2 Cool Fishing Forum banner

1 - 20 of 67 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,198 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
You can see the details including the actual scans of the reports at www.saferbaytown.com

finally, the proof we have been waiting for, from the city's own reports.
The Baytown PD put out accident reports for monitored intersections for the period before the cameras went up compared to period after they went up. If the cameras really work then the best results should be seen in the busier intersections with the most cameras. Garth at West Baker should show the best results if the cameras really work, 3 of the 4 approaches have cameras and there is definitely a high traffic volume. What do the numbers show? Total accidents, red light violation accidents and rear end accidents ALL WENT UP AFTER THE CAMERAS WENT UP!
Look for yourself.

Total accidents before cameras = 36. After cameras = 40.
UP 11%
Red Light violation accidents before cameras = 5. After Cameras = 7. UP 40%
Rear end accidents before cameras = 19. After Cameras = 20.
UP 5%

Remember this when the city tells you it is about safety. Keep in mind this is the city's own report. I have posted the scans of the reports so you can add them up yourself.

 

·
Jedi Knight and Friend to Captain Solo
Joined
·
17,027 Posts
Red light cameras are a money grab. Nothing more. To avoid making a contribution, or having to KNOW which intersections have them, I simply make sure that I don't roll through any yellow lights. But I have been through some that turned yellow as I passed and I always wonder if I'm gonna get a taxation without representation demand in the mail. It seems like the intersections that have the cameras also have shorter light cycles, but that could just be me.
 

·
Dont hate the player... hate the game...
Joined
·
2,093 Posts
I have a statistic for ya...


75% of all statistics are made up..

give it frigg'n rest...

quit running red lights, and hang up your cell phone. We'll all make it home alive...
 

·
Rolling Offset Flat Turn on 3... Break
Joined
·
8,036 Posts
If I remember

If I remember right, which I should look before posting but I'm too lazy, there should be a 1 second of yellow light for every 10 mph of speed limit that is assigned to the road which the light is on.
 

·
Tripped Outtings
Joined
·
2,261 Posts
TRAFFIC LIGHT RULES

Green Light= Go
Yellow light= Go VERY Fast
Red Light = Stop
LMAO
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,198 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
The BPD definitely made up some statistics I agree. I will give it a rest when the city stops breaking the law and sacrificing safety for profit and trampling the constitution while they do it. Don't know why someone would support a law breaking city collecting $2million for making intersections more dangerous, but there is someone out there for every point of view I guess. The cameras bank on catching people that would never cause a red light violation accident while the worst offenders that deliberately run the lights long after they are red get no penalty and just keep throwing the notices away. Anyone truly concerned about safety would demand the cameras come down immediately.

I have a statistic for ya...

75% of all statistics are made up..

give it frigg'n rest...

quit running red lights, and hang up your cell phone. We'll all make it home alive...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,198 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
It is close to that, real close, there actually is a chart put out by the ITE that they are required to follow. Shorter yellows = less safety, unfortunately for us it also = more $$$, I don't trust the government to make that decision correctly.

If I remember right, which I should look before posting but I'm too lazy, there should be a 1 second of yellow light for every 10 mph of speed limit that is assigned to the road which the light is on.
 

·
Jedi Knight and Friend to Captain Solo
Joined
·
17,027 Posts
I have a statistic for ya...

75% of all statistics are made up..

give it frigg'n rest...

quit running red lights, and hang up your cell phone. We'll all make it home alive...
I'm not gonna climb all of the way up on my soap box. But I will say that persistent citizen activists are often society's best protection against obvious government money grabs like red light cameras. Thank God that we still have a few living, breathing examples. :work:

Please note that I did NOT say community organizer. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,607 Posts
Well said Slopoke!

I'm not gonna climb all of the way up on my soap box. But I will say that persistent citizen activists are often society's best protection against obvious government money grabs like red light cameras. Thank God that we still have a few living, breathing examples. :work:

Please note that I did NOT say community organizer. :D
 

·
At the gym
Joined
·
4,704 Posts
Would it NOT be a money grab if people would only approach a light with common sense?

We have all seen it so many times:

The lights turn yellow and 3 to 5 cars speed up so they will not be inconvenienced by the red light stopping them for 4 minutes out of their entire life.

Then when one person decides they are not going to run through the yellow light, all the other fools that ARE speeding up slam into that person.

What happened to common sense? Have you NOT approached light signals since the day you received your drivers license? Do you NOT know they do turn yellow and that yellow means to slow down, not speed up?

Most importantly, where in the heck are going to in such a hurry all the time that you feel the need to speed up through yellow lights? Plus the fact that those at these intersections know that cameras are installed and still drive like fools trying to beat a red light.

