Go Back  The Hull Truth - Boating and Fishing Forum > BOATING FORUMS > Dockside Chat
Reload this Page >

Giving out tickets by camera yet?

Notices

Giving out tickets by camera yet?

Old 06-08-2011, 09:50 PM
  #141  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: East Central Florida
Posts: 7,295
Default

Originally Posted by PROFINITY View Post
SC- Give it a rest. If you want to play ball then why not tell us what you do for a living? Let's start with some form of accountability. The majority of folks do NOT agree with you. Deal with it. You want govt. to control our lives and there are those of us who don't. Deal with it. Sooner or later the general public is going to have their fill of this type of crap and things will change. Society is becoming more violent with time for a reason. Police are subjected to more violence against them for a reason. Masturbate this stuff all you want, I'm going to go do the horizontal Cha-Cha with the Mrs.

I have nothing to do with the government or anybody in the red light camera business. Just an ordinary citizen tired of seeing assholes blasting through redlights in front of me on a daily basis and whining about their "right" to do it.

I don't have to "deal" with anything. A few years ago there were no red light cameras. Now they fairly common and the number is increasing constantly, not decreasing.

Its called progress. Deal with it.
Seacat FL is offline  
Old 06-08-2011, 09:54 PM
  #142  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: East Central Florida
Posts: 7,295
Default

Originally Posted by TSA View Post
no, they do not. the majority of tickets are thrown out when contested.

the cameras were pitched to FL cities as a revenue stream to shore up loses from decreased revenue from property taxes. safety is not a driving factor behind the installation of cameras. case and point, several cities are losing money because of the cameras once that happens the cameras go bye bye.
Not true. A few cases were contested before the legislature established a state wide law allowing them which is really quite fair. Of you don't want to pay your red light camera ticket you can request a hearing, same as any other violation.

The only problem here is that a few people, rightfully ticketed for running red lights, feel they have the right to do it and don't like being caught. Tough. There are more cameras every day. Just slow down a little and be prepared to stop when the light changes.
Seacat FL is offline  
Old 06-08-2011, 10:05 PM
  #143  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: East Central Florida
Posts: 7,295
Default

Study: Red-light cameras save lives

February 01, 2011|By Dan Tracy, Orlando Sentinel
Red-light cameras saved 159 lives in 14 of the nation's biggest cities from 2004 to 2008, according to a national study released Tuesday.
If such cameras had been operating in all large U.S. cities, 815 deaths could have been avoided during the four-year period, the Insurance Institute For Highway Safety said.
Those conclusions were welcome news to a half-dozen cities and counties in Central Florida where cameras are running or about to be installed.




"That comes as no surprise," said Jim Harrison, who heads up transportation for Orange County, which will turn on cameras at 10 intersections on Feb. 28.
Critics have charged that the cameras are more about generating money than public safety, but Harrison said Orange County only wants to reduce accidents.
"This is not about money," Harrison said. "This has always been about saving lives and reducing injuries."
The 18-page report by the institute, a nonprofit based in Arlington, Va., compared cities with populations of more than 200,000 that had cameras to those that did not. It found 24 percent fewer accidents with cameras. That, the study said, equates to 74 fewer fatal red-light crashes, for 83 lives saved.
Accidents also fell at intersections without cameras in cities filming violators. Combined with some other factors, that translates into a total of 159 people who are alive because of camera enforcement, the study said.
"The cities that have the courage to use red-light cameras despite the political backlash are saving lives," institute president Adrian Lund said.
In Orlando, red-light cameras went online in September 2008 at 10 intersections. Accidents that first year fell 33 percent, from 99 to 66. Rear-end collisions — which opponents say increase because people slam on their brakes to avoid a ticket — dropped 20 percent, as well, city officials said. Fatalities dropped from two to zero.
"It [the study] sort of bears out what we have been seeing ourselves," said Mike Rhodes, who oversees the Orlando program.
More recent statistics are not available in Orlando.
In Winter Springs, which has monitored two busy intersections since April 2009, the biggest change was in speeding, said police Capt. Greg Tolleson. Before the cameras, he said, motorists were clocked as fast as 80 mph in a 45 mph zone. Now, he said, the speeds typically are between 45 and 50 mph.
Fatalities dropped from one to none, he said.
Winter Springs, Tolleson said, actually loses money on the cameras, paying $47,500 from August through December to the company that operates the system, while bringing in about $36,000 in fines.
The state gets half of the fine from each ticket, which is $158, if it's paid on time. The state Legislature approved cameras throughout Florida starting this past July 1. More than 50 cities have them, with dozens more studying the idea or installing systems.
Six Central Florida communities have cameras. Orlando, Apopka, Ocoee and Winter Springs are up and running. In addition to Orange County, Winter Park is starting a program.
Dan Tracy can be reached at dtracy@orlandosentinel.com or 407-420-5444.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/...end-collisions
Seacat FL is offline  
Old 06-08-2011, 11:25 PM
  #144  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: SouthEast Florida
Posts: 4,365
Default

Originally Posted by bsmit24 View Post
And if convicted ask for community service or jail time in lieu of a fine.

