I got a camera red light ticket

[Politicalboi]

In Ca the fine is $436.00 and $64.00 if I want traffic school. I have been reading about trying to beat them but it doesn't look good. Then I stumbled upon a video about some spray for your plate so the camera can't get your plate. They want $30.00 a can. Then I thought what about hair spray? Well a few posts I saw says it works. Someone posted that Myth busters proved it doesn't work. Then I thought Myth busters better keep quiet if it really does. So does anyone know if that works? Kinda late for me now, but for future reference is good to know.

[HelenWheels]

1. Just don't run the light nt

[Politicalboi]

8. LOL! Yes I know that

It's not like I do it all the time. It was a left turn arrow. I admit I was guilty, but $500.00 is a little much.

[Retired AF Dem]

36. 500 bucks is cheap

Feeling remorse for the rest of your life for killing someone while running a redlight is priceless.

[Politicalboi]

38. Yes it is

I do realize that, but if we go by that then wouldn't $5,000 be ok too? It's racket. They have the video, they could see if any lives were in danger and they weren't. Through traffic was still on delay. But of course they don't go through all that to determine the fine. A cop may have let me go, or not even have bothered.

[Retired AF Dem]

39. Approx 1000 people in the USA

are killed every year by assholes running stoplights. Tell it to them.

[frylock]

61. this asshole paid $500 for rolling a right-hand turn on a red at 5mph..

$500 for a firsst offense that endangered NOBODY. red-light cameras are a scam that have never been proven to create safer driving environments. in fact, they have been found to cause more rear end collisions. moreover, the fine is FUCKING outrageous, and nowhere near the level that a fine should be for a first time offense. i'm fortunate in that i was able to pay the fine. i can't even imagine the poor guy, or single mother, barely able to make ends meet, having to pay this BULLSHIT. you do know that a larger percentage of the fine goes to the vendor that operates these cameras, and not the municipality? think about that next time you run your 1000 people bullcrap.

[Retired AF Dem]

121. The problem with to many of todays drivers

is they don't know the rules of driving. Here is one for you, you can make a right turn on a red light after making a complete stop. If you don't you are subject to a fine. Follow the rules and you wont get fined, break them and pay. Just quit your fucking whining if you are unwilling to follow the rules.

[frylock]

123. and you've missed the point of my post entirely..

but thanks for replying, Sargeant Friday.

[RamboLiberal]

102. Gee - a camera is going to prevent a drunk or an idiot from

running a light. Be better if we intalled ignition kill switches instead of cameras that would turn off any car that wasn't slowing to stop at the light.

[Threedifferentones]

106. lol

5 million internet flamewars are started every day by assholes who judge acts they never witnessed. There is a big difference between flying through a stop light at 60 mph 3 seconds after it changes and rolling through a right turn at 5 mph. $500 is about a weeks pay for me, and is an outrageous fine for the latter. For the former, jail time would be justified IMO.

[panader0]

2. paint it black and run every red light

[BuyingThyme]

3. Just keep your windshield very dirty.

If they can't see your face, they don't send a ticket.

[Joe the Liberal]

4. My brother got one of those......

except the fine was about 30-50$ I believe, $436.00 seems a bit much, no?

[Politicalboi]

11. Yes it is

It's been a over 5 years since I have gotten a ticket. This is my first red light ticket, all others were speeding on the freeways.

[SoCalNative]

5. I think they had all of the various methods

of obscuring your license plate from those cams on "Mythbusters" and none of them worked.

[Politicalboi]

10. Yes but if Mythbusters admit to it

Then they would have a shitload of people pissed at them. I feel the cameras do serve a purpose, but the fine is huge. Granted better than an accident, but it wasn't like the traffic moved while I made my illegal turn, they were stopped.

[CreekDog]

12. They could have simply not televised it

You act as if their only option was to fabricate half a show to show that something doesn't work when it fact it does.

Nevermind that there is probably no chemical that can be applied to and make an item invisible to cameras, yet visible to the human eye.

C'mon, apply Occam's Razor, please. :hi:

[Politicalboi]

15. That's true about televising it

It just shocked the shit out of me when I got it in the mail today. They even let you watch the video of your offense online.

[wolfgangmo]

99. There is a method that will work but it is VERY illegal

Use a 2 clear polarized lenses (usually some type of plastic) and make a license plate cover. If you align the polarized sheets correctly they will be clear from ground level and black from an upper angle.

Here is the problem. If you get pulled over by a cop they will likely notice the problems with the license plates and will fine your butt into submission. It works but as they say, "your pays yur money and youse takes yur chances."

[trumad]

6. Yeah---

because we all know that running red lights is a good thing...ugg

[tazkcmo]

7. Don't run the light.

The people you don't kill will be happy.

[rustydog]

9. pay the ticket...stop running red lights.

[Stuckinthebush]

13. Take a picture of $436 and mail it to them

:D

[Politicalboi]

18. LMAO!

Hey maybe that would work. Maybe add an big apology to boot.