Money grab? Yea from the idiots out there that continue to make it a money grab. :headknock
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,198 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
It is a money grab when they deliberately shorten the yellow lights making it more dangerous so they can make more money. You are spot on, the people that run those lights still do it, so how have the cameras helped? they haven't. Problem is that many people that drive safe and use common sense still get ticketed, so the idea that they are only penalizing bad drivers is totally false. If you want to reduce red light running you can do it through engineering methods like extending the yellow time, just doing that reduces violations by 40% or more and you don't have to walk on the constitution or siphon millions of dollars to an out of state for profit company during an economic recession to do it.

Would it NOT be a money grab if people would only approach a light with common sense?

We have all seen it so many times:

The lights turn yellow and 3 to 5 cars speed up so they will not be inconvenienced by the red light stopping them for 4 minutes out of their entire life.

Then when one person decides they are not going to run through the yellow light, all the other fools that ARE speeding up slam into that person.

What happened to common sense? Have you NOT approached light signals since the day you received your drivers license? Do you NOT know they do turn yellow and that yellow means to slow down, not speed up?

Most importantly, where in the heck are going to in such a hurry all the time that you feel the need to speed up through yellow lights? Plus the fact that those at these intersections know that cameras are installed and still drive like fools trying to beat a red light.

Money grab? Yea from the idiots out there that continue to make it a money grab. :headknock
 

·
http://talesofhumor.blogspot.com/
Joined
·
4,635 Posts
I got a ticket in Germany in 1986 for running a red light... they've had cameras there for many many years...

Of course, I'm not gonna go whine and cry if I get a ticket for running a red light because I'm a responsible adult and I know the laws.... and when it comes to statistics, I'd need to see ALL of them and not just part of them.. were there intersections where collisions were reduced? Were there intersections where less people ran red lights? Were the statistics based only on a couple of the worst intersections?

INQUIRING MINDS WANT TO KNOW! :D:D:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
314 Posts
money grab or not it doesnt matter....everyone thats drives knows when the yellow light comes on that red is soon to follow....its common sense...what right hs it violated that they put up the cameras? as far as the repeat offender...whether caught by a camera or officer they still ignore the tickets and will always do that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,198 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
Responsible adults who know the law get tickets all the time when they have done nothing wrong, just like with most of the red light camera violations. That's not whining that's doing what is right. BTW the city long ago dismissed the sole red light ticket I ever received before it went to court because I proved they were operating the lights illegally and they didn't want me to appeal to the municipal court to have a judge decide to throw all the tickets out.

If cameras never went up you would expect the accidents at some intersections to go up, some go down and some stay the same right? That is what we saw in Baytown after the cameras went up, so how do you decide if it is the cameras or other variables that caused it? The fairest way to try to determine if the cameras really had an effect is to use an intersection with enough traffic volume and cameras so small sample size errors are left out. Garth and Baker definitely has high traffic volume and is the only intersection with 3 cameras. To give you an example, there was one intersection where there were 0 red light violation accidents before the cameras and 1 afterwards. I didn't include that out of a sense of accuracy and fairness, but I could have said red light violation accidents went up 100% there but it would have been as misleading as the reports the city have put out. Next you have to understand that Garth and West Baker is THEIR pet intersection, it is the one they used in their report to a study done last year claiming accidents went down 43%. So this isn't cherry picked. Also, you have to know that across the country accidents are down to the lowest levels in decades, as the economy slows fewer people are going out to eat, the movies shopping etc. So we would expect to see a steady decline in most traffic statistics, which we haven't seen at this intersection. Bottom line is the burden is on the city to demonstrate the cameras have made a difference, and no reasonable person can confidently say there is any improvement because of them. I am holding much more info on this until a reporter has had a chance to review them and publish them, I want to give them the first shot, but if they don't publish it I will have the rest of th info up on my website in the next several days.

I got a ticket in Germany in 1986 for running a red light... they've had cameras there for many many years...

Of course, I'm not gonna go whine and cry if I get a ticket for running a red light because I'm a responsible adult and I know the laws.... and when it comes to statistics, I'd need to see ALL of them and not just part of them.. were there intersections where collisions were reduced? Were there intersections where less people ran red lights? Were the statistics based only on a couple of the worst intersections?

INQUIRING MINDS WANT TO KNOW! :D:D:D
 

·
http://talesofhumor.blogspot.com/
Joined
·
4,635 Posts
Why does the city need to justify the red light cameras? They're the city, they can put them up if they want and then just let the folks challenge the tickets in court if they wish. Red light camera tickets are pretty cut and dry. You either ran it or you didn't and the photo shows it... By law, as long as you legally entered the intersection, you can legally exit it which means if you enter the intersection on yellow and it turns red while you are in the intersection, you're legal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,198 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
What right has it violated? Do you know 14 states have declared photo enforcement unconstitutional? What about rights like innocent until proven guilty? the camera law as it is written says that if the notice gets lost in the mail that is your admission of guilt. Being able to have a trial by jury, being able to confront your accuser, equal protection under the law, why is it if I run a light and a cop catches me I get to have a jury, court date, evidence presented against me and the city has to prove their case, not so with a civil violation with the cameras. If a cop catches me going through a red light the ticket goes to me, with the camera the ticket goes to the owner who doesn't even have to be in the state! Here are 10 reasons why every law abiding safety minded freedom loving american should oppose the cameras, (from the NMA)

1) Ticket cameras do not improve safety.
Despite the claims of companies that sell ticket cameras and provide related services, there is no independent verification that photo enforcement devices improve highway safety, reduce overall accidents, or improve traffic flow. Believing the claims of companies that sell photo enforcement equipment or municipalities that use this equipment is like believing any commercial produced by a company that is trying to sell you something.
2) These devices discourage the synchronization of traffic lights.
Once red-light cameras start making money for local governments, they are unlikely to jeopardize this income source. Engineering improvements that lessen the income brought in by the cameras include traffic-light synchronization, the elimination of unneeded lights and partial deactivation of other traffic lights during periods of low traffic. When properly done, traffic-light synchronization decreases congestion, pollution, and fuel consumption.
3) There are better alternatives to cameras.
If intersection controls are properly engineered, installed, and operated, there will be very few red-light violations. From the motorists' perspective, government funds should be used on improving intersections, not on ticket cameras. Even in instances where cameras were shown to decrease certain types of accidents, they increased other accidents. Simple intersection and signal improvements can have lasting positive effects, without negative consequences. Cities can choose to make intersections safer with sound traffic engineering or make money with ticket cameras. Unfortunately, many pick money over safety.
4) Ticket recipients are not notified quickly.
People may not receive citations until days or sometimes weeks after the alleged violation. This makes it very difficult to defend oneself because it would be hard to remember the circumstances surrounding the supposed violation. Even if the photo was taken in error, it may be very hard to recall the day in question.
5) Ticket recipients are not adequately notified.
Most governments using ticket cameras send out tickets via first class mail. There is no guarantee that the accused motorists will even receive the ticket, let alone understand it and know how to respond. However, the government makes the assumption that the ticket was received. If motorists fail to pay, it is assumed that they did so on purpose, and a warrant may be issued for their arrest.
6) There is no certifiable witness to the alleged violation.
A picture may be worth a thousand words, but it may also take a thousand words to explain what the picture really means. Even in those rare instances where a law enforcement officer is overseeing a ticket camera, it is highly unlikely that the officer would recall the supposed violation. For all practical purposes, there is no "accuser" for motorists to confront, which is a constitutional right. There is no one that can personally testify to the circumstances of the alleged violation, and just because a camera unit was operating properly when it was set up does not mean it was operating properly when the picture was taken of any given vehicle.
7) Taking dangerous drivers' pictures doesn't stop them.
Photo enforcement devices do not apprehend seriously impaired, reckless or otherwise dangerous drivers. A fugitive could fly through an intersection at 100 mph and not even get his picture taken, as long as the light was green!
8) Cameras do not prevent most intersection accidents.
Intersection accidents are just that, accidents. Motorists do not casually drive through red lights. Even the most flagrant of red-light violators will not drive blithely into a crowded intersection, against the light. More likely, they do not see a given traffic light because they are distracted, impaired, or unfamiliar with their surroundings. Putting cameras on poles and taking pictures will not stop these kinds of accidents.
9) The driver of the vehicle is not positively identified.
Typically, the photos taken by these cameras do not identify the driver of the offending vehicle. The owner of the vehicle is mailed the ticket, even if the owner was not driving the vehicle and may not know who was driving at the time. The owner of the vehicle is then forced to prove his or her innocence, often by identifying the actual driver who may be a family member, friend or employee.
10) Ticket camera systems are designed to inconvenience motorists.
Under the guise of protecting motorist privacy, the court or private contractor that sends out tickets often refuses to send a copy of the photo to the accused vehicle owner. This is really because many of the photos do not clearly depict the driver or the driver is obviously not the vehicle owner. Typically, the vehicle owner is forced to travel to a courthouse or municipal building to even see the photograph, an obvious and deliberate inconvenience meant to discourage ticket challenges.

money grab or not it doesnt matter....everyone thats drives knows when the yellow light comes on that red is soon to follow....its common sense...what right hs it violated that they put up the cameras? as far as the repeat offender...whether caught by a camera or officer they still ignore the tickets and will always do that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,198 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
Sorry if you don't see why a city would have to prove something works when the evidence is to the contrary and it takes millions out of local pockets and makes the streets less safe. Especially when they turned down lower cost better alternatives and broke the law to raise the revenue up knowing full well that most people would just pay instead of going to fight it in court as you suggest they should. If you support the cameras, great, come on out and vote when they come on the ballot in May.

Why does the city need to justify the red light cameras? They're the city, they can put them up if they want and then just let the folks challenge the tickets in court if they wish. Red light camera tickets are pretty cut and dry. You either ran it or you didn't and the photo shows it... By law, as long as you legally entered the intersection, you can legally exit it which means if you enter the intersection on yellow and it turns red while you are in the intersection, you're legal.
 
1 - 20 of 67 Posts
Top