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 ...
Actually the Houston Pravda had it on the front page in the newspaper vending machine. I saw the headline walking into work. I didn’t buy the paper; I don’t have a bird. I was surprised the paper had it on the front page.
Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time!
We got our first red light camera at Yosemite and Arapahoe road. Anyone who has been there prior to the cameras knows that the entire intersection was jammed with red light runners from all directions. With the cameras the intersection is not clear and flows smoothly. They placed cameras at about 6 more interesections with the same problem. So, to me, the cameras were not revenue generators but have solved major problems at key intersections.
“You know, like when you see a radar cop, no matter how fast you are going you instinctively take your foot off the gas. :)
“
Only if I know that I am speeding. :)
Just because one action causes someone doing an action they should not have been doing to act badly doesn’t mean the first action is wrong.
>>Only if I know that I am speeding.<<
I do it instinctively, and for good reason: You can sometimes increase your speed without knowing it and be in a “zero tolerance” area.
I was on a road that was straight as an arrow with no side streets or residential buildings, yet the speed limit was 25. the road “felt” like a 45 zone. I was doing 24 because I was participating in a rally and had to be precisely on speed. Good thing too, because there was a radar cop behind a bush.
It is prudent to always let your foot off the gas when you see radar because you just may be unknowingly speeding. People are not machines. I am not as accurate as my cruise control because I have other things to think about. And normal human beings would become quickly fatigued if they monitored their speed precisely at all times.
Cops in some areas depend on it.
>>Just because one action causes someone doing an action they should not have been doing to act badly doesnt mean the first action is wrong.<<
You are assuming that all traffic violations are intentional. Most are not, actually. It’s why good people get tickets all the time.
>>We got our first red light camera at Yosemite and Arapahoe road. Anyone who has been there prior to the cameras knows that the entire intersection was jammed with red light runners from all directions. With the cameras the intersection is not clear and flows smoothly. They placed cameras at about 6 more interesections with the same problem. So, to me, the cameras were not revenue generators but have solved major problems at key intersections.<<
Yes, I’ve seen this in some Chicago intersections as well. I was at one where I had a green and yet THREE cars, one behind the other, continued into the intersection in front of me. It is one reason that I look before I leap if I am the first car in line at a green light.
You also bring up the official reason these cameras were introduced in the first place. And, frankly, I think it just might work if they did just two things:
1. Slightly extend the length of the yellw at “red light” intersections.
2. Ignore “California stop” free right turns. That is not the “safety” reason that is used to justify their presence. It is the T-bone accidents from someone running a red, just after the yellow.
The cameras are brutal on number two. It is the main source of revenue from these things. If it were not for number two, most people just may think these cameras were ok and they wouldn’t be voted out EVERY SINGLE TIME THEY ARE BROUGHT TO A VOTE OF THE PEOPLE.
>>Dont do the crime if you cant do the time!<<
It’s not like robbing a bank. You can accidentally speed, run a “yellow/red” light, not come to a complete stop, “with rollback”, at a stop sign. You cannot accidentally rob a bank, or rape someone, or shoplift, with the exception of absent mindedly slipping a can of tuna in your coat pocket at the Sac-o-Suds.
Rolling right turn is not quite as bad as you fools that blow though a red light, but damn near as dangerous.
This is no different that some fool shooting a gun through a residential area or a school playground, just to hear it go BANG.
Regarding the BS about “cities shorting yellow lights” have you taken the time to document this? NO! have you ever had anyone involved with the technical procedure admit this was done? NO! Show us one case where this is not just so much BS as a ploy to be able to blow though a red light.
If three extra cars from your direction went through ahead of you when your light was turning red, but you stopped, and on the next half-cycle three cars in the other direction went through when their light was turning red, wouldn't the impediment to your progress caused by the latter group of three cars be offset by the fact that your position in the queue was three cars ahead of where it would otherwise have been?
Obviously there's a limit to how far cars should push a light that's turning red. If there weren't, the light may as well not be there. On the other hand, having the actual hand-off of traffic flow occur a little later relative to the timing of the lights will generally ensure that by the time the hand-off occurs, everybody's intentions are clear. This will, to a certain extent, improve efficiency and safety.
OK, folks, short of the cameras how do you suggest a better way to make idiots quit running red lights?
I am certainly not opposed to having a cop stationed at an intersection to ticket and in fact would suggest leaving the cameras running as a documentation backup for the cop handling out huge tickets for runners.
Red light running is just too big a hazard to leave it to driver good-will or an occassional cop seeing someone.
No. I was waiting for a red, and after my light turned green three cars ran the red crossing in front of me and every one entered the intersection after my light turned green. And they were one behind the other. I’ve noticed that a lot in Chicago. My take is that if you get caught BY A COP doing that it should be a serious ticket. But cameras are a) giving tickets for california stops and b) giving tickets at lights where the cycle has been shortened and c) giving tickets if you miss it by a nanosecond. A human cop can use more discretion.
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.