[spanone]

14. my kids are out there driving, please stop running red lights...it kills

thanks

[RamboLiberal]

19. And Red Light cameras increase the rear-end accidents

at intersections.

Red Light cameras do not improve safety - they only serve as a source of revenue (read tax) to government.

Amazing how many perfect drivers we have here at DU who have never accidentally run a light or mistimed the yellow.

And for the record in 40 years of driving I have 1 red light violation that was in the late 70's or early 80's.

[JonLP24]

22. I can see that

I got flashed before, I was behind a city bus with no idea how long the light was green or yellow. Anyways the bus made a right turn and at 20 mph in a 40 mph zone the light was yellow and immediately turned red as I entered the intersection. According to their own photos they sent me my two front tires were ahead of the white line they referred to as you can't cross after the light turns red. I thought I could probaly challenge it but felt it would be better to go the route of traffic school and have the charge eventually dropped. Anyways I went to the courthouse to enroll into the school and my traffic charge was already dropped a month before I even got there.

[Politicalboi]

26. LOL!

I thought because of the Big Brother taste in our mouths I would have had more support. I know I was wrong. I am not saying I'm innocent. Just thought the hair spray was a way of fighting back.

[alstephenson]

33. Do your research before paying the fine.

In most jurisdictions (pursuant to court cases) a notice received through the mail is not considered proper service. If they decide to serve you properly, you will be responsible for paying for it, but they rarely send out a process server unless it's a gross violation (like speeding 100+ mph).

I'm not PRO red-light running, just ANTI Big Brother cameras.

[Politicalboi]

41. Sounds good but,

I may have blown that because I went to their site to watch my illegal activity so they know I got it. And I have NEVER had a warrant so I don't want that. They give the option if the person in the car wasn't you. But you must provide who it was, even if the picture is blurred.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

51. Don't forget the added late fee he will have to pay if he takes your advice.

[GreenArrow]

82. Apparently the big brother taste

is either increasingly relished, or just so habitual that it's ignored.

[Call Me Wesley]

101. Figthing back what?

Your 'freedom' of being a Formula One racer? Go apply there. The streets don't belong to you alone, and traffic lights are there for a reason.

Have fun paying the fine. Don't blame Big Brother if you're decision to be the king of the road will end in hurting other people. As you said, you're not innocent. Deal with it.

[alstephenson]

29. And the private company that calibrates the machinery and

decides where to place the cameras also makes lots of revenue.

[Politicalboi]

44. Yup

That is what it's all about. I would have learned my lesson at $100.00.

[Vickers]

92. "I would have learned my lesson at $100.00."

Ding! Ding!

:thumbsup:

I would at least go to court and see if it can be adjudicated and lowered to (for instance) 100 bucks with no points (if that's an issue).

In the meantime...take it easy, amigo!

:P

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

49. What is the severe injury rate in rear end vs. side impact collisions?

[RamboLiberal]

64. Either crash isn't healthy - I'm sure you see your share of accidents

As a driver while I've seen red lights run, but not that often and I've yet to see a crash.

But I've sure seen plenty of other crashes, including some fatals. Many caused by tailgating.

I don't think red light or speed cameras reduce accidents by any appreciable measure and I do believe they are nothing but a revenue generator for cash-strapped localities & states. I consider majority of tickets generated by cameras to be nothing but a tax. Often at the expense of those who can least afford it.

I think its wrong not to be able to argue your case in traffic court against a human cop.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

67. Side impact collisions cause more frequent and more serious injuries.

Probably 60% of the fatal wrecks I have worked have been from running red lights including 1 mass casualty event. Most of the others have been on the interstate. I have never worked a fatal rear end collision although they do occur rarely.

David

[RamboLiberal]

97. Like guns I doubt red light cameras will stop many of the blatant

red light runners. Many of those crashes probably occur at night and I'd bet alcohol is involved.

Dave you argue against gun control against the people here who think laws banning guns will make us safer, what makes you think red light cameras will make us safer?

We have tons of traffic laws and still idiot drivers end up killing themselves and others. And I'm not saying all accidents are caused by idiots, but a lot of them are drunk drivers or just Darwin award candidates who cause the carnage.

Be a defensive driver at lights, before assuming the light changed to green is safe check the intersection for any vehicles that are going to run the light.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

112. I'm not arguing for or against just stating the facts in regards to the collisions.

I actually agree that they are a scheme for money. My reason though is that extending the yellow lights to 4 or 5 seconds dramatically decreases the number of accidents at intersections it also dramatically lowers the revenue of red light cameras. So governments install cameras and keep the yellow lights at 2 seconds. Although I do find the big brother arguments a little over the top, they only take your picture if you run the light and then the videos are reviewed by an officer before a citation is issued, at least that's the way it is here.

David

[RamboLiberal]

117. Gotcha

I think they are mostly scams or feel good measures. Especially when you have private companies in on collecting the cash. I wonder how many places have anyone review video (if there is video, I thought a lot of them just snap a photo) before sending the ticket in the mail?

There's too much traffic enforcement in this country that is done as revenue enhancement and not for safety improvement. I'm sure most of us who are motorists have a number of tales of speed and stop sign traps, etc.

The other thing that ticks me off is so many traffic lights aren't timed for traffic flow. And once a traffic light goes in it is never removed even if the area no longer needs.

Also there's too many speed limits that are artificially low and not set to flow of 80% of the traffic.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

118. I don't disagree.

Like pulling people over in a construction zone on the weekend when no construction is taking place. On the traffic cameras here you can actually go a review the video yourself. They are reviewed by an officer though before the citations are sent. One of the fire department secretaries husbands is one of the guys that reviews them if they are short staffed.

David

[vadawg]

119. in my experience i agree, side impacts always seem to end worse N/T

[BlooInBloo]

75. Link?

[RamboLiberal]

91. Try this

http://hscweb3.hsc.usf.edu/health/now/?p=404

[LibDemAlways]

77. I agree. The fear of being photographed "running the

light" increases the chance that a driver will screech to a halt on a yellow and be smacked from behind by another driver. So often whether or not to proceed is a judgment call that shouldn't be second-guessed.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

78. Coming to a stop from a high rate of speed always increases that chance.

[LibDemAlways]

86. Approaching an intersection doesn't necessarily mean a driver

is travelling at a high rate of speed. My husband, who is the most cautious, law abiding driver I know, routinely slams on the brakes if a light turns yellow just as he's approaching or entering an intersection, always at or below the posted speed. One of these days he's going to be rear-ended, and it will be interesting to see if he'll be partially blamed for the collision.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

113. Okay coming to a complete stop from any speed greatly increases the chances of a rear end collision.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

116. I've never seen a cop partially cite anyone.

[Xithras]

80. Yes, which are 3x less likely to kill you.

Also, those numbers are deceptive. Only 15% of rear end accidents are rated as "very severe". According to insurance records, the vast majority of rear end collisions involve vehicles that simply stopped a little long, where damage is limited to scratched bumpers and maybe a broken headlight. Less than 30% of reported rear end collisions are even serious enough to fire off the airbags.

Compare that with broadside collisions, where one or both vehicles are travelling at or above normal speed at the time of collision. The energy level of the collision is higher by an order of magnitude, and the crush zones present in front end impacts aren't there to help you.

So yes, red light cameras cause more rear end collisions, but the odds are two in three that the collision won't be severe enough to fire the airbags, and if it is severe, you're three times more likely to survive it because of the additional crumple zones between you and the other car.

Personally, I think it's a fair trade.

[RamboLiberal]

93. I want to see the numbers as we see an increase in smaller cars

Where you have less crumple zone.

[mockmonkey]

83. I read somewhere

that most of the money goes to the company (not necessarily from the state you reside in) that installs and watches all the videos. I've been seeing a lot more people running lights because they are on their cell phones. I have to wonder what happens in states where you have ice and snow in the winter, more rear end accidents like you say just to avoid a ticket?

[LanternWaste]

114. red light cameras do indeed reduce both violations and accidents

NTSB has emphatically stated that the red light cameras do indeed reduce both violations and accidents when in place. One local study cited was the camera program in Fairfax Co., VA. After two years of operation, violation rate was down by almost 65%, and the accident rate was reduced over 25%. While the decline in the rate of accidents was not found to be statistically significant, it certainly did not increase.

However, I would be quite interested in reading any valid, peer-reviewed sources you can cite that do in fact claim that the program results in an increase of the accident rates. Thanks.

[michreject]

122. Don't tailgate

problem solved.

[RamboLiberal]

124. Tell that to the idiot behind me - n/t

[tammywammy]

16. Best solution - Don't run red lights.

We have had the cameras around here for years and I've never gotten one single ticket. Pay the ticket, stop running red lights.

Those sprays and crap don't work.

[madokie]

17. I've read that if your tag has a layer of dust on it the camera won't get a good pic

[Chisox08]

20. They spray doesn't work

Try challenging the ticket by saying the cammera went off to early or you was allready in the intersection and had to clear the intersection. It worked on a cop and a judge before.

[Politicalboi]

23. Well even in the picture

The arrow was red. I just thought wrong I guess. I know the through traffic has a few seconds delay so I thought I was good to go.

[Canuckistanian]

21. You can't beat the technology

We had the old type of camera in Ontario where those special license plate covers could obscure the plate number.

Then they got cameras that could see right through the covers.

AND the covers themselves became illegal and the cops would write you up on the spot if they saw one.

If you don't like red-light cameras, write letters to your city council.

But as long as they're there, you're going to get caught.

Better yet, strive to become a better driver.

[OhioChick]

24. Isn't $436 a little steep??

First off, don't run red lights.

On a side note, many here either don't put their front plate on or use one of those tinted plate covers.

[lpbk2713]

25. Remember 007's Aston-Martin?

He could press a button and rotate his license plate. Hmmmm. That gives me an idea.

I could make something with a simple relay or solenoid that would turn it downward.

Now how could I market something like that without having the law knocking on my door?


:think:

[Fumesucker]

27. Whenever the light turns yellow..

Stomp on the brakes hard..

And don't bother checking the rear view mirror for the tailgater that is likely to eat your ass, just assume you're going to get hit and push yourself back in the seat.

A lot of places that put in red light cameras also shorten the yellow lights to increase the number of tickets which enhances revenue.

[Not Me]

45. That's exactly what happened to me in West Hollywood last summer

The yellow light had been reduced to 2 seconds. $380 fine for entering the intersection 0.2 seconds into the red.

They are manipulating the camera lightes to generate money.

[BreweryYardRat]

58. Yep. My city is testing one at an intersection I've regularly used for years.

The yellow light is definitely reduced from what it used to be. Nowadays, if you're not entering the intersection when it turns yellow, you'd best slam on the brakes and hope the guy behind you stops in time.

[WeDidIt]

28. You can tell the spray on shit just by looking at it.

And the fines for altering your license plate are far greater than a red light of blown toll booth fine will ever be in most states.

[Politicalboi]

31. I watched the video about the 30 dollar spray

And I thought about hair spray because it crystals. Then I thought he's probably selling cans of hair spray for $30.00.

[Journeyman]

30. I heard of a lawyer who beat a red light ticket this way. . .

He definitely ran the light. He was coming off a freeway and ran the light at the bottom of the ramp. When pulled over, he insisted the officer note on the ticket the presence of his three-year-old son in a safety seat in the back of the car. In court, he told the judge he didn't want to run the light but there was an 18-wheeler bearing down on him from behind, and he feared for his son's safety. Because the officer had noted the presence of the child, but could not attest to the presence or absence of the 18-wheeler, the court let the driver off with a stern warning.

The upshot is, that lawyer's waiting to test his theory in court, that the camera's record the action but do not note any extenuating circumstances or the entirety of the scene. And because a driver can be caught and cited by a traffic camera without knowing he's been "caught," there's no way he can mount an effective defense since all circumstances around the event were not recorded and the driver is not presented with notice of his transgression at the time it occurred, and so doesn't have the opportunity to register all the elements for his defense at the time of the event.

Can't say if his argument held sway with the court (I haven't talked with him about it since he beat his original ticket), but it's definitely a point to consider. It doesn't sound like you're in danger of losing your license or suffering inordinately because of this, but if you find the need to hire a lawyer to defend against future tickets such as this, it might be a good argument to keep in mind.

[Hepburn]

32. Defense of necessity.

I got a client off on exiting the HOV lane by crossing the solid line with that defense. He was driving a low-slung Toyota car and there was debris from an earlier accident in the HOV lane and he had to change lanes to avoid hitting the large object ~~ a car bumper ~~ and avoid a most certain accident. No problemo...the judge ruled in my client's favor.

[Politicalboi]

34. Thank you

I did go online and see about beating it, and I e-mailed an attorney so I hope to hear from him tomorrow, but I'm not holding my breath. One place wanted $189.00 money back guaranteed to get it dismissed but it could be a scam.

[paulsby]

50. jaysus keeerist.

how about this? if there wasn't an 18 wheeler there, you are suggesting this person commit perjury. to "beat" a red light ticket.

so, it's ok to commit perjury in order to "beat" a ticket you are obviously guilty of?

unbelievable.

advocating the commission of a felony in order to be found not responsible for a civil infraction.

the mind reels.

[itsrobert]

35. Adam Corrolla suggest

If you buy a new car, just keep the temp sticker on the windshield and keep the new plates they send you in the trunk of the car. A cop will not see the plates, investigate and when they see the temp sticker, they will drive away. He doesn't put the plates on the car ever. If he ever gets caught, it's a much lesser fine or fix it ticket versus the red light camera ticket.

[Politicalboi]

37. Well I'm probably not going to buy a new car soon

But that is a good idea. I am going to see about the lenth of the yellow light, that may be my only defense if that even works.

[tammywammy]

55. Except in states like Texas temp tags all have individual number/letter combinations on them

When you sell a car, to get the temp tag you go through the Dept. of Transportation website and they randomly assign the license plate numbers/letters and it's on file with the state. So even if around here someone ran the red light, the lettering is big enough that THAT would still show on the picture and the registered owner could still be found.

Best bet - don't run red lights.

[Blue_Tires]

94. temp plates are only good for 30 days here, iirc

[dflprincess]

40. The Minnesota Supreme Court declared red light cameras unconstitutional

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/16/1688.asp

The Minnesota Supreme Court today delivered the highest-level court rebuke to photo enforcement to date with a unanimous decision against the Minneapolis red light camera program. The high court upheld last September's Court of Appeals decision that found the city's program had violated state law (read opinion).

The supreme court found that Minneapolis had disregarded a state law imposing uniformity of traffic laws across the state. The city's photo ticket program offered the accused fewer due process protections than available to motorists prosecuted for the same offense in the conventional way after having been pulled over by a policeman. The court argued that Minneapolis had, in effect, created a new type of crime: "owner liability for red-light violations where the owner neither required nor knowingly permitted the violation."

"We emphasized in Duffy that a driver must be able to travel throughout the state without the risk of violating an ordinance with which he is not familiar," the court wrote. "The same concerns apply to owners. But taking the state's argument to its logical conclusion, a city could extend liability to owners for any number of traffic offenses as to which the Act places liability only on drivers. Allowing each municipality to impose different liabilities would render the Act's uniformity requirement meaningless. Such a result demonstrates that conflicts with state law."

The court also struck down the "rebutable presumption" doctrine that lies at the heart of every civil photo enforcement ordinance across the country.

"The problem with the presumption that the owner was the driver is that it eliminates the presumption of innocence and shifts the burden of proof from that required by the rules of criminal procedure," the court concluded. "Therefore the ordinance provides less procedural protection to a person charged with an ordinance violation than is provided to a person charged with a violation of the Act. Accordingly, the ordinance conflicts with the Act and is invalid."

Not that I have a lot of sympathy for someone who runs a red light (unless it's slippery and you slide through it which does happen here - in those condition smart drivers wait to make sure everyone could stop before entering the intersection), but if the picture only shows the plate and does not clearly show the driver as the cameras here did, I think the Minnesota Supremes got it right.

[Politicalboi]

42. Nor do I have sympathy

For those who run red lights, but my picture is clear enough to know it is me. It was one of those "I think I can make it" but I didn't. It was at the beginning of the light cycle so it's not like I ran the light while someone was attempting to turn left or other cars in the intersection. I just got caught.

[dflprincess]

46. I didn't mean to sound quite so sanctimonious

it's not like I haven't had a moving violation. My shiny new car (that doesn't even have its permanent plates yet) nearly had someone hit it when they ran a stop sign today so I was feeling a little hostile.....Nothing like a new car to improve my attention span and driving skills.

Sorry they got your picture - I don't like the photo surveillance thing at all too big brothery I thought you could make a case against the camera.

[Politicalboi]

48. Thanks anyway

I had someone run a stop sign in a parking lot last week but we didn't because I stopped when I had the right of way. I knew I could get a ticket if a cop saw me, but I didn't even notice the camera signs. And I knew I wasn't going to hit anybody because the traffic was still stopped. It's like they were waiting for me before they moved.

[paulsby]

54. your analysis is flawed.

in most states, running a red light is a CIVIL infraction, not a crime.

there IS a presumption of innocence in a CRIMINAL trial.

there is NO presumption of innocence in a civil hearing.

grok the difference?

it's a different standard of evidence, too.

and also has different hearsay rules, etc.

minnesota may have laws of criminal procedure that have a presumption of innocence vis a vis red light tickets. either they are criminal cites there, not civil infractions OR their rules of criminal procedure somehow apply a presumption of innocence in a civil infraction hearing.

but most states don't

[dflprincess]

59. It's not MY analysis - it was taken from an article about the

reasoning the state Supreme Court used. Though, at least in Minnesota, a parking ticket is considered a civil infraction but moving violations, depending on the circumstances, run anywhere from a misdemeanor to a felony. And, because even a misdemeanor moving violation can affect both your driving record and your insurance rates, they are treated differently from a parking ticket.

[paulsby]

60. right but

my points was that minnesota law may be different.

based on what you say, they are .

in my state, and most states, running a red light is a civil infraction.

thus, presumption of innocence does not apply

thus, minnesota law is irrelevant to put it mildly.

this is a democratic republic. state laws varies.

most states have running a red light as a civil infraction, and therefore the minnesota decision is totally irrelevant to them.

[nadinbrzezinski]

43. Does not work

and how about following the traffic laws?

Running a red light is one of the most dangerous things you can do.

[Politicalboi]

47. Yes I know

It was a stupid thing to do. Yes. It was one of those lights that I knew through traffic had a delay, that's why I thought I had it. But yes running red lights is not good.

[shadowknows69]

52. If you indeed ran the red light I have no sympathy for you

I live in constant pain because of two idiots who thought that they were smarter than traffic signals and I was the lucky one they hit.

[kudzu22]

53. Couple ideas

#1 - start a ballot initiative to make red light & speeding cameras unconstitutional. It worked for the anti-gay-marriage crowd, it can work for you too! Be sure to make your amendment retroactive so you get a refund on your ticket.

#2 - steal the mayor's plates and run through a dozen red lights.

#3 - just stop at red lights

#4 - your state is bankrupt and needs that money, so quit complaining and pay up!

[Politicalboi]

57. So I have to help bail out Ca

The state today that just said I am a second class citizen. That state. It's a racket.

California Courts Split on Red Light Camera Contracts
Appellate court in Los Angeles, California rules that red light cameras tickets can be issued by companies with illegal contract arrangements.

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/26/2699.asp

And this was the same intersection I got my ticket.

[emilyg]

56. Why run lights?

[RamboLiberal]

65. Do you drive?

You never mistimed the yellow? You never had a brain fart & accidentally missed a light or stop sign?

I've gone through a yellow that was turning red cause I knew if I stomped the brakes the idiot behind me was going to cream my rear end.

Or in winter in Pittsburgh on an uphill red light I've carefully gone through cause to stop for the light on the hill on icy or snowy streets theres no way in hell I could get up the hill if I lost momentum. Or on a downhill trying to stop before ABS I would be taking a chance of sliding into an object like a pole. Same with stop signs.

Of course the friggin' camera wouldn't care.

If they ever try to put them in my area of PA I'm fighting them tooth & nail.

[Trekologer]

62. Cities can and do reduce the yellow light time to increase revenue

http://techdirt.com/articles/20080410/011257809.shtml

Find out what the minimum yellow light time is and measure the yellow light time yourself. Barring that, you could always go to court and ask that the city produce the records from the last time the camera was calibrated and all maintenance records of the traffic light and camera since calibration. When the city can't provide those request dismissal.

[proteus_lives]

63. 1. Don't break traffic laws.

It's better in the long run. I nailed for a $185 ticket last year for a an illegal turn. I was super-pissed but it's even more scary to think I could have killed a jogger or someone.

Don't get the spray-stuff. If you get pulled over for some other reason or a cop walks by and notices it, you'll be in another shit-storm.

[RamboLiberal]

66. Italy - but don't think it isn't happening here

Redlight Camera Operator Arrested For Scam Involving Shortening Yellow Light Timing
from the it's-about-money,-not-safety dept

We already know that at least six US cities have been found to have illegally reduced the timing on yellow lights at intersections where red light cameras were installed. However, over in Italy things have gone even further, with the guy behind one red light camera system now getting arrested for being a part of a scam involving decreasing the time on yellow lights from the required 5 seconds to 3 seconds. Apparently a bunch of police officers and municipal government employees are under investigation as well -- though it was a suspicious police chief questioning why they were seeing so many red light offenders, that resulted in the scam unraveling.

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090202/0202023601.shtml

[anneboleyn]

68. Can you ask to go to court? This sometimes works if you can come up with an excuse

However I am not sure what the procedure is normally for "red light" offences.

[MrScorpio]

69. Red lights cams have everything to do with making money and nothing to do with safety

And guess which sucker just got caught

[RamboLiberal]

70. We all know business won't cheat to collect more money

Fear of litigation is causing some California cities to think twice about red light camera contracts containing so-called “cost neutrality” provisions. On Tuesday, the Turlock City Council decided to drop the idea of red light cameras for good.

“We will not be bringing them back to you,” Turlock Police Chief Gary R. Hampton said. “Litigation on the whole red light camera issue continues…”

“A cost neutrality clause provision in the contract assures that the city of Turlock will never be required to pay Redflex more than actual net revenue received from the program,” Hampton explained in a memo to the council… for each intersection approach, Redflex was to be compensated at 100 percent of the revenue collected from each ticket, with the amount capped at $6000 per intersection approach each month. This scheme ran afoul of state law banning per-ticket compensation, according to a November appellate ruling by a California Superior Court judge. The court found that a similar cost neutrality deal struck between the city of Fullerton and Nestor Traffic Systems (NTS) was illegal and all tickets issued by the system were declared void.

Vice Mayor Ted Howze during the April 28 city council meeting asked to the city delay the proposed contract after a concerned citizen warned that a lawsuit over the illegal contract arrangement could result in a multi-million dollar refund, as happened in Minnesota.

Theoretically, a four-approach system generating $6,000 each could generate over $288,000 a year for Redflex for just one intersection, reaffirming our long held position: All they want to do is take your money.

http://camerafraud.wordpress.com/2009/05/15/redflexs-latest-scam-6000-per-intersection-a-month/

[RamboLiberal]

71. In the better mousetrap category - Camera Alert system

Build a better mousetrap, and mice will look for new ways not to get caught.

Responding to the proliferation of red-light cameras in Chicago, the suburbs, and other urban areas, Cobra Electronics has launched a new line of radar detectors with a regularly updated database of red light and speed cameras.

The device uses a GPS locator with what Cobra calls its AURA (Advanced Universal Road Alert) database that will tell a driver when a red-light camera is approaching. The device first flashes a green signal when a red-light camera intersection is coming up, then an orange signal with an audible alert, and then a red signal. An arrow shows where the camera is.

At $389, the detector is pricey. But Cobra plans to offer a scaled-down version this June called the SL3 that alerts drivers to red light and speed cameras without the radar feature for $99 -- $1 less than a single red light ticket. Other companies offer camera-detection devices, but Chicago-based Cobra claims it has a more reliable database.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/transportation/1567473,CST-NWS-ride11.article

Now of course if GPS keeps working. This is something I might consider if my area ever got cameras. BTW, seems some states are moving in the opposite direction and banning cameras.

[RamboLiberal]

72. Couldn't resist adding this study by University of South Florida College of Public Health

Tampa, FL (March 11, 2008) -- Rather than improving motorist safety, red-light cameras significantly increase crashes and are a ticket to higher auto insurance premiums, researchers at the University of South Florida College of Public Health conclude. The effective remedy to red-light running uses engineering solutions to improve intersection safety, which is particularly important to Florida’s elderly drivers, the researchers recommend.

The report was published this month in the Florida Public Health Review, the online journal of the college and the Florida Public Health Association.

"The rigorous studies clearly show red-light cameras don’t work,” said lead author Barbara Langland-Orban, professor and chair of health policy and management at the USF College of Public Health.

“Instead, they increase crashes and injuries as drivers attempt to abruptly stop at camera intersections. If used in Florida, cameras could potentially create even worse outcomes due to the state’s high percent of elderly who are more likely to be injured or killed when a crash occurs.”

-----

• Comprehensive studies from North Carolina, Virginia, and Ontario have all reported cameras are significantly associated with increases in crashes, as well as crashes involving injuries. The study by the Virginia Transportation Research Council also found that cameras were linked to increased crash costs.

http://hscweb3.hsc.usf.edu/health/now/?p=404

[SeattleGirl]

73. Not running red lights is the best idea, I think. No ticket if you stop

doing it.

[Nikki Stone1]

74. I don't like the red light cameras because they can cause more fender benders

People are afraid to go through a stale green or yellow light for fear that it will change and they will get caught on camera, so they stop before they need to. This increases the number of rear end accidents. There was actually a study done on the east coast (VA, I think) and the state got rid of the cameras because they were more of a hazard.

[Lucian]

76. They ruled that unconstitutional here in MN last year or so.

It's because YOU might not be the one driving your car. You could've lent your car to a buddy and they could've been the one driving the car at the time. That was the logic behind the banning. And I'm glad they banned that.

[Echo In Light]

79. Indeed. We need much less Big Brother Inc bullshit

[WCIL]

81. My son was riding in a car with a friend

when she got caught by a camera running a red light. They sent her a picture, and you could clearly see her face (my son's face was blurred out - he recognized himself from his shirt). This was in Missouri - I guess all states don't capture the driver's face?

[SacredCow]

84. To the people saying "Well, don't run red lights:"

Sorry, but the world is not black and white, and sometimes it's better and safer to fudge the red light

What if an emergency vehicle is coming up behind you and you've nowhere to go but through the light? The law clearly allows you to run a light in that situation, but the cameras don't know that. You'll get a ticket, and if the emergency vehicle isn't in the picture or video, you're totally fucked.

Slamming on your brakes at a yellow is not necessarily the best option. A month back, I watched a woman slam on her brakes at a yellow (that she could have easily passed through) only to be rear-ended by a tractor-trailer at 40 mph. Later, she said that she had just received a red-light camera ticket and was trying to err on the side of caution.

Finally, the purpose of these cameras is NOT safety: It's the free money. Do a search about all of the areas that have installed the cameras, and when the tickets issued slow down because people are aware of the cameras, the city shortens the yellow duration to snag more people. You see, the city is in a contract for a certain number of violations per time period with the camera monitoring companies, and when it falls below that number- the city stands to lose some of the revenue for breach of contract.

IMHO, the intersection cameras are nothing but a racket.

[LibDemAlways]

85. Thanks for that.

Whether or not to keep going on a yellow depends on many factors, not the least of which is whether or not a person is being tailgated at the time. I would prefer not to be on the receiving end of a tractor-trailer collision, and deciding whether or not to risk receiving a red light ticket in that situation would be a no-brainer.

I posted earlier on this thread that proceeding through or stopping on a yellow light is usually a judgment call. The camera can't see all the circumstances. It can't even tell who is driving.

It's probably an effective revenue raising tool, but as for keeping people safe - not so much.

[SacredCow]

87. As you can tell, I have strong feelings about the things....

My city installed them, and I very soon had a bogus ticket to contend with:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x8020612

Nowhere on the citation you get in the mail does it say where to call to point out that their crappy little system was out and out wrong. I called the number to pay by phone and got passed around from department to department for 15 minutes or so until someone finally pulled up the pics/video and admitted that it was a mistake. I've since learned a LOT about the money involved and where said money goes, and bottom line- the things are thinly-veiled theft.

[slackmaster]

89. If you are unable to stop for a stale yellow light, you were driving too fast

I agree the cameras are a racket, but it's everyone's responsibility to drive safely and pay attention to what is going on.