The government and its agents can repeat until they are blue in the face that it is not about money and all about safety but when enforcement starts costing them money they will quietly change course or new representation will be elected to make the appropriate changes.
everything from non profit to churches to homeless shelters to governements. it is all about $$$ and ¢¢¢.

even if the paper (accounting) says zero profit. someone is getting rich from it.
UaVaj is offline  
Old 06-09-2011, 04:33 AM
  #145  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Lake Murray, SC
Posts: 4,234
Default

http://www.motorists.org/red-light-c...07Virginia.pdf
The Impact of Red Light Cameras (Photo-Red Enforcement) on Crashes in Virginia
Virginia Transportation Research Council
June 2007

The Virginia Transportation Research Council released a report expanding upon earlier research into the safety effects of red light cameras in Virginia. Despite showing an increase in crashes, this study was instrumental in the return of red-light cameras to the state of Virginia. With a proven negative safety impact, the clear incentive to bring back the cameras was money.

Quotes from the study:

“After cameras were installed, rear-end crashes increased for the entire six-jurisdiction study area… After controlling for time and traffic volume at each intersection, rear-end crash rates increased by an average of 27% for the entire study area.”

“After cameras were installed, total crashes increased.”

“The impact of cameras on injury severity is too close to call.”

“Based only on the study results presented herein and without referencing other studies, the study did not show a definitive safety benefit associated with camera installation with regard to all crash types, all crash severities, and all crash jurisdictions.”

Last edited by jrolin1; 06-09-2011 at 04:44 AM.
jrolin1 is offline  
Old 06-09-2011, 04:35 AM
  #146  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Lake Murray, SC
Posts: 4,234
Default

Seacat - Your study by the 'non-profit' is an advocate for the cameras.

http://www.motorists.org/photoenforc...inalreport.pdf

The Red-Light Running Crisis: Is It Intentional?
Office of the Majority Leader
U.S. House of Representatives
May 2001

This report was prepared by former House Majority Leader Dick Armey’s staff. It looks at the problems of red-light cameras and how to really deal with traffic-light violations.

Quoted from the study:

“And one should ask the question, if there’s a problem with an intersection, why don’t safety engineers in the field just go out and fix the timing?

In fact, before red light cameras arrived in the United States, that’s exactly what our regulations instructed them to do. If too many people enter on red at an intersection, engineers were supposed to lengthen its yellow time. But in the year that red light cameras first started collecting millions in revenue on our shores, those entrusted with developing our traffic safety regulations dropped the requirement to fix signal timing, instructing engineers to “use enforcement” instead.

Indeed, according to the Federal Highway Administration, these problem intersections serve as a great location to hold a press conference. The agency offers a script for local officials to exploit a tragically mistimed intersection to call for the installation of additional red light cameras and tout their safety benefits.

But none of the reports that are supposed to tell us that red light cameras are responsible safety benefits actually say that. First, they dismiss increases in rear-end collisions associated with red light cameras as “non-significant,” despite evidence to the contrary. Second, they do not actually look at red light intersection accidents. The latest accident study in Oxnard, California, for example, only documents accident reductions “associated with”—not caused by— red light cameras. Although that statement has little scientific value, it does have great marketing appeal if you don’t look too closely.

Every study claiming red light cameras increase safety is written by the same man. Before joining the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), he was a top transportation official in New York City at the time the city began looking into becoming the first jurisdiction in the country to install red light cameras. In other words, the father of the red light camera in America is the same individual offering the “objective” testimony that they are effective.

A similar conflict of interest affects those entrusted with writing safety regulations for our traffic lights. The Institute of Transportation Engineers is actively involved in lobbying for, and even drafting legislation to implement, red light cameras. They are closely tied to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), which in turn is funded by companies that stand to profit handsomely any time points are assessed to a driver’s license.

