Legailty Of Traffic Light Cameras

The person who the license plate is registered to will get the ticket. My GF was driving in NJ and the toll gate didn't work when she dropped 35 cents into the basket. After a few moments she beeped the horn and kept going. Since the license plate was in my name, I was cited a ticket. The owner has to fess up who was driving or prove it was stolen. My GF wrote a letter explaining what happened and cut a check for 35 cents.

Normally when trying to beat a yellow light, you have a red both ways condition which technically is still in your favor (nopoints). However if the driver went thru a red light while the other direction was green then that is a moving violation which can take away points.

I'm not a lawyer, but...

In MD, you can be fined, but do not get awarded any points. It's a pure revenue grab, the judges know it, the machines can be tweaked endlessly, and if you have a legitimate gripe, you'll not have to pay anything.

I've been lit up exactly once...during a yellow...and no fine was mailed.

On the other hand, if you playing free and easy with lights turning red: consider braking: the camera will let you be and we'll all be a little safer...

Pennsylvania doesn't have them, but I wish they did. Around here once the light turns RED you can count as many as 6 vehicles going through. So once you get a green light one must wait until it's safe to go. We were in Arizona last fall and they have camera lights which must work well, because when the light changes RED, everyone stops! So fess up, "getting tkts left and right"... wouldn't be a lot safer and cheaper if you would just learn how to drive?????

When the light goes AMBER, and you can stop the vehicle without causing significant nosedive/squealing tires/motorists rear ending you then STOP the damn car! VW's have pretty good brakes, and they are cheaper to replace then paying off traffic tickets and insurance hikes due to points on your record.

They are QUITE legal and the owner of the plate gets the bill. Don't think you accrue points in Ontario, as they aren't sure who is driving the car.

In Ontario they are talking about bringing back Photo-Radar.... basically minivans (with radar-camera's) that drive around looking for speeders on the

400 series highways (Ontario's main system of express highways) and we have traffic camera's at Toronto's worst intersections.... Like one poster said, you would see a good 5-6 people fly thru the red lights.

In Europe they have speed cameras on bridge underpasses - friend of my father's almost (he had "priors" but he was able to pay a huge fine, as he needed his car/licence for his job as a salesman) lost his license permanently for doing 200kph in a 120kph zone on one of the Autobahn's - he never slowed down when he saw that the speed limit had taken effect.

Easy fix, quit trying to run the lights....

See

Third Q&A item down is: Is red light photo enforcement constitutional? Yes. Section 42-4-110.5 of the Colorado Revised Statutes specifically authorizes municipalities to use automated vehicle identification systems

Yes, but there's a "condition" which follows.

No.

No.

The site noted above is for a specific city (Northglenn) but makes extensive mention of Colorado laws. You'll have to see if the systems you're running afoul of are in compliance with the laws noted on the site. If they are, then it would appear you're not. Anyhow, happy reading. It's fairly clearly worded.

- Bill

Ok.

I've calmed down since yesterday morning. Maybe I should explain the situation a little better.

I was going home from a shitty night of work and wanted a quick bagel from the bagel shop. The first light I stopped at didn't change for about 8 minutes (Seriously) and it peeved me even more! So, as I was coming up on the bagel shop the light was changing and I pretty much ran it intentionally. This was at 6a.m Saturday morning in the freezing cold. I know it doesn't make it that much more excusable but it was much safer than some of you are making it out to be. It's a lesson learned and slowly this big brother system is making me a safer driver. I'm just hoping I don't get any points deducted on this one.

Good day.

Jim B.

Sounds like a "one shot."

But this...

Sounds like an ongoing driving policy.

Or were you still cranked when you wrote the message and the "gettng tkts left and right" was a gross exaggeration?

As you pointed out yourself, running the second light wasn't really excusable, but as a "one shot," following the broken first light, it was at least emotionally understandable. I expect we've all experienced something similar a time or two.

- Bill

They Are Legal is not completely true. As a previous post mentions, here in MD it is completely a Revenue Trap. The MD law states that the Amber Light must stay lit for a MINIMUM of 3.0 Seconds. Every light in my area that has a camera is below 3 seconds and all documented by a video camera anywhere from

2.2 seconds 20 2.8, all ILLEAGLE. It will also hold up in court, my case was dismissed while others with tickets for the same thing were fined. The complete operation is run by a civilian company, which is making a fortune on this. I have loaned my video camera to two others, one was thrown out as mine and the other has yet to come up in court. Check your local laws, there is a definitive time in which the yellow must remain lit.

If they really wanted to reduce trafic accidents, they would increase the yellow time, which has been a proven fact to reduce accidents. its all about $$$$$

Good Luck and get a video camera, Butch

Remember when lights were only red and green. And I'm not that old.

At least on the few I saw operate, red and green basically just swapped. If you had red showing north and south and green east and west, and they switched, then you instantly had green north and south and red east and west. Later developments added overlaps, such as you mention.

As I recall, the idea was that the guy who got the green was supposed to look around before starting to move.

Getting a red was pretty much like getting a yellow (amber) these days. You stopped if you were far enough back, and didn't if you were too close.

And while were on the subject of OLD traffic signals, anyone remember those ones with flags on them?

- Bill

I'm 49. I didn't see them personally. My dad told me about them, and I've seen them in some old movies (background in news reels).

I see where you're coming from. Yes. Given where signals are now used, and HOW they're now used, that would be true. Originally, the point was to regulate a busy road so that it was possible to gain entry from side roads. These would be used only in the heart of a city. Speeds would be low, even on the main road, and usually functionally zero (waiting for entry) on the side road.

My dad used to tell me about the first one he ever saw installed somewhere in downtown Boston. A side road he used to commonly spend ten or fifteen minutes trying to enter from he could then get out of in three or four minutes. But you DID have to look to make sure people really HAD stopped for the red light. And whereas it had been nearly impossible to make a left turn out of the road before it was now possible because traffic was stopped both ways. But, again, you had to make sure they'd really stopped.

- Bill

PA is enough of a police state without something like this. Careful what you wish for!