Re: Challenge every Red Light Camera Ticket!

Page 1 of 3  


Lockheed Martin puts in ALL those 100K $ signals? I GUESS you mean the ones with the cameras on them? I see them go up in my city pretty regular now. I always see a CITY truck and workers doing it. If the city buys this crap from Lockheed Martin that just goes to show you how stupid and the "money is no object" attitude government has. I mean really, it takes a company like Lockheed Martin to develope and sell this??? And it takes small goverments to buy it? Morons.....Anyway, I like them....I am getting sick and tired of having to drive defensively just to get through a GREEN light. I was on my motorcycle one day and a guy in a motorhome tryed to kill me and all I was doing was leaving the intersection when the light turned green. The dumbass didnt even slow down. I was so surprized I looked twice at the light to see if *I* ran it red....The others (and him) were turning in front of me on the green, there was a big gap in vehicles, then BAM, theres a motorhome turning right in front of me running the red light big time.....Like I said, I like the cameras......it makes those morons stop at a red light for once, and not just gun it when its good and yellow.
--
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com ).
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I agree there are some real morons driving out there today. Bring on the cameras.

splits
close
the
zone,
describes
formula.
times
by
according
be
ones
I
is
of
dumbass
see
the
turning
like
not
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
There was a big stink in the news last year of short yellows when cameras were installed. News people checked and they were not short compared to lights without cameras. People just don't like getting tickets.

light
risk
recommendations
50
of
typically
caused
to
the
are
Even
accidents.
above.
and
now.
"money
like
goverments
my
was
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Art wrote:

Especially tickets for driving in a reasonable manner. I would think that that falls under the category of "things so obvious that they don't really need to be said."
nate
--
replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@mindspring.com says...

True for some, but not for others. You have to check them because the folks who set them up have a lot of profit in mind when they do so. -------------- Alex
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004, Alex Rodriguez wrote:

What's more, checking the yellow-light duration at intersections with cameras against that at intersections without cameras isn't the right way to do it. It's common for a local red-light running problem to be entirely due to insufficient yellow-light duration at ALL intersections. In such cases, increasing the YLD frequently causes red light violations to plummet dramatically--but it doesn't bring in the $$$$$ like red-light cameras.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Around here, Santa Clarita CA, these lights have put a stop to turning left long after the light has changed red. Before the cameras, as many a eight or nine cars would continue to turn left long after the red thus clogging up the intersections and causing accidents. Now, everyone (or nearly so) complies. I vote to keep the cameras.
--
R. J. Talley
Teacher/James Madison Fellow
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Bandaid fix that raises revenue for the county. The real problem is probably that the intersection is poorly designed and needs to be re-configured. The red light cameras will not prevent accidents that will happen because of the poor design. The real solution would be to have an engineer study the intersecion and re-design the intersection. Then implement the new design. That way you minimize the number of red light runners and make the intersection safer. Of course this won't raise revenue for the politicians to spend, so it is not a popular solution. -------------- Alex
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Alex Rodriguez wrote:

You must not live in an area with high traffic volumes. Simply "redesigning" intersections isn't going to stop red light runners.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Depends on the redesign.
If you redesign it so that one road passes under or over the other and you eliminate the need for the signal entirely... well, I'd bet that would lower the number of red-light runners to zero.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

That would totally eliminate all left turn accidents as well. Round-abouts minimize the severity of the inevitable accidents. They're even starting to now bring them to this continent.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Full_Name wrote:

We've started to get them in Metro Detroit.
I don't understand why they're supposed to be all that great. For one thing, it virtually assures that everyone reaching the intersection *has* to stop. Not so with a traditional intersection, where people who are traveling at the correct speed can sail through green light after green light.
The intersection near my home where they've implemented this is a relatively low-traffic-volume spot. I imagine it would be absolutely miserable in higher-traffic-volume places.
Bridges with ramps just intuitively seem better to me.
--Geoff
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 08:24:42 -0400, Geoff

If you've got clear vision & they're designed correctly you shouldn't have to shed more than 10% of your speed (seeing as it's a 4 way yield). I've been through Europe where the roundabout is a slightly raised (4" round mound in the middle of an intersection. on off hours I've seen many people drive through at full speed.
The problem with round-abouts (true round-abouts & not these 1/4 round affairs) is that poor drivers don't try to "merge", they stop & wait for a large gap.
"If" roadway etiquette is followed a large number of people can pass through with minimal interruption and greater safety.
(bad drivers can totally screw up round-abouts though. When I was in the UK this past winter 3 drivers were banned from a private tunnel's round-about b/c monitoring determined that those 3 were responsible for nearly 60% of the morning's delay's! this was a tunnel used by thousands).
And yes, Bridges with ramps are "better" unless you're the taxpayer who's got to pay for them or look at them. But with many North American Drivers or newer European drivers (those who've gotten their licenses in the past 5 years) round-abouts are terrors.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Full_Name wrote:

See, that's exactly the problem. Around here, we have a lot of 'Yield' signs placed where stop signs should be. People who don't ignore the yield signs routinely (same ones who roll through stop signs) are conditioned to stop for them. I am, I must confess. The yield sign doesn't evoke the 'proper' behavior as assumed by the roundabout design.
I submit that waiting for people to start exhibiting the proper behavior will be pretty hopeless.

Around here, proper roadway etiquette means that you resist the urge to give somebody the finger while you cut them off! :-)
All kidding aside, if you don't drive pretty defensively (and somewhat aggressively) you're in for more than your fair share of wreckage around here. I've not owned a single vehicle that hasn't been struck in the rear at least once by somebody else, and believe me, it isn't because I'm not going fast enough!
The roundabout thing is a nice idea, but I sure wouldn't want one at a major intersection, and I'm not convinced that they're a good idea anywhere else, given the conditions on the local roadways. In good weather, they can be difficult at best. When things are covered with ice for the four months or so that can happen here, the roundabout is going to be synonymous with 'traffic jam'.
--Geoff
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
says...

If there is a lot of traffic in the circle, then you have to stop and wait. You can't make room to merge where there is none. ------------- Alex
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Would be a real riot covered with snow !!
Bill
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
geoff snipped-for-privacy@nospamhotmail.com says...

If an average driver can figure this out, why can't your local DOT figure it out. On low volume roads they work ok. On a high volume road they just slow down traffic. ------------ Alex
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I grew up with roundabouts in the UK, many of them on major highways. Their diameter was large, and it was possible to traverse them at considerable speed most of the time. They did slow down somewhat in the rush hours but on the whole were pretty good.
Of course there was a difference in the way people drove. There was no "give way to the ...." rule (other than "Give way to traffic already on the roundabout"): drivers approaching an intersection at about the same time mostly followed the "After you, Claude." "No! No! After *you*, Cecil" approach, and everything sorted itself out on the basis of common sense and courtesy. All quite unlike the "Get out of my way, you @#%$&*, before I run you off the road" approach common in many US cities.
Roundabouts of a decent size do take more space than regular light-controlled intersections but are cheaper than over/underpasses.
MB
On 09/24/04 08:24 am Geoff put fingers to keyboard and launched the following message into cyberspace:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 08:24:42 -0400, Geoff

Bridges cost a fortune and don't work everywhere. They've been plugging them in Davie, Florida, and they work great. It's a yield sign, and you can pretty much just blow through the intersection if your timing's right. It takes some getting used to, but once you do they're great. -- lab~rat >:-) Do you want polite or do you want sincere?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Ever been to Boston? They had a few there when I was a kid (60s). We called them rotarys. They have a modified version here in Portland, OR.
--
Every day is a good day- it's just that some are better than others.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.