Robert Thomas
Well-Known Member
Next time someone gets a ticket we should all kickin and pay it. That will save a lots of time for everybody. TJR take a breath "life is good"
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Photo Radar
- Thread starter LoriMaury Kimbrough
- Start date
Help Support Ford SportTrac Forum:
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Thomas Rogers
Well-Known Member
Caymen said:
Care to show me the studies related to that? BTW, I never argued with you on that point. I have seen many, many intersections where the yellow light duration was clearly too short.
You also said:
When you say "make the same", I assume you meant to say "had no affect". Either way, do you have any studies that show cameras to be ineffective or worse, to reduce safety as you claim?
Lastly, note, I was talking about a specific use of cameras and such devices, that being where their use is clearly displayed with signage. Do your studies describe the difference in effectiveness with stealth vs clearly labeled devices? Do you have an opinion on the differences?
TJR
A traffic light is not biased either. Extending the yellow light by a half second has shown to make intersections safer.
Care to show me the studies related to that? BTW, I never argued with you on that point. I have seen many, many intersections where the yellow light duration was clearly too short.
You also said:
Camera's have proven to make intersections the same and actuially, in some cases, made them LESS safe.
When you say "make the same", I assume you meant to say "had no affect". Either way, do you have any studies that show cameras to be ineffective or worse, to reduce safety as you claim?
Lastly, note, I was talking about a specific use of cameras and such devices, that being where their use is clearly displayed with signage. Do your studies describe the difference in effectiveness with stealth vs clearly labeled devices? Do you have an opinion on the differences?
TJR
Gypsy me
Well-Known Member
I found this link....interesting..from Channel 11, Lubbock, TX
note the paragraph about the national standard of How Long should a Yellow light be...
note the paragraph about the national standard of How Long should a Yellow light be...
Last edited by a moderator:
Care to show me the studies related to that? BTW, I never argued with you on that point. I have seen many, many intersections where the yellow light duration was clearly too short.
I will not spend a half hour to prove it. if you want proof, look it up. I am sorry that I did not save the articles in the news paper that supports my claim.
When you say "make the same", I assume you meant to say "had no affect". Either way, do you have any studies that show cameras to be ineffective or worse, to reduce safety as you claim?
Yes, the effect was that the number of accidents went up and injuries were worse with the camera's.
Again, you can do all the reasearch you need to do about it. The local news paper has plenty of info about these money makers.
Here is a fact many people do not want to admit.
The state of Ohio has the speed limit that says cars can go 65 MPH, but trucks must not exceed 55 MPH. This is because of safety.
The Ohio Turnpike Commission, a private company, raised the speed limit to 65 MPH for all vehicles. While the accident rate did go up, the number of increased traffic has gone up more than the accident rates.
If you look at the accident rate per 100 cars on the turnpike, it is half of that on the interstate with a 65 MPH Car and 55 MPH truck speed limit.
This is a good example where the state does not do something for safety. It is done because a truck running 65 MPH can get a ticket in a 55 MPH Zone. If that truck is running 65 MPH in a 65 MPH zone, no ticket is given.
Tom
Yes, the effect was that the number of accidents went up and injuries were worse with the camera's.
I have heard about a study with this outcome last year, if I recall correctly it was conducted in Arizona. Rear end collisions drastically increased at intersections with red-light cameras. I don't remember who did the study. . .
Dingo
Well-Known Member
When Akron installed speed camera's, they did not install the camera's where kids got hit and killed by cars. They never installed them in those area's. There was not enought traffic to justify installing them there.
What I read into that.
"In those area's there are not enough cars to nab for speeding to justify its use".
Lets not forget, a few months a kid was hit and killed by a driver in a school zone. There are still no camera's in that area.
Tom
What I read into that.
"In those area's there are not enough cars to nab for speeding to justify its use".
Lets not forget, a few months a kid was hit and killed by a driver in a school zone. There are still no camera's in that area.
Tom
Fudged Undies
Well-Known Member
Haven't read the entire thread but anyone saying that getting a ticket from a camera and getting one from a cop are the same thing should consider this. What is the turnaround time between being caught by camera and receiving the citation? Will you be able to remember the time at which you passed the point in question and what the details of the incident are? With a camera, good luck remembering the details, but if you get pulled over, those details tend to get burned into your memory and I've been in a situation or two where despite the cop being correct I was able to get out of it because there was another side to the situation.
I disagree with the cameras, they are just the beginning of worse things to come (yeah, by concerns of Big Brother). England has had invasion of privacy issues due to the cameras being everywhere even being able to look into peoples homes, even if that wasn't the intention.
I'm no angel and regularly speed. I avoid running lights if at all possible, however the whole thing about getting caught in a yellow, qualifies as running the red. I suppose this may vary from state to state but that's how its been stated to me by cops down here.
I disagree with the cameras, they are just the beginning of worse things to come (yeah, by concerns of Big Brother). England has had invasion of privacy issues due to the cameras being everywhere even being able to look into peoples homes, even if that wasn't the intention.
I'm no angel and regularly speed. I avoid running lights if at all possible, however the whole thing about getting caught in a yellow, qualifies as running the red. I suppose this may vary from state to state but that's how its been stated to me by cops down here.
Thomas Rogers
Well-Known Member
Caymen, Dingo,
Informal "studies" like that one cited in the news report by Dingo are far from scientific and therefore questionable.
For example:
- what were the durations of the statistical periods before and after the cameras that were installed?
- is it possible that after the cameras were installed the number of "reported" accidents went up, and that before there were as many "unreported" accidents (bringing into question how the accidents get reported and what has been the level of accuracy before and after)?
- might the increase in accidents since installing the cameras merely be an interim phenomenah caused by the perceived change in traffic control (all changes in traffic control from what was before tend to increase accidents in the short term, even when the change is to improve safety in the long run)?
- are other states other than Ohio seeing this same phenomenah?
- are the numbers reported statistically meaningful...they seem not to be?
Now if we want to say that cameras are bad because they are used by cities to turn a traffic infraction into a civil liability, then fine, let's discuss that. I suspect that's really the issue here, that people are questioning the effectiveness of these cameras not because they themselves are worried about the safety, either, but because they have issue with the coin.
TJR
Informal "studies" like that one cited in the news report by Dingo are far from scientific and therefore questionable.
For example:
- what were the durations of the statistical periods before and after the cameras that were installed?
- is it possible that after the cameras were installed the number of "reported" accidents went up, and that before there were as many "unreported" accidents (bringing into question how the accidents get reported and what has been the level of accuracy before and after)?
- might the increase in accidents since installing the cameras merely be an interim phenomenah caused by the perceived change in traffic control (all changes in traffic control from what was before tend to increase accidents in the short term, even when the change is to improve safety in the long run)?
- are other states other than Ohio seeing this same phenomenah?
- are the numbers reported statistically meaningful...they seem not to be?
Now if we want to say that cameras are bad because they are used by cities to turn a traffic infraction into a civil liability, then fine, let's discuss that. I suspect that's really the issue here, that people are questioning the effectiveness of these cameras not because they themselves are worried about the safety, either, but because they have issue with the coin.
TJR
Last edited by a moderator:
Dingo
Well-Known Member
TJR, I have no idea. I just googled and posted the first relevant one.
Thomas Rogers
Well-Known Member
Dingo, not picking on you. I Googled too...most all such complaints about safety decreasing due to cameras is coming out of Ohio (Akron, et al) and that to me means that someone has a bug in their bonnet and that's how they are fighting it.
TJR
TJR
TJR,
You are helpless.
Tom
You are helpless.
Tom
