Posted on 07/22/2007 11:51:19 AM PDT by nvcdl
If they are "privately owned," then why is the revenue going to the state coffers in the case I cited? All toll roads that I normally come in contact with are Gubbermint owned and Gubbermint managed.
I'd suggest the problem you are having with understanding the utility of traffic regulation is you think they are simply a plot by evil people to tyrannize free spirits on the roads.
Could be right.
I always am ;-).
As far as your preachy story about the guy in the red pickup truck, well, nobody said that the rules of physics nor survival of the fittest ceases to apply.
Actually, the platoon system and the detections system are not mutually exclusive. The best way to get the most people through an intersection (another way of saying it is to reduce the total time lost waiting for a light) is a combination of both.
Detection has gone from pressure plates to magnetic to induction loops buried inthe pavement to cameras (not recording like the red light cameras) to infared and I am sure there are a few others that I have missed. The largest percentage of intersections have detection of one kind or another.
I don’t know why people insist on running red lights, but I was hit by one about 10-12 years ago. He was ticketed, but when he got to court, he lied, lied and lied some more. I sure would have liked to have an unbiased picture of him running the light. BTW, I later found out that he had done this thing several times before and did not have insurance. Although this state REQUIRES a driver to have insurance for just this kind of occurance, I was not able to get his removed without going thorough all kinds of hoops on my dime, not the state that passed the law in the first place.
You might want to start here.
http://www.ite.org/safety/rlr.asp
It goes through each step. Red light cameras are the LAST step, but they are there if all others fail.
BTW, I disagree with your assertion that someone who runs a red light is a “law abiding driver(s)”.
There's been a lot less of that stuff in this area since they changed the laws concerning permits to carry a concealed weapon.
Hasn't been all that many "instances", but the bozos who run redlights must have it on their minds.
Both of them look like I-66 to which they connect (directly or indirectly).
Amazing resemblance I might add.
It doesn't MATTER what I personally think about the issue. Sure folks might be safer....but anybody who gives up their constitutional rights in the name of safety is an idiot and a fool.
And, cameras violate the right to face one's accuser. Therefore, they should not exist.
Any other argument is superfluous and inane.
I made so such assertion.
I said that law abiding drivers were having their money confiscated, i.e. drivers that were not breaking traffic laws were getting tickets. Washington, DC is a good example of that.
Woman gets a fine in the mail for a car in her garage that hasn't left the garage in 6 months, is a different color and has 2 or 3 characters on the license plate that match some kind of a car that was photographed. Those sorts of horror tales abound.
Personally, I'd like to be able to sit at an intersection in my town and shoot at red light runners with my pellet gun. They deserve it for endangering my life and the lives of my family. But I am against using that as a pretext for a greedy bureaucracy to extort money from citizens. And IMO most of the bureaucrats involved in these scams are no better than those they say they want to stop.
I don’t know what is being done in Washington DC, but I would not use that as an example of anything, good or bad. They exist in a universe of their own. The ones in use that I am aware of allow someone falsely accused to demand a trial. Some have done so and some have been successful.
In any case, we are discussing the symptoms, not the underlying cause.
I have worked with politicians who call themselves “conservative” to their base and those who call themselves “liberal”. They all want to “fix things”, regardless of political persuasion. That is what puts the laws in place that give rise to bureaucracies.
If they just told their voters, “No, we are not going to fix the “problem” that you are complaining about. Learn to live with it.”, most of the laws we complain about here would go away and the bureaucracies with them. But, they usually don’t. Not even “conservatives”.
Once the politicians put the goundwork in place, complaining about red light cameras is useless. Its a done deal. The only question is how long will it take.
SEE BELOW, This states my position precisely:
Drivers' Rights Abused in a Flash
by Radley Balko
Radley Balko is a policy analyst with the Cato Institute.
There's nothing wrong with city or state government taking measures to keep our roadways safe. But the measures they take should be effective. If they are punitive, the measures should give motorists due process; and there should be minimal potential for abuse. Traffic cameras fail on all three counts.
A recent BBC study of mobile speed cameras revealed significant accuracy problems. One researcher was able to clock a stationary wall at 58 mph. The Australian government has begun paying $26 million back to motorists who were issued tickets by faulty cameras. A Canadian town recently recalled 6,800 tickets issued by cameras. The Washington Times has reported several incidents in which D.C. motorists were ticketed for cars they no longer own or drive, or that are inoperable.
Clearly, speed cameras err. But motorists issued tickets might be surprised to learn that they're generally considered guilty until proved innocent. It's up to a car's owner to prove he wasn't driving when the ticket was issued, that the camera misread his plates, or that the camera itself is faulty. In many cases, the private companies who run the cameras get a cut of each ticket issued, and appeals of tickets are settled by the company itself, not a judge or traffic court. Camera manufacturers have also been known to train cops on how to testify against appeals, and in some cases have paid officials to advocate the cameras to other cities. That's an unsettling kind of justice.
Cameras are ripe for abuse, too. One city in Florida now uses traffic cameras to snap the plates of every motorist entering the city, and checks them against various law enforcement databases. In Southern California, a photo taken by a red-light camera was used to prove adultery in a divorce case. San Diego shut down all of its cameras after a judge ruled that the company in charge was tampering with the machines to increase ticket output.
But the most troubling thing about traffic cameras is the way city governments grow dependent on the revenue they generate. Bethesda, Md., was caught shortening a yellow light at the city's most lucrative red-light camera, in an effort to squeeze more cash out of its motorists. When tickets dropped off from existing speed cameras in Washington, the City Council simply installed more, and raised the fines. Sacramento now charges motorists $351 for a single red-light violation.
Traffic enforcement should be primarily about safety. Too often with cameras, it quickly devolves into generating revenue for local governments and the companies that operate them.
This article originally appeared in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution on March 23, 2005.
Note that in my reply I showed how Bethesda was shortening a yellow light to collect more mone. That is clearly a case of a government DELIBERATELY ENDANGERING citizens in order to extort money.
So, when the government says it is protecting me and is making gobs of money in the process, I remain very skeptical.
Greedy businessmen take a distant second place to greedy bureaucrats.
When I read about the “yellow light scam”, I noted that they had programmed the yellow light to the time recommended by the ITE — which in some cases, shortened it. Depending on the traffic speed limit, the slope of the street, and the skew of the intersection, this generates a number from 3 to 5 seconds. In a number of reports from all over the world that prove that lengthening it does NOT increase safety and if you get much beyond 5 seconds, it actually decreases safety.
Anyway, lets wait for 20 years and see what happens. You don’t think it will be commonplace to have Red Light cameras. I think there will be. The politicians will get the electorate to DEMAND that — for their own safety. And it will happen. Just like motorcycle helmets and seat belts. Used to be voluntary. What are they now?
I never said that. On the contrary, I expect just the opposite. Follow the money, follow the money, follow the money.
I fully expect more of the same in many other areas of our lives. This will open the gates for all sorts of behavior control that will have [essentually] nothing to do with the safety of society in general and everything to do with government control of things we do.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.