« Pasadena Raises Fees, Wonders If It Will Matter | Home | The Great Debate on 98 (and 99): Won’t Get Fooled Again »
Red Light Cameras Just Money Farming?
By Centinel | May 21, 2008
You’ll be shocked (shocked!) to learn that those red-light cameras aren’t really there to keep you safe. They exist to make money. I’ll be sure to smile when blowing through the cameras near city hall.
Last 5 posts in Main Page
- Feed Portantino's Election Reelection Campaign - July 23rd, 2008
- Alvarez Waterboarded! - July 23rd, 2008
- Morning Linkfest: 7 Reasons to Hate Corporations - July 23rd, 2008
- Even the Cost of Underwear Is Increasing - July 23rd, 2008
- Pasadena Has a New City Clerk - July 23rd, 2008
Powered by Gregarious (42)
Share This
Topics: Main Page, Transportation, Pasadena |
May 21st, 2008 at 9:00 am
Of course its a money maker. But if you obey the law their funds are cut short.
They have another purpose: Civil ligitation.
The interesting thing is that I had a couple of claims go to suit when those were first put in some 10 or so years ago where there was a light dispute and a fatality. Those films actually solved who ran the red.
May 21st, 2008 at 9:25 am
What?! They make money?! You’re kidding!?
May 21st, 2008 at 9:30 am
Can I has the mony?
May 21st, 2008 at 9:48 am
lolcatz invade.
May 21st, 2008 at 10:06 am
can it plz b blog times now?
May 21st, 2008 at 10:09 am
If you read the link, though, Fraz, you’ll realize that they’re making their money off catching people who slow, but don’t stop, when making right turns on a red. It’s highly debatable as to whether the “California stop” really has any practical merit.
May 21st, 2008 at 10:10 am
If you read the link, though, Fraz, you’ll realize that they’re making their money off catching people who slow, but don’t stop, when making right turns on a red. It’s highly debatable as to whether the “California stop” really is a safety issue.
May 21st, 2008 at 10:15 am
The bottom line is that if drivers stopped at the red, there would be no issue. Too many drivers feel inconvenienced, stopping at a red, prior to a right turn. We have accepted a rolling or banking right turn without coming to a complete stop just like we have at the stop sign, creating the phrase “California rolling stop”.
Can the cameras generate revenue? Sure. But if they are placed based on crash and citation statistics, set for a specific time to trigger after the phase, and at/above specific speeds, then there is no excuse, none, for the driver that is legitimately cited for failing to stop at the red.
Are there safety concerns from drivers blowing a red on a right turn, even at slower speeds? Yes. Perhaps not as great as a mid phase broadside collision, but what about the pedestrian factor… Peds tend to not always look before stepping off with a green or walk phase. What about the driver a second or two late that rolls right through the red and into the path of the ped stepping off the curb?
If it was just about the money, jurisdictions would place them at every signalized intersection. Whether the camera targets a straight red light, a “no turn on red”, speed violations and it clearly shows the violation and the driver is identified, the only difference is that they are not stopped by the officer then. They don’t sign a promise to appear and if they don’t respond the cite in the mail, then we have to go find them.
Put the responsibility back on the driver! If we all did a better job of driving safely and obeying the laws in place, we would have no use for the cameras.
And no, we don’t have any in town. We have considered use at a few intersections to include Huntington and Santa Clara. Huntington makes a sweeping right turn to continue and the right turn red light violations would definitely be targeted. We have collision history there as well as a failure to yield to ped problem…
May 21st, 2008 at 10:21 am
But it’s crystal clear that the law requires you to come to a stop.
May 21st, 2008 at 10:22 am
I have to differ, Tom. Cities can only institute so many red light cameras/speed traps/”DUI” checkpoints before they will suffer serious blowback.
I do think there are reasonable uses of red-light cameras and completely support your idea of employing them at intersections where large numbers of crashes occur. I’d like to see evidence, though, that such is the case in how red light cameras are being used. I’m not against them in principle, just against them when some cities pretend their main aim is to prevent accidents.
May 21st, 2008 at 10:24 am
@Nick:
Sadly, you are right. So, I’ll pack up my griping…
May 21st, 2008 at 10:28 am
I like your second PP and agree! And yes, if over used, it is like anything…ruins it for all and the intent is killed! The speed topic may come up on the POA blog in the near future…lots of opinion on that one.
Here is my snip for the day…using the free internet at HMH right now…wonder what my IP address is showing…just had to throw that one in for a silent laugh to myself. And yes, not working!
May 21st, 2008 at 10:36 am
The bigger issue is that there are too many bad drivers out there. Unless you kill a pedestrian and/or drive your car into a stationary object, it’s pretty much impossible to fail the driver’s test. If the DMV actually made sure that good drivers were on the road, we’d all be better off. (And, as a bonus, we might even have a workable public transit system!)
May 21st, 2008 at 10:50 am
@ Tom: Who knows, who cares? I hope no one ever uses the letters I and P in the same sentence again.
May 21st, 2008 at 11:40 am
Let’s back up. The law is right on red after a complete stop. Obey the law and voila no problems.
Of course anything abused keeps people from visiting and spending their hard earned cash. I don’t support them, just saying if they are there just mind your p’s & q’s and no problems.
May 21st, 2008 at 6:23 pm
The red light cameras in the City of Pasadena are installed based upon traffic collision data. If Pasadena really was after revenue, they would be up and down Colorado instead of Union/Lake, Union/Marengo, Foothill/San Gabriel and Pasadena/Maple. Look at West Hollywood, there are cameras in 40% of their main intersections.