In short, the only documented benefit to red light cameras is to the pocketbook of local governments who use the devices to collect millions in revenue.”
jrolin1 is offline  
Old 06-09-2011, 04:36 AM
  #147  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Lake Murray, SC
Posts: 4,234
Default

http://www.motorists.org/photoenforc...eport_2004.pdf

Investigation Of Crash Risk Reduction Resulting From Red-Light Cameras In Small Urban Areas
Mark Burkey, Ph.D. & Kofi Obeng, Ph.D.
North Carolina Agricultural & Technical State University
July 2004

A study prepared by the North Carolina A&T State University’s Urban Transit Institute for the United States Department of Transportation.

Quoted from the study:

“Using a large data set, including 26 months before the introduction of RLCs, we analyze reported accidents occurring near 303 intersections over a 57-month period, for a total of 17,271 observations. Employing maximum likelihood estimation of Poisson regression models, we find that:

The results do not support the view that red light cameras reduce crashes. Instead, we find that RLCs are associated with higher levels of many types and severity categories of crashes.”
jrolin1 is offline  
Old 06-09-2011, 04:37 AM
  #148  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Lake Murray, SC
Posts: 4,234
Default

http://www.motorists.org/photoenforce/2003-ontario.pdf

Evaluation of the Red-Light-Camera-Enforcement Pilot Project
Ontario Ministry of Transportation
December 2003

This report from Ontario, Canada’s Ministry of Transportation’s concluded that jurisdictions using photo enforcement experienced an overall increase in property damage and fatal and injury rear-end collisions. The report also concludes that there was an overall reduction in serious accidents and angle collisions. However, a closer look at the data found in this government-sponsored report show that intersections monitored by cameras experienced, overall, a 2 percent increase in fatal and injury collisions compared to a decrease of 12.7 percent in the camera-free intersections that were used as a control group (page 21).

In fact, the non-camera intersections fared better than the camera intersections in every accident category.

Quoted from the study:

“Exhibit 2 indicates the red light running treatments have:

* Contributed to a 4.9 per cent increase in fatal and injury rear-end collisions; and
* Contributed to a 49.9 per cent increase in property damage only rear-end collisions.

The rear-end collision results are similar to findings in other red light camera studies.”
jrolin1 is offline  
Old 06-09-2011, 04:48 AM
  #149  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Raleigh & Surf City, NC
Posts: 12,846
Default

Originally Posted by WildSideFL View Post
I went to court and it was dropped

In NC it's a $50 mail in fine and no insurance points, not worth my time to go to court. It's just another revenue generator for the gov't.
baypro21 is offline  
Old 06-09-2011, 05:17 AM
  #150  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Sandwich, Marshvegas, MassHole
Posts: 1,553
Default

go ahead and read my plate

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/227/4...c3d4c42266.jpg
Semper Fi-sh is offline  
Old 06-09-2011, 05:42 AM
  #151  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Sunny florida
Posts: 22,780
Default

The Florida house has has JUST narrowly passed a bill repealing the legality of red light cameras. This is the beginning of the end.

Seacat, you are the sole voice of approval of red light cameras on this site so far. The majority of the public, as represented by opposing voices here, sees that they are nothing but an unconstitutional revenue generator. Wasn't it Juno Beach which had to refund alot of red light camera ticket money because of a successful legal challenge?
billinstuart is offline  
Old 06-09-2011, 05:46 AM
  #152  
Senior Member
 
Captain Willie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: HAAF
Posts: 25,434
Default

Originally Posted by billinstuart View Post
The Florida house has has JUST narrowly passed a bill repealing the legality of red light cameras. This is the beginning of the end.

Seacat, you are the sole voice of approval of red light cameras on this site so far. The majority of the public, as represented by opposing voices here, sees that they are nothing but an unconstitutional revenue generator. Wasn't it Juno Beach which had to refund alot of red light camera ticket money because of a successful legal challenge?
You are correct. For some reason I thought it was WPB. I was living in Stuart at the time. It cost the taxpayers an incredible sum of money.
Captain Willie is offline  
Old 06-09-2011, 08:02 AM
  #153  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: East Central Florida
Posts: 7,295
Default

Originally Posted by billinstuart View Post
The Florida house has has JUST narrowly passed a bill repealing the legality of red light cameras. This is the beginning of the end.
That bill failed.

