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.
See you are part of the reason we as Americans are losing our civil rights, so what if they barely missed the yellow by .3 seconds they don't deserve a ticket for that. jDid you here about the cities like Long Beach Ca. who intentionally made the yellow light shorter so more motorist got tickets? It was proved in court. they only threw out that one persons ticket, they had logbooks to prove they shorted the yellows. Like you say though if uncle sam says pay up you better pay up. that,s some serious bs man. The city gov't can not be trusted with this whole camera thing. it circumvents the whole judicial process. How many Innocent people are in prison because of overzelous DA's. They are taking our freedom a little at a time.
and what about the thousands and thousands of tickets issued to the people that didn't break the law? That weren't even driving? Or the ones that got tickets for going through green lights or funeral processions? I guess they would just be crying too right? If they actually broke the law how about actually charging them with the crime of running a red light instead of violating a city ordinance? They don't save lives, they cause accidents, time and time again we have seen it right here in Texas.
When the way they enforce speeding or murder becomes decriminalized, enforced by a for profit corporation, causes accidents and injury to the driving public and wholy violates our constitutional protections yes, let's have a vote. Until then that is a totally false comparison. Those like you that are opposed to a people governing themselves can turn out to vote too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by m48xhp
wow. i just now read all this...well most of it. i've never read so many grown adults crying. its like a bunch of little kids arguing on the playground.
if you ran the red light you broke the law. done. there is no "..but I" or "...but this"...no. you broke the law, whether you agree with the law or not.
personal opinion: i dont like the cameras. i think there are other ways to improve safety, like extending yellow lights. However, if the cameras save ONE LIFE, then they are worth it. and lets be honest, the city can use the revenue. maybe the contract needs to be more fair, but i'm ok with the revenue generation. if you hate it, dont break the law. anyone else think its funny that these even gets a "vote"? i dont remember a public vote on whether or not speeding should be illegal, or if murder should be illegal.
Not just long beach, happened in Houston, Baytown, College Station, pretty much anywhere you find a camera you will find a short yellow light.
Quote:
Originally Posted by heetseeker
See you are part of the reason we as Americans are losing our civil rights, so what if they barely missed the yellow by .3 seconds they don't deserve a ticket for that. jDid you here about the cities like Long Beach Ca. who intentionally made the yellow light shorter so more motorist got tickets? It was proved in court. they only threw out that one persons ticket, they had logbooks to prove they shorted the yellows. Like you say though if uncle sam says pay up you better pay up. that,s some serious bs man. The city gov't can not be trusted with this whole camera thing. it circumvents the whole judicial process. How many Innocent people are in prison because of overzelous DA's. They are taking our freedom a little at a time.
and what about the thousands and thousands of tickets issued to the people that didn't break the law? That weren't even driving? Or the ones that got tickets for going through green lights or funeral processions? I guess they would just be crying too right? If they actually broke the law how about actually charging them with the crime of running a red light instead of violating a city ordinance? They don't save lives, they cause accidents, time and time again we have seen it right here in Texas.
When the way they enforce speeding or murder becomes decriminalized, enforced by a for profit corporation, causes accidents and injury to the driving public and wholy violates our constitutional protections yes, let's have a vote. Until then that is a totally false comparison. Those like you that are opposed to a people governing themselves can turn out to vote too.
hey, im on your side on many points, but can you seriously answer this....if someone runs a red light in a situation truly against the law, and gets a camera ticket, is that right or wrong?
that is my point. im not concerned with coincidences where a law was not really broken. for that reason, i dont like them, like i said in my first post. but in the instance of actually ticketing people for truly breaking the law, i think it is good.
i live near sugar land and notice much MUCH less running of lights near the hwy 6/59 intersection since the put in the cameras. and if a light is run, out of careless driving, one should receive a ticket.
If a cop does an illegal search of a vehicle on a traffic stop but finds drugs or illegal weapons in the vehicle is it right or wrong that he be arrested?
If your position is that it is OK that thousands of innocent people have their rights violated and get falsely accused without our usual constitutional protections just because the system also catches people that deserve it and that comes at the expense of increased accidents and injuries and letting the worst red light runners get away with ignoring the ticket I just don't agree. I would rather have them face a REAL ticket. I would rather the police officer have a chance to look for reasons like outstanding warrants or intoxiation and actually take that red light runner off the street. I would rather the city make the intersections as safe as possible for everyone all the time. So far as them cutting down on red light running HPD data indicates otherwise. 2010 the last year of the cameras was the highest year for violations even though they weren't on for the full year.
Quote:
Originally Posted by m48xhp
hey, im on your side on many points, but can you seriously answer this....if someone runs a red light in a situation truly against the law, and gets a camera ticket, is that right or wrong?
that is my point. im not concerned with coincidences where a law was not really broken. for that reason, i dont like them, like i said in my first post. but in the instance of actually ticketing people for truly breaking the law, i think it is good.
i live near sugar land and notice much MUCH less running of lights near the hwy 6/59 intersection since the put in the cameras. and if a light is run, out of careless driving, one should receive a ticket.
If a cop does an illegal search of a vehicle on a traffic stop but finds drugs or illegal weapons in the vehicle is it right or wrong that he be arrested?
