USA becomming Facist, Socialist
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
From: Quantico, VA
Originally Posted by vader1,Nov 3 2008, 09:16 AM
I disagree.
Car and Driver did a story one time that cited studies of the use of red light cameras. They are very expensive and need to be paid for with revenue from tickets. The municipalities argued that they were putting them in for safety reasons and issued many tickets and brought in lots of money. Once the citizens figured out where the cameras were, they started being more careful and revenues dried up but the cameras were not paid for, so they shorten the yellow light durations to catch more people. The unintended consequence was an increase in the accident rate. What the city argued was to make the public safer was actually about money, and in a quest for it they made the roads more dangerous.
I have a built in distrust of many in law enforcement and motives. Courts are starving for money and get it by giving people tickets and getting them to plea to a lesser charge and pay a fine when they should not have been charged in the first place.
My wife is a former prosecutor in the City of Minneapolis. She told me she probably got 50 disorderly conduct cases a week which some person had flipped off a cop or used some foul language. Both are protected by the first amendment, and while laws exist on the books, they are rendered unenforceable by supreme court decisions (don't believe it? google Miller vs. California 1973, or "miller test" + "obscenity law") The tickets were handed out because some cops are nice people who want to protect and serve and others are insecure pricks who like to push people around and chase squirrels. Now as a prosecuter, my wife said if they were sophisticated enough to mention the Miller test and argue it to a judge, the case was tossed, but since most were idiots and prosecuters need to push up convictions to keep their bosses happy, it was easy to violate their constitutional rights and take a few hundred dollars from them. I find it highly objectionable that courts and police use power to push people around and take money from them for things that are not illegal and protected by the constitution. Most of these people don't have money to begin with.
You are either for liberties or you are ok with them being taken from you. Red light camera's should be illegal because you have a right to question your accuser. How do you cross examine a camera? They have been stuck down by courts in my state for just such reason.
Car and Driver did a story one time that cited studies of the use of red light cameras. They are very expensive and need to be paid for with revenue from tickets. The municipalities argued that they were putting them in for safety reasons and issued many tickets and brought in lots of money. Once the citizens figured out where the cameras were, they started being more careful and revenues dried up but the cameras were not paid for, so they shorten the yellow light durations to catch more people. The unintended consequence was an increase in the accident rate. What the city argued was to make the public safer was actually about money, and in a quest for it they made the roads more dangerous.
I have a built in distrust of many in law enforcement and motives. Courts are starving for money and get it by giving people tickets and getting them to plea to a lesser charge and pay a fine when they should not have been charged in the first place.
My wife is a former prosecutor in the City of Minneapolis. She told me she probably got 50 disorderly conduct cases a week which some person had flipped off a cop or used some foul language. Both are protected by the first amendment, and while laws exist on the books, they are rendered unenforceable by supreme court decisions (don't believe it? google Miller vs. California 1973, or "miller test" + "obscenity law") The tickets were handed out because some cops are nice people who want to protect and serve and others are insecure pricks who like to push people around and chase squirrels. Now as a prosecuter, my wife said if they were sophisticated enough to mention the Miller test and argue it to a judge, the case was tossed, but since most were idiots and prosecuters need to push up convictions to keep their bosses happy, it was easy to violate their constitutional rights and take a few hundred dollars from them. I find it highly objectionable that courts and police use power to push people around and take money from them for things that are not illegal and protected by the constitution. Most of these people don't have money to begin with.
You are either for liberties or you are ok with them being taken from you. Red light camera's should be illegal because you have a right to question your accuser. How do you cross examine a camera? They have been stuck down by courts in my state for just such reason.
Also when approaching a green light from a distance its always smart to assume your not going to catch it, so you should plan to stop. If your doing 80 to catch up to the light before it turns from green, you also deserve the ticket. Anyone who obeys the laws of the road and has some common sence while driving shouldnt be affected by it.
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 7,662
Likes: 1
From: Long Beach, CA
Originally Posted by vader1,Nov 3 2008, 12:16 PM
I disagree.
Car and Driver did a story one time that cited studies of the use of red light cameras. They are very expensive and need to be paid for with revenue from tickets. The municipalities argued that they were putting them in for safety reasons and issued many tickets and brought in lots of money. Once the citizens figured out where the cameras were, they started being more careful and revenues dried up but the cameras were not paid for, so they shorten the yellow light durations to catch more people. The unintended consequence was an increase in the accident rate. What the city argued was to make the public safer was actually about money, and in a quest for it they made the roads more dangerous.
I have a built in distrust of many in law enforcement and motives. Courts are starving for money and get it by giving people tickets and getting them to plea to a lesser charge and pay a fine when they should not have been charged in the first place.
My wife is a former prosecutor in the City of Minneapolis. She told me she probably got 50 disorderly conduct cases a week which some person had flipped off a cop or used some foul language. Both are protected by the first amendment, and while laws exist on the books, they are rendered unenforceable by supreme court decisions (don't believe it? google Miller vs. California 1973, or "miller test" + "obscenity law") The tickets were handed out because some cops are nice people who want to protect and serve and others are insecure pricks who like to push people around and chase squirrels. Now as a prosecuter, my wife said if they were sophisticated enough to mention the Miller test and argue it to a judge, the case was tossed, but since most were idiots and prosecuters need to push up convictions to keep their bosses happy, it was easy to violate their constitutional rights and take a few hundred dollars from them. I find it highly objectionable that courts and police use power to push people around and take money from them for things that are not illegal and protected by the constitution. Most of these people don't have money to begin with.