Gert used to it they are coming. Slow down. Take a little time approaching a light. Problem solved.
Seacat FL is offline  
Old 06-09-2011, 08:06 AM
  #154  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Naples/Ft Myers
Posts: 1,415
Default

Originally Posted by Seacat FL View Post
Its called socialism. Deal with it.
Seacat, I fixed it for ya!
Ft Myers Ken is offline  
Old 06-09-2011, 10:52 AM
  #155  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: st augustine fl
Posts: 7,182
Default

What's the basic issue with this lengthy thread anyway?....if you run a red light, endanger others, the camera clicks and a citation is issued to the owner of the car...the owner needs to get a handle on who they let drive their cars....I'd bet most of you would feel differently if you had been t-boned once or twice by someone running the light...I welcome the cameras...seems most of this thread is about beating the rap....a serious traffic offense has occurred often with tragic results....get real..
slickster is offline  
Old 06-09-2011, 10:55 AM
  #156  
Senior Member
 
Captain Willie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: HAAF
Posts: 25,434
Default

Originally Posted by slickster View Post
What's the basic issue with this lengthy thread anyway?....if you run a red light, endanger others, the camera clicks and a citation is issued to the owner of the car...the owner needs to get a handle on who they let drive their cars....I'd bet most of you would feel differently if you had been t-boned once or twice by someone running the light...I welcome the cameras...seems most of this thread is about beating the rap....a serious traffic offense has occurred often with tragic results....get real..
Except for those that got rear ended etc... because of the cameras. It costs more to implement, manage, collect and defend than to do it the old fashioned way ie: cops.

I gaurantee you that it is a money losing proposition for the cities in the long run.
Captain Willie is offline  
Old 06-09-2011, 11:04 AM
  #157  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: st augustine fl
Posts: 7,182
Default

The red light cameras are set up to snap a pic if the vehicle enters the intersection after the red light is on...so if you are hit from behind, then the vehicle behind you would have entered the intersection WAY after the light goes red...can't remember the last time a cop was monitoring an intersection, trying to catch runners....there is a main intersection here in st auggie that is monitored by a device that senses movement in the intesection and delays the opposing green light until the intersection is clear...the redlight cameras can be a losing proposition if the city constantly needs to defend itself against obvious offenders trying to beat the rap with money grubbing lawyers....if you run the light, get caught, pay up and don't endanger me or my family just because you want to get home 2 minutes sooner to watch CSI or some other mind numbing %#$@$
slickster is offline  
Old 06-09-2011, 11:09 AM
  #158  
TSA
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: St Pete/Islamorada
Posts: 6,123
Default

does the camera take into consideration guys towing heavy boats and trailers who were unable to stop safely? these are factors that can justify busting red, and that only police on the scene can consider.
TSA is offline  
Old 06-09-2011, 11:13 AM
  #159  
Senior Member
 
Captain Willie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: HAAF
Posts: 25,434
Default

Originally Posted by slickster View Post
The red light cameras are set up to snap a pic if the vehicle enters the intersection after the red light is on...so if you are hit from behind, then the vehicle behind you would have entered the intersection WAY after the light goes red...can't remember the last time a cop was monitoring an intersection, trying to catch runners....there is a main intersection here in st auggie that is monitored by a device that senses movement in the intesection and delays the opposing green light until the intersection is clear...the redlight cameras can be a losing proposition if the city constantly needs to defend itself against obvious offenders trying to beat the rap with money grubbing lawyers....if you run the light, get caught, pay up and don't endanger me or my family just because you want to get home 2 minutes sooner to watch CSI or some other mind numbing %#$@$
People are getting hit from behind because the cameras cause panic--ie: people are slamming on the brakes. And, people are getting distracted by the flash and crashing. Read up on it.

More importantly--it is administratively very expensive. Throwing taxpayers money at a problem does not fix it. I agree that running red lights is wrong. However, in this economic crisis I can't justify placing more and more weight on the taxpayers back over a low level problem.
Captain Willie is offline  
Old 06-09-2011, 11:14 AM
  #160  
Senior MemberCaptains Club MemberPLEDGER
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Not in Texas
Posts: 10,213
Default

Originally Posted by TSA View Post
does the camera take into consideration guys towing heavy boats and trailers who were unable to stop safely? ...

I think the idea is that folks pulling heavy loads need to be responsible for driving with that load, e.g. they need to drive slower such that they can stop without the need to run a red light, run into a stopped car, run over a old lady crossing the street, etc. If guys pulling heavy boats can't stop safely for red lights, they shouldn't be towing heavy boats.
Eyeball is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread