Did you know that when the city send out citations in the mail with photos of you running a red light that you can go to the website, enter your citation information and watch a neat little video of it too?

Rad.

 

How much does it cost to watch said video?

 

^^ Its probably free to watch it... You are essentially paying for the services when you pay for your ticket.

I do not like the idea of red light intersections because it causes "some" drivers to panic when approaching an intersection with a camera.

From a local law enforcement standpoint, it's definitely a nice income in this time of economic crisis.

 

Yes, I did know that. Not from personal experience, thankfully.

 

[QUOTE=WestSideBilly,Oct 17 2008, 08:51 AM] How much does it cost to watch said video?

 

Wrong. Red Light cameras are being moved out of most cities, because they are not able to pay for themselves. The systems require a pretty substantial maintenance agreements with the vendors. Cities that have installed Red Light cameras are finding out that drivers take notice to them and stop running red lights as much.

People stop running red lights
City doesn't make enough income on the system to justify the maintenance costs.
City discontinues the program
These cameras turn up in other neihgboring jurisdictions.
Cycle repeats.

It's obviously not about safety....

 

And an incentive to not run the light.

 

Which is why Seattle is expanding the number of them?

 

post a link so that we can all watch!

 

Would you cite me sources of your claims because I find this contradictory to current information regarding new cameras were being installed in the beginning of this year.

"Most cities" meaning which cities? And are you talking about Seattle?

Yes, I do realize the cameras have operating costs but it doesn't take too many "red light runners" to generate income.

$3500 per month operating costs / $124 ticket per driver => 29 drivers to run the red light to cover just the operating costs (this is simplified calculations from the article). Thats about one driver a day which I do not have the data but we can assume at least one driver will make a mistake at least one day of the month like pepperoni and will pay the fine.

"The new cameras are a substantial expansion of a pilot program started in June 2006 with four cameras at three busy intersections. That was later broadened to six cameras at four intersections. The cameras cost about $3,500 a month to lease. So far, fines from the cameras have covered the operating costs."

"During the one-year pilot period, the city issued 16,539 citations, resulting in about $1.1 million in penalties. More than 70 percent of those ticketed paid their fines."

Reference: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/...edlight03.html


And yes, there are certain intersections where the camera's are not generating income and causing trouble but for the intersections that do generate sufficient income, the red light cameras will be here to stay.

And also, you are right that "some" intersections do have insufficient revenue and can cause more harm than good. Example from another article which there has been certain conflicts with drivers claiming that the yellow lights have been timed shorter explained in this article:

"A few cities across America, however, have been caught short-timing their own yellow lights below legal levels in what may be an attempt to boost ticket revenues by giving drivers less time to come to a stop."


"As of February, 2008, however, the cameras are back down. While the cameras were initially credited with reducing the total number of crashes in Lubbock by 5.5 percent, rear-end crashes at the intersections in question rose 90 percent. The cameras also failed to generate sufficient revenue while they were deployed in Lubbock, which undoubtedly contributed to the city's decision to can the program.

Reference: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080...onal-trend.html


I have learned throughout my course of education working with MDs, MD/Ph.D's, Ph.D's, its never good to just say "wrong." Not only is it somewhat condescending without supporting information but if you provide a claim, present the source of data which will help others understand where you are coming from.

FOR ME: I recieved this ticket once and spoke with a friend (lawyer) and I decided to do some research of my own to gain a better understanding.



Cheers,