According to the Penal Code, a city only gets 20-65% of the base fine of a violation. In LA County a red light citation is $381.00. The base fine is $100.00 and the rest is penalties and assessments. The city gets only about $45.00 of that $381.00. Pasadena does not issue many tickets from this system at all. I know because I work very closely with the citations and court related stuff
May 21st, 2008 at 6:56 pm
Joe Friday here. I am very impressed with the posts by Bruinfan53.
Joe Friday with the facts.
May 21st, 2008 at 8:35 pm
Let’s all just stop when the light says stop, okay?
May 21st, 2008 at 9:19 pm
Unfortunately, the LA Times has never been a huge supporter of the LAPD.
May 22nd, 2008 at 7:27 am
Did you know that stop signs with white outlines are optional?
May 22nd, 2008 at 8:15 am
[…] to bruinfan53 for his valuable comment in the discussion about red light cameras: The red light cameras in the City of Pasadena are […]
May 25th, 2008 at 12:58 pm
Let me tell you of my experience. I am a victim of the Red Light Camera Program here in NYC: On April 7th I was ticketed for going through a YELLOW light. A few weeks later, I got the summons in the mail with two photos showing exactly that. It was not enough to beat the summons in NYC’s kangaroo traffic court. Several weeks later through the mail, the judge gives me a thumbs down. Included was an “technician’s report” refuting that the camera malfunctioned (under misdemeanor penalty of perjury). This vile injustice was upheld. That very night I head off to work - this time in the other direction. Just past the crosswalk, the light turns yellow. What do you think I did? I hit the brakes: YELLOW light = red light ticket. I knew the camera was there playing hardball; the woman behind me? Yellow light = hit the gas, it’s about to turn red. The result? Kapowww!!! I was rear-ended and sent flying across the intersection nearly knocked unconscious. It was five minutes before I crawled out of the car. I was in full uniform. The police took my gun (I’m a federal peace officer) and emergency medical techs immobilized my head and spine. I now suffer from a herniated disk, and I don’t know what my future holds. I may be in chronic pain for the rest of my life because New York City is downright ruthless in imposing an extortion plot. My car is totaled; the woman behind me? Her car totaled - mushroomed up to the top of the windshield. Oh, and BTW she has no insurance. I owe a $1,000 deductible AND as I have no gap insurance on my lease - maybe another $3,000 since my insurance will only pay book value. The woman is a turnip nobody can bleed. Can any of you who support Red Light Cameras honestly say that this is right?
My normal defensive driving habits would have prevented all or this; but I tried to stop at the crosswalk on the YELLOW light. This past week has been a nightmare, and it’s only started. What happened to my civil rights? Habeas Corpus - the right to confront your accuser in court? No luck there, it’s robot camera. The right to equal protection under the law? If YOU were stopped by a traffic cop you could face him in traffic court. The right to due process? A crooked judge found
me guilty - they called my evidence (their photos no less) “not persuasive” - even though it showed a YELLOW light at my intersection and a red light two blocks away (the coloration was not at fault). I drew arrows to illustrate this fact. If it were about public safety, why not just increase the time of the yellow light and the time that both signals remain red? That would give time to clear the intersection.
But it’s not about safety. It’s about cash - and YOU the motorist, are expendable.
Further, the RLC companies are contracted to share the loot. The result? Corporate greed enters the equation: An evil stew in a pot of avarice when mixed with a system already in conflict of interest and moderated by a crooked court: They rig the cameras and exhort the traffic department to reduce the time of the yellow signal as well. I have seen traffic signals go through a yellow signal in almost the blink of an eye. I have spoken to three other people who’ve been ticketed on the yellow by these “Red” light cameras. These faulty cameras and signals and the crooked courts that uphold them represent a tyranny that’s injuring maybe even killing innocent drivers. If I had been on a motorcycle I would surely be dead. RLC’s are a dream come true for the tax and spend politicians who take the easy way out: And why not? They generate 14 million a year in NYC alone with more on the way. Proponents naively assume the cameras are only ticketing violators. But that is clearly not case – I would venture to guess between half and most of those ticketed are drivers completely innocent of wrongdoing: This is the other side of the issue the public needs to be made aware of.
May 25th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
alpan, here in LA County, the vendors work on a fixed price yearly contract. If they were paid on a per cite plan they would not make a lot of money. In a previous post I wrote about the per cite amount that the city receives. Also, every city is responsible for maintaining the system. This means they have to make sure that the yellow light length is consistent with federal highway safety guidelines. The timing of the yellow light may not be below a certain threshold. Also, the camera may not be activated to take a photo or video unless the light is red. Most agencies here have photos of the approach to the intersection, in the intersection and post intersection to show that a violation actually occurred. Most police departments also have a contingency plan to have officers monitor the intersections to verify that all timing is correct.
This is needed because many years ago, the City of San Diego installed cameras in their city. Not long after the cameras were installed the city launched a massive program to improve roads. The company that did the road work moved the sensors in the street (loops) that activate the cameras. They put them back in wrong places and the city and the vendor did not verify that they were. Hundreds, if not thousands, of citations were issued and the Police Dept issued the citations haphazardly. The vendor found there were issues after many public complaints. The police Dept had to request the court dismiss a ton of citations and refund a mass of money. East LA had a similar problem.
Police Depts do not really make a lot unless they issue a ton of cites. Where they really make money is on the parking citations. They collect in upwards of 80% of the entire fine. It is not in the best financial interest of the city of have a non functioning red light camera citation programs.
May 25th, 2008 at 7:15 pm
alpan…why did you take a deductible you couldn’t afford? Why no Uninsured motorist coverage. I don’t know about NY, but in LA county the number of uninsured has sat around 30% with some areas (East SFV and parts of lower/central SGV where it is in excess of 75% uninsured).
I carry the Uninsured coverage as I like myself as much as the other guys whom I have to carry liability coverage for in the event I screw up.