Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Boo Hoo. The poor little, scared, irrational government conspiracy theorist, has got his panties all in a wad again.
You're the perfect example of someone who's made up his clouded little mind, and now refuses to be confused by the real facts.
Red light cameras make intersections safer, they only raise revenue from idiots who run the red lights, and in the long run actually REDUCE revenue because anyone with an IQ over 80 (nothing you could relate too) quickly learn not to run the red light.
DEAL WITH IT.
LMAO! You really should get outside and see the sun every so often, it might do you some good and you might not be so pale.
I love how you go from me not saying a WORD to/about you to all of a sudden insulting me and saying a ton of things about me which you know nothing about.
Also, I've not seen the FACTS that red light cameras make intersections safer. YOU deal with it.
It's awful hard to have an intelligent debate with someone with so little between their ears. When people don't agree with you, the insults come out aplenty. Rather than providing said facts showing your stance (like an intelligent person does) you figure standing up and screaming that you're right and everyone else is wrong and stupid and are conspiracy theorists and liars and whatever else you claim about us will make you more right. But, I guess this works for you. My 6 year old son figured out this doesn't work about 2 years ago. I'm not judging, I'm just saying...
Last edited by GadgetRick; 02-15-2013 at 05:12 AM..
I'm trying to see where exactly anyone has pushed a crazy government conspiracy fear. But I just don't see any post in this thread that does that.
Thank you.
Mr. Nomad likes to claim I'm a conspiracy theorist because I--like many others--actually ask questions of why certain things are pushed on the public rather than just act like a sheep and buy everything they do to us. But, then again, it would make for a lot less problems if we would all just stop asking questions about things which affect our lives.
Oh, and, you HAVE to agree with him because, if not, you become another conspiracy theorist.
But let's not let the facts cloud the discussion...
--->clicky<---
This discusses how many places which have them have indeed reduced the length of the yellow light (illegally in some places, btw) and how a large percentage of tickets are issued to people who get caught in the intersection when the light goes from yellow to red (especially in FL, btw). I guess they reduced the length of the yellow light to make the drivers safer?
--->clicky<---
Or let's talk about this article--one of many similar articles, btw--which discusses how many towns are shutting down red light cameras. Yes, they're shutting them down because of reduced revenues (in the long run) from the red light cameras. But looking at this a little deeper they're seeing reduced revenue because they're not catching as many people running red lights once people know where they are.
If they're so concerned about our safety (and not revenue) why would they be shutting them down just because they weren't bringing in enough revenue? They blatantly say this is why they're shutting them down. Wouldn't it make sense to keep them there if they're put there to actually make their people safer? Once the cameras are removed, wouldn't the intersections then become less safe?
But they have our best interests in mind when putting these in, right?
But you're right, I have no idea what I'm talking about.
Oh and, as far as the safety thing goes, it's about as clear as mud as to whether they actually make intersections safer. I've read many studies (by the government in some cases as well as other groups) and they all say the same things (essentially) that the cameras decrease the t-bone accidents but drastically increase the rear-end collisions.
Now, taken at face value, this seems to be a good thing because fatalities are usually caused by a t-bone accident rather than a rear-end collisions. However, when you dig deeper into these numbers you'll find that, while the decline of t-bone accidents (percentage-wise) seems significant, it's typically from a very small sample set since t-bone accidents are not nearly as common as you may think. However, rear-end collisions are very common and the increase in percentage is quite high (based on the larger sample size).
So, do they really make an intersection safer? On one hand you can say yes, on the other hand you can say no. See, that's the funny thing about statistics, you can use them in many different ways depending on what you're looking for. The cameras do reduce the number of t-bone accidents for sure but the question is whether this is actually a major problem. I'd love to see a study indicating how many drivers who caused these t-bone accidents were under the influence and how many were not. That would tell us a lot more about whether the cameras really help. (For those of you simple-minded people--you know who you are--my reasoning is someone under the influence has a good chance of ignoring any signs of red light camera enforcement taking the camera out of the equation.)
Basically, unlike certain people, I'm willing to read FACTS and I'd even change my mind about my conclusions if provided with said facts showing me they a) make intersections safer, b) are really not just a grab for revenue (although I'd not worry about this if a is true) and c) they can fix it so they can determine whether you are actually the driver of the ticketed vehicle.
Mr. Nomad likes to claim I'm a conspiracy theorist because I--like many others--actually ask questions of why certain things are pushed on the public rather than just act like a sheep and buy everything they do to us. But, then again, it would make for a lot less problems if we would all just stop asking questions about things which affect our lives.
Oh, and, you HAVE to agree with him because, if not, you become another conspiracy theorist.
But let's not let the facts cloud the discussion...
--->clicky<---
This discusses how many places which have them have indeed reduced the length of the yellow light (illegally in some places, btw) and how a large percentage of tickets are issued to people who get caught in the intersection when the light goes from yellow to red (especially in FL, btw). I guess they reduced the length of the yellow light to make the drivers safer?
--->clicky<---
Or let's talk about this article--one of many similar articles, btw--which discusses how many towns are shutting down red light cameras. Yes, they're shutting them down because of reduced revenues (in the long run) from the red light cameras. But looking at this a little deeper they're seeing reduced revenue because they're not catching as many people running red lights once people know where they are.
If they're so concerned about our safety (and not revenue) why would they be shutting them down just because they weren't bringing in enough revenue? They blatantly say this is why they're shutting them down. Wouldn't it make sense to keep them there if they're put there to actually make their people safer? Once the cameras are removed, wouldn't the intersections then become less safe?
But they have our best interests in mind when putting these in, right?
But you're right, I have no idea what I'm talking about.
Oh and, as far as the safety thing goes, it's about as clear as mud as to whether they actually make intersections safer. I've read many studies (by the government in some cases as well as other groups) and they all say the same things (essentially) that the cameras decrease the t-bone accidents but drastically increase the rear-end collisions.
Now, taken at face value, this seems to be a good thing because fatalities are usually caused by a t-bone accident rather than a rear-end collisions. However, when you dig deeper into these numbers you'll find that, while the decline of t-bone accidents (percentage-wise) seems significant, it's typically from a very small sample set since t-bone accidents are not nearly as common as you may think. However, rear-end collisions are very common and the increase in percentage is quite high (based on the larger sample size).
So, do they really make an intersection safer? On one hand you can say yes, on the other hand you can say no. See, that's the funny thing about statistics, you can use them in many different ways depending on what you're looking for. The cameras do reduce the number of t-bone accidents for sure but the question is whether this is actually a major problem. I'd love to see a study indicating how many drivers who caused these t-bone accidents were under the influence and how many were not. That would tell us a lot more about whether the cameras really help. (For those of you simple-minded people--you know who you are--my reasoning is someone under the influence has a good chance of ignoring any signs of red light camera enforcement taking the camera out of the equation.)
Basically, unlike certain people, I'm willing to read FACTS and I'd even change my mind about my conclusions if provided with said facts showing me they a) make intersections safer, b) are really not just a grab for revenue (although I'd not worry about this if a is true) and c) they can fix it so they can determine whether you are actually the driver of the ticketed vehicle.
Excellent Post! Saved me a ton of response time. By the way, I know a "Rick" that is a photographer, who also doubles as a baseball coach. You aren't one in the same by chance are you?
Excellent Post! Saved me a ton of response time. By the way, I know a "Rick" that is a photographer, who also doubles as a baseball coach. You aren't one in the same by chance are you?
SS
As a matter of fact that sounds like me.
I help coach both of my boys in ABAA. My younger one is just starting Rookie and my older one is 10 and in the Minors.
Wrong again. In the long run, this isn't about revenue generation. It's about reckless driver punishment, and common sense public safety.
Study after study has proven that red light cameras actually end up REDUCING revenue, because any person with an IQ over 80 quickly learns not to run the red light. JBtwinz has already attached some of these studies.
The only people that will end up paying, are the idiots that deserve to pay. Hopefully, this will run them all out of town, or end up pushing them over the points limit, so that they lose their license.
If it bothers you so much, why don't you put the wheels back on your house, and move to Canada?
I know this response will get cut by a moderator, and I might get banned for a period of time, but you are an a$$hole for coming on here and bashing people left and right because they don't agree with your point of view. If this debate were viewed publicly for say an election or something, you wouldn't even get elected as a city dog catcher. Nice job being a tough guy behind that internet connection, but I know GadgetRick personally, and I can say unequivocally that in the real world, my money is 100% on him, and I'd bet the house on it.
LMAO! You really should get outside and see the sun every so often, it might do you some good and you might not be so pale.
I love how you go from me not saying a WORD to/about you to all of a sudden insulting me and saying a ton of things about me which you know nothing about.
Also, I've not seen the FACTS that red light cameras make intersections safer. YOU deal with it.
It's awful hard to have an intelligent debate with someone with so little between their ears. When people don't agree with you, the insults come out aplenty. Rather than providing said facts showing your stance (like an intelligent person does) you figure standing up and screaming that you're right and everyone else is wrong and stupid and are conspiracy theorists and liars and whatever else you claim about us will make you more right. But, I guess this works for you. My 6 year old son figured out this doesn't work about 2 years ago. I'm not judging, I'm just saying...
I don't know what's more rewarding for me.
Seeing you and all the other irrational government conspiracy theorists quivering in fear your entire lives, over the imaginary boogie man....
Or knowing that every time another irrational uneducated redneck kicks the bucket, you and your kind fall further and further into the increasingly marginalized permanent new minority.
I know this response will get cut by a moderator, and I might get banned for a period of time, but you are an a$$hole for coming on here and bashing people left and right because they don't agree with your point of view. If this debate were viewed publicly for say an election or something, you wouldn't even get elected as a city dog catcher. Nice job being a tough guy behind that internet connection, but I know GadgetRick personally, and I can say unequivocally that in the real world, my money is 100% on him, and I'd bet the house on it.
PS: That's not my thumb.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
By the way, I know a "Rick" that is a photographer, who also doubles as a baseball coach. You aren't one in the same by chance are you?
