<<
People are not defending red light running. They are attacking the real reason the cameras exist - revenue.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.