Stop the push for red light cameras. (Penn: leasing, crime)

[DowntownHarrisburg]

Originally Posted by fisheye

I do pay attention to my surroundings

Not if you've never seen anyone run a red light. Not remembering what you see doesn't make it any better.

If you were the only person on a road, that was covered with black ice or slippery slush and encountered an uphill light, would you still stop if you knew you could not get going again and you were sure nobody was coming?

Are you serious? You can't control your car, so you shouldn't have to stop for a red light? Besides, everyone who ever ran over a pedestrian was "sure nobody was coming".

Yeah, you should probably just go ahead and stop driving now. The world doesn't need an 18-wheeler driven through unsafe conditions.

[DowntownHarrisburg]

I'm going to start selling my novel, bulletproof, 100% guaranteed, sure-fire way to beat the traffic camera system. It works 100% of the time, guaranteed.

Don't run red lights.

[fisheye]

Originally Posted by DowntownHarrisburg

I'm going to start selling my novel, bulletproof, 100% guaranteed, sure-fire way to beat the traffic camera system. It works 100% of the time, guaranteed.

Don't run red lights.

I do not have a vested interest in red light cameras; do you? I have to ask if you have read any of the research? You don’t have to take my word for it or the links that I posted - we have great search engines today. Just try typing in problems with red light cameras - you will have a great start.

I know that Harrisburg has finical problems. Believe me that these cameras will not solve your problems or do the research.

[DowntownHarrisburg]

Originally Posted by fisheye

I do not have a vested interest in red light cameras; do you?

Nope. However, I do find it amusing that whenever someone loses an argument, they begin accusing the other party of having some vested interest in the subject.

I do have a vested interest in not getting T-boned because some idiot driver saw the red light and though "I can make it, there's probably nobody coming".

[fisheye]

Originally Posted by DowntownHarrisburg

Nope. However, I do find it amusing that whenever someone loses an argument, they begin accusing the other party of having some vested interest in the subject.

I do have a vested interest in not getting T-boned because some idiot driver saw the red light and though "I can make it, there's probably nobody coming".

I simply asked the question if you had a vested interest. I did not attack you. You started off questioning my remarks.

I have only said what I have personally witnessed to the best of my ability. I have seen the carnage on some roads that have these cameras. I have seen other things that I am sure most motorist have not - like getting mooned by a school bus full of kids in Miami. I am not making up remarks - just because they fit into your expectations.

I keep repeating that you should do your own research. There is absolutely no reason for you to take my word. There are plenty of studies that suggest that you will not be “safer” with the camera red lights.

[greg42]

Originally Posted by DowntownHarrisburg

Nope. However, I do find it amusing that whenever someone loses an argument, they begin accusing the other party of having some vested interest in the subject.

I do have a vested interest in not getting T-boned because some idiot driver saw the red light and though "I can make it, there's probably nobody coming".

Trouble is, the cameras won't fix that. (That was, I believe, fisheye's point about looking at the research as opposed to just assuming they will help.) Or at least, they won't fix the most likely cause of that, someone already otherwise impaired (drunk, drugs, whatever). The idea that someone thinks like that in a non-impaired state is, well, too much to even think about. I suppose I can't say it's impossible, because there are always stupid people out there willing to prove that there are new depths of stupidity. But I've never seen a case of someone running an already red light in this manner.

[fisheye]

Originally Posted by greg42

Trouble is, the cameras won't fix that. (That was, I believe, fisheye's point about looking at the research as opposed to just assuming they will help.) Or at least, they won't fix the most likely cause of that, someone already otherwise impaired (drunk, drugs, whatever). The idea that someone thinks like that in a non-impaired state is, well, too much to even think about. I suppose I can't say it's impossible, because there are always stupid people out there willing to prove that there are new depths of stupidity. But I've never seen a case of someone running an already red light in this manner.

Thank you!

[DixieJo]

The other week I watched in horror as a schoolbus full of children ran a red light. He didn't drift through a stale yellow, his light was decidedly red (because mine was decidedly green) when he STARTED to go.

A red light camera might not have stopped him from running this particular light on this particular day. It would have, however, enforced accountability. Better than a phone call to the school district's transportation office from some random stranger, a photo and a ticket would make for a much more effective training and discipline opportunity.

But meh. I'm not too keen on the red light cameras as the city gets a too-little percentage of the fines collected. I'd rather see local police stings camping out at regular offender red lights and just nabbing people as they race by. I get rather persnickety when my already too short left-turn arrow gets shortened because folks cant bother to wait their turn for another light cycle.

[Fighter 1]

Originally Posted by fisheye

Right now there is a push to get these red light cameras in our major cities: http://paindependent.com/2011/11/cameras-may-target-red-light-runners-in-more-pa-cities/

We have to get more people to fight these camera lights. Here is a good link to why you should fight them: http://www.motorists.org/red-light-cameras/studies

I used to drive truck and I have seen the aftermath of stoplight cameras. In Illinois, on Route 30, you can see the tire marks, the broken glass, and broken metal and plastic at these intersections. What happens is that the local motorist don’t want a ticket. They slam on their brakes suddenly to avoid the camera. That is great for them - but not for the motorist behind them that was not paying attention. You can talk all you want to about the person that followed too close - but that did not prevent the accident. The accident was caused because of the traffic light. Safety is not always safe. Look at the studies and don’t listen to the self serving sponsors of this legislation.

I have driven close to two and a half million miles in my life - some of that was as a professional truck driver. I cannot recall seeing one motorist run a red light. I am not counting yellow lights that turn quickly red. I know that it obviously happens. I have seen many motorist run stop signs or roll through the stop sign - nobody wants to put cameras on stop signs (it is too easy to obey the law and escape a ticket).

Do not allow our lobbyist to shove this legislation trough. Feel free to call your representatives and voice your opinion.

The biggest reason not to install the camera's is the fact that that the camera's are installed and operated in most states by a private company( not the police dept. and by this you can and will beat any red light ticket in any court . this has been proven in many states by their lack of revenue return on these tickets. AND probably the "reason" is the fact that these companyies make the cities sign a "CONTRACT" and charge a huge fee in the thousands of dollars to get out of it, as was the fact that the city Of Yucaipa , CA where I used to live paid $ 198,000.00 to get out of their contract with the AZ. company that hooked them on the red light camera's. The only company that makes out is the installer and operators.

[Fighter 1]

Originally Posted by RomaniGypsy

Where I live, red light camera violations are (supposedly) reviewed by a real police officer before the tickets are generated. So, though the ticket may be generated by the company and you have to pay the company (which was the case with mine), they are authorized by a police officer in the municipality. It's no wonder we have those "scameras"... we have to pay for extra police officers to sit in cubicles reviewing the videos and photos taken by the cameras.

The problem with the police authorizing the person from the "PRIVATE" company is that that action is a violation of "LAW" , only a authorized law enforcement officer can issue a ticket for a violation of a road law. The officer can't issue a "Verified complaint " that is required by law again to force you to pay a fine . That's the problem here ,most city counsels only look at these tickets as a way to make money . they forget they swore an oath to uphold yours and my constitutional rights to due process. If anyone should be in favor of punishing some one who runs the lights it should be me, I was the victim in a 6 car accident ( I was sitting in the left turn lane and didn't move when the light turned green) pickup comming from my left ran the light and collided with 2 cars coming from the opposite direction of me , hitting me and the2 cars along side me. Had their been a camera there it still would not have done what the camera companies say it will the camera will not stop the accidents from happening.