You are either for liberties or you are ok with them being taken from you. Red light camera's should be illegal because you have a right to question your accuser. How do you cross examine a camera? They have been stuck down by courts in my state for just such reason.
Car and Driver did a story one time that cited studies of the use of red light cameras. They are very expensive and need to be paid for with revenue from tickets. The municipalities argued that they were putting them in for safety reasons and issued many tickets and brought in lots of money. Once the citizens figured out where the cameras were, they started being more careful and revenues dried up but the cameras were not paid for, so they shorten the yellow light durations to catch more people. The unintended consequence was an increase in the accident rate. What the city argued was to make the public safer was actually about money, and in a quest for it they made the roads more dangerous.
I have a built in distrust of many in law enforcement and motives. Courts are starving for money and get it by giving people tickets and getting them to plea to a lesser charge and pay a fine when they should not have been charged in the first place.
My wife is a former prosecutor in the City of Minneapolis. She told me she probably got 50 disorderly conduct cases a week which some person had flipped off a cop or used some foul language. Both are protected by the first amendment, and while laws exist on the books, they are rendered unenforceable by supreme court decisions (don't believe it? google Miller vs. California 1973, or "miller test" + "obscenity law") The tickets were handed out because some cops are nice people who want to protect and serve and others are insecure pricks who like to push people around and chase squirrels. Now as a prosecuter, my wife said if they were sophisticated enough to mention the Miller test and argue it to a judge, the case was tossed, but since most were idiots and prosecuters need to push up convictions to keep their bosses happy, it was easy to violate their constitutional rights and take a few hundred dollars from them. I find it highly objectionable that courts and police use power to push people around and take money from them for things that are not illegal and protected by the constitution. Most of these people don't have money to begin with.
You are either for liberties or you are ok with them being taken from you. Red light camera's should be illegal because you have a right to question your accuser. How do you cross examine a camera? They have been stuck down by courts in my state for just such reason.
Wasnt there a clause that said when the govt becomes corrupt, its up to the people to rise up against it and take it back? The constution is the supreme law of the land? The govt should fear its people, not the people fear the govt?
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,771
Likes: 2
The Texas DOT determined that the simplest way to reduce red light running and accidents was to increase the yellow time by 1 second so what did the towns do who had red light cameras? REDUCE the yellow light time by 1 second.
It also had the effect of increasing the number of rear end collisions.
It also had the effect of increasing the number of rear end collisions.
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 32,283
Likes: 0
From: Cincinnati, OH
for the actual topic, not only will this not prevent accidents as someone has already pointed out it has actually caused accident rates to go up in almost every city that has implemented it. as for speed cameras, i think myth busters showed that if you go fast enough they can't get you... also anyone who really speeds a lot will figure out where they are and/or use a radar detector to avoid them.
and when some of you say 'if you aren't doing anything wrong then it shouldn't affect you...' i cringe. edited the rest of my post out. you've probably heard it before anyway, just read what vader1 wrote.
and when some of you say 'if you aren't doing anything wrong then it shouldn't affect you...' i cringe. edited the rest of my post out. you've probably heard it before anyway, just read what vader1 wrote.
meh. Guess im a commy then.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 8,504
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Kyushin,Nov 3 2008, 07:46 AM
This may be centering around the photo radar movement, but the guys do have good point... I suggest we all join the NMBLA and seek to have this shit banned.
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 11,950
Likes: 474
From: MAHT-O-MEDI
Originally Posted by SPO100,Nov 3 2008, 11:46 AM
The whole point of the yellow light is so you have time to slow down before the red. Yellow dosnt mean bust a move and drop it to 2nd so you dont have to wait. People who blow through yellow lights most likely speed everywhere elce, in which case they deserve a ticket.
Also when approaching a green light from a distance its always smart to assume your not going to catch it, so you should plan to stop. If your doing 80 to catch up to the light before it turns from green, you also deserve the ticket. Anyone who obeys the laws of the road and has some common sence while driving shouldnt be affected by it.
Also when approaching a green light from a distance its always smart to assume your not going to catch it, so you should plan to stop. If your doing 80 to catch up to the light before it turns from green, you also deserve the ticket. Anyone who obeys the laws of the road and has some common sence while driving shouldnt be affected by it.
Yellow lights need to be long enough to give people time to stop. They also need to be reasonably uniform. If you get used to ones that are five seconds everywhere, and then get one that is 2 seconds, chances are you will not stop in time and maybe cause an accident. Without some uniformity and some reasonable expectation of duration of yellows at all intersections, you the driving public does not know what to do. Do I have enough time to stop? Do I need to JAM on the breaks cuase this one is MIGHT be just one second? Non-uniformity is dangerous because unexpected traffic control will give rise to unexpected driver behavior.
When I approach an intersection and a light turns yellow, I reasonably know about how long I have and what everyone around me will do. Now make yellow light times just random and I have no idea what I should do or what others around me may do. It not only affects safety but traffic flow as well.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,720
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Kyushin,Nov 3 2008, 10:46 AM
http://www.radardetector.net/forums/photo-...nforcement.html
This may be centering aruond the photo radar movement, but the guys do have good point... I suggest we all join the NMA and seek to have this shit banned.
This may be centering aruond the photo radar movement, but the guys do have good point... I suggest we all join the NMA and seek to have this shit banned.
Looking forward to breaking some skulls...