A month back, I watched a woman slam on her brakes at a yellow (that she could have easily passed through) only to be rear-ended by a tractor-trailer at 40 mph.

That was clearly the fault of the tractor-trailer's driver.

...and when the tickets issued slow down because people are aware of the cameras, the city shortens the yellow duration to snag more people....

If you get caught by an illegal trap like that, it is your civic duty to defend yourself by proving that the light duration does not meet the specification set in the Vehicle Code.

[SacredCow]

95. regardless of it being the fault of the tractor-trailer....

She is now undoubtedly in a great deal of pain that would have been avoided if she had been driving sensibly, as opposed to driving in fear of getting another "big-brother is watching you" kind of ticket. Yes, it's everyone's responsibility to drive safely and pay attention- and sometimes that involves making snap decisions that the cameras can't see or comprehend. And when you get into that situation, you have absolutely no recourse other than opening your wallet.

As for the cycle shortening... People are fighting it, and winning. And I'd counter that it's the traffic department's duty to make intersections more safe- NOT to be a profit center.

[RamboLiberal]

98. I'm with you on this one

And people forget that tractor trailers even if they have good brakes can't stop on a dime.

Damn cameras don't record that. Maybe the cop at the intersection will. And at least with the cop you got someone that has to show up in court and counter your argument with the traffic judge of the circumstances of the ticket.

[slackmaster]

103. Just to clarify - If I was being tailgated by a large truck, I'd run the light and risk a ticket

If I got one, I'd take it up with the judge and claim the truck was an extenuating circumstance. The photo would surely include the menacing tractor-trailer (who presumably would also have received a ticket).

[SacredCow]

108. I hear you....

And I don't mean to be so snarky about it- I just have personal experience with the things, and the ensuing research opened my eyes to the fact that they are absolutely NOT for the purpose of safety.

But regarding the tractor-trailer getting a ticket also? Not necessarily. Early on, the camera companies figured out that it was too much trouble to find out who was driving the particular trailer at the time, and I gather that ticketing the company that owned the trailer was problematic, legally.

[slackmaster]

88. Another vote for "stop running red lights"

And if it's close, step on the gas and cover your face so you can't be identified in the photo.

[RamboLiberal]

90. Problem is in some areas the car registration gets the ticket

Doesn't matter who's photographed driving. Another dirty little secret according to something I was reading last night in researching this thread, tractor trailers usually don't get a ticket since the trailer's license is what is photographed and its just too much hassle to track down the driver & rig hauling the trailer at the time.

[slackmaster]

104. I personally know someone who beat a camera ticket because his face was not visible

He simply said he wasn't driving the car that day. The DA dropped it.

It happened in San Diego at the intersection of La Jolla Village Drive and Towne Center Drive.

[SacredCow]

109. It's through the registration here....

In Louisiana, there are no front plates so all pics are of the back of the vehicle (no way to tell who was driving it). The citation has a place for you to plead that you weren't driving the car at the time, but to do that you have to give them the name AND drivers license number of the person who was driving.

[Blue_Tires]

96. someone used to sell license plate frames that would conceal your plate

if you looked at it from an angle instead of dead-on...i don't see them anymore now, so they must have been outlawed...

either way I feel your pain...these cameras are a racket and i got caught a couple times in D.C. with them...You should take heart that a group of people in Arizona has started to rebel and have been covering up the cameras with tape, gum, spray paint, etc....

[RebelOne]

100. I got one of those tickets here in the Atlanta area.

My fine was only $70. California really sticks it to you.

[SacredCow]

110. They're $113 here in Baton Rouge....

I think- they might be more now.

[lumpy]

105. If you can't afford the $436.00 then save money, pay $64.00 to

traffic school and learn why you should not be ignoring red lights. Sounds like you are considering repeating your carelessness since you are interested in trying to beat the rap for possible future violations. Grow up, you might just avoid worse situations.

[BeeBee]

107. My husband got hit with one of them in San Francisco

we toyed with the idea of trying to fight it until we got the picture in the mail...it was clearly him, in our car, running a red light.

[Seldona]

111. Yet another vote for not running the light in the first place.

I can't see entering an intersection where your entire view is blocked anyway. Slow down and give the truck some room so you can at least see.

[Puzzler]

115. Here's the deal:

1) almost all of these devices/sprays do not work. They are hoaxes... and...

2) if, by some miracle, they do work, they are almost certainly illegal in most states.

[armyowalgreens]

120. Am I the only one that has been flashed going through a green light?

I think AZ red light cams are broken or something.

I've been flashed twice driving through green lights.

[Mike 03]

125. Best idea of all is drive at the speed limit. Check out some pictures of what

happens to people who die in vehicular homicides because people are speeding, or running lights.

The best thing is to just comply with the laws, and help keep the roads safe so that we don't see deaths like those in the trial we are all watching right now, the State Trooper in NJ who wiped out to teenage sisters for exceeding the speed limit and blowing off a Stop Sign.

Who wants to die young? I don't.