If your position is that it is OK that thousands of innocent people have their rights violated and get falsely accused without our usual constitutional protections just because the system also catches people that deserve it and that comes at the expense of increased accidents and injuries and letting the worst red light runners get away with ignoring the ticket I just don't agree. I would rather have them face a REAL ticket. I would rather the police officer have a chance to look for reasons like outstanding warrants or intoxiation and actually take that red light runner off the street. I would rather the city make the intersections as safe as possible for everyone all the time. So far as them cutting down on red light running HPD data indicates otherwise. 2010 the last year of the cameras was the highest year for violations even though they weren't on for the full year.
first of all, you did not answer my question.
second, to answer your question. No, it is not because it is not within "the law". however, per "what is right", maybe he should be arrested. i know the law is not always within "rights". i understand the difference between "what is right", "what are rights", and "the law".
by your logic, we should then have a full time officer (or 4) at each of these street corners to pull over each offender? am i right? how much would that cost us,t he taxpayers? where's the vote on that? that would then be against my "rights", wouldn't it?
wow. i just now read all this...well most of it. i've never read so many grown adults crying. its like a bunch of little kids arguing on the playground.
if you ran the red light you broke the law. done. there is no "..but I" or "...but this"...no. you broke the law, whether you agree with the law or not.
personal opinion: i dont like the cameras. i think there are other ways to improve safety, like extending yellow lights. However, if the cameras save ONE LIFE, then they are worth it. and lets be honest, the city can use the revenue. maybe the contract needs to be more fair, but i'm ok with the revenue generation. if you hate it, dont break the law. anyone else think its funny that these even gets a "vote"? i dont remember a public vote on whether or not speeding should be illegal, or if murder should be illegal.
How would a camera save someone's life??? If someone runs a light and hits another driver; the camera being there won't protect or save anyone. Red light cameras only create paranoia and mass hysteria. Car collisions and red light runners will happen whether cameras are there or not. Majority of us don't run red lights just because we feel like it; it happens because we think we can make it or we're going at a relatively fast speed and see no need in slamming on our brakes. These lights don't show that.
I did answer the question, with the question I posed. If you want a more direct answer my answer would be pretty much the same as you, "no, it is not because it is not within the law". That's your answer. There is nothing in my logic that says we have to have a full time officer at each corner. Cameras don't catch all the red light runners and neither do cops. You don't have to have 24/7 police coverage of an area to get compliance. Ever drive on 146 through seabroook? Everyone knows there is often a cop there in the 35mph stretch, and guess what, when there is no cop there people are still usually going 35. There is a residual effect to police presence. It is a quantity vs quality argument. I would rather have fewer, tougher tickets with a real possibility of taking the offender off the street than massive ineffective tickets with no immediate penalty for bad driving. Especially when it is a system that the WORST offenders completely flaunt by throwing away their tickets. The entire concept of photo enforcement as an effective tool is completely contrary to reason. In order to believe they work you necessarily have to believe; lowering the penalty for a crime gets you less of that crime, that someone who would deliberately disregard their own life and property and that of others would suddenly improve their behavior and become a model citizen because they get a $75 ticket in the mail weeks later with no penalty for not paying it, and that somehow sending those tickets in the mail to the registered owner of the vehicle who very well may not have been driving is going to modify the behavior of someone that was driving and didn't get the ticket in a signifigant way. It defies all reason.
Quote:
Originally Posted by m48xhp
first of all, you did not answer my question.
second, to answer your question. No, it is not because it is not within "the law". however, per "what is right", maybe he should be arrested. i know the law is not always within "rights". i understand the difference between "what is right", "what are rights", and "the law".
by your logic, we should then have a full time officer (or 4) at each of these street corners to pull over each offender? am i right? how much would that cost us,t he taxpayers? where's the vote on that? that would then be against my "rights", wouldn't it?
Location: Central Bay Area, CA as of Jan 2010...but still a proud Texan from Houston!
7,484 posts, read 10,448,062 times
Reputation: 8955
Quote:
Originally Posted by baytownb
Ever drive on 146 through seabroook? Everyone knows there is often a cop there in the 35mph stretch, and guess what, when there is no cop there people are still usually going 35.
Of course people will become conditioned to not drive over 35 in an area where 90% of the time a cop is sitting waiting for speeders. And of course most people who are caught running a red light at a red light camera intersection will probably pay better attention or change their driving habits the next time they encounter that intersection.
Quote:
Originally Posted by baytownb
the WORST offenders completely flaunt by throwing away their tickets...
The way to solve this problem is not to get rid of the cameras...sure that will really teach those WORST offenders. The city should have a system in place to enforce stiffer penalties for non payment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by baytownb
The entire concept of photo enforcement as an effective tool is completely contrary to reason. In order to believe they work you necessarily have to believe; lowering the penalty for a crime gets you less of that crime.
That is not what one has to necessarily believe. The cameras no doubt lower the number of red light offenders and no doubt help some people to change driving their habits. But the main purpose of the cameras are to record the offender and fine him. That is it...which in turn lowers the number of offenders and helps to shape driving habits making those intersections safer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by baytownb
that someone who would deliberately disregard their own life and property and that of others would suddenly improve their behavior and become a model citizen because they get a $75 ticket in the mail weeks later with no penalty for not paying it, and that somehow sending those tickets in the mail to the registered owner of the vehicle who very well may not have been driving is going to modify the behavior of someone that was driving and didn't get the ticket in a signifigant way. It defies all reason.
The problem with your reasoning here is because the city did not choose to impose harsher penalties for not paying then the cameras must go! Why not launch a crusade for the city to enforce harsher penalties for not paying...since that seems to be the jest of your argument. That would have been a much more worthy cause to go after.
Secondly, even though some don't pay...the majority do and it generated a lot of money (44 million dollars) for the state of Texas...it's not all bad.
Third, It does not happen a much as you are tying to make it appear that someone borrows your car and is caught by the red light camera. If you trust someone enough to borrow your car then I would hope that you could trust them to pay the fine if they ran a light while borrowing your car. The owner of the car is responsible for the fines incurred by his car...whether it's parking at a meter and letting it expire and the meter maid does their job or running through the EZ tag lane without an EZ tag or running a red light camera. That is not a fault of the EZ tag camera or the red light camera...or the meter maid!
Let's keep this civil.
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.
