Are you trying to start a new thread?

 

Here is the concerned grass roots behind red lights
http://www.stopredlightrunning.com/
And here is the people that put up the money
http://www.stopredlightrunning.com/h...t-sponsors.htm

Feel Like your being played a fool? You should

You should check out how much money The RLC companys spend on lobbying also
As far as I know in phoenix the Fine started at 125 went to 175 and is now going to 250

Here is the ACS contract for DC just transpose it for phoenix.

http://washingtontimes.com/metro/200...3846-4281r.htm
Critics question the city's motives for the program. The region's largest motor club, AAA Mid-Atlantic, has backed traffic cameras in other jurisdictions but notes that the D.C. program has generated tens of millions of dollars in fines.
The new contract pays ACS a flat fee of about $850,000 per month. Previously, the company received a flat monthly fee of about $650,000. Under the previous no-bid deal approved last year, ACS also stood to earn more money if the District issued more than 53,750 citations in any given month.

 

I don't have a problem with companies supporting activities that build their market and business. Is there supposed to be something sinister about that? Washington has lobbyists and businesses have banded together to build interest in their products through associations of different sorts.

What I care about is that the cameras are effective in saving lives and reducing loss of property.

Check out their advisory board: Click Here

 

So you dont think there is nothing sinister about The RLC companys only placing cameras were the yellow light times are the shortest? No problem with it at all that the RLC companys lobbied for eliminating the requirement that trasportation engineers, time the intersection and fix timing accordingly?

None?

And most of their advisory board have nothing to do with traffic safety. Even the one guy affiliated with a NTSB oriented group isnt on the board of directors

Like this guy

Honorable Allen Fields, Chief Justice
Republic of the Marshall Islands
Did this guy personally figure out traffic engineering?

Ricardo Martinez, M.D.
Emory University
this guy is a cardiologist

Bryan Porter, Ph.D.
Old Dominion University
This guy is a psychologist

Anthony Kane
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
Yeah right. This guy isnt even on there board, and they are not an official organisation.

Peter Harkness
Governing Magazine
Ewww for sure this magazine editor is a traffic engineer

Governing is a monthly magazine whose primary audience is state and local government officials: governors, legislators, mayors, city managers, council members and other elected, appointed and career officials. They are the men and women who set policy for and manage the day-to-day operations of cities, counties and states, as well as such governmental bodies as school boards and special districts.


Sorry I cant even like you now, Its people Like YOU that is running this country into the ground. Its ok for the goverment to violate our rights, and use us like cattle as long as its for "the children" ...right?

 

Empirical studies indicate that longer yellow lights allow people more time to react to changing light cycles. Consequently, placing computerized, law enforcement devices at intersections with short yellow lights can obviously result in more red light citations than can computer–enforcement devices placed at intersections with longer yellow lights. It is the effect of the short yellow light on apparent red light running that the red light camera program in San Diego has seized upon in order to maximize revenue.

The reason why short yellow lights create a trap for people driving is that short yellow lights create an "impossible to stop" zone in which a certain percentage of people approaching an intersection become caught in the dilemma of not being able to stop safely before the light turns red, and not being able to cross into the intersection without technically running a red light. Federal traffic control standards require that a traffic control device give drivers adequate time for a proper response. Acceptable traffic engineering standards require that a yellow light be long enough to allow drivers sufficient time to stop their vehicle safely at the limit line before the traffic light changes from yellow to red. There are different methods of calculating appropriate yellow light time based on factors like road grade and approach speed. The recent traffic engineering practice has been to determine approach speed by using the posted speed limit rather than the 85th percentile speed (the speed at which 85 percent of people are thought to be driving). However, it is more appropriate to base these calculations on the speed at which people are actually driving toward the intersection. The faster the approach speed and the shorter the yellow light, the greater the likelihood that people driving will be caught in the "impossible to stop" zone and forced to run the red light.

Data from public records suggests that the operators of the red light camera program in San Diego exploited the "impossible to stop" zone by selecting intersections for computer–enforcement that have relatively high speeds and short yellow lights. This situation is not unlike the age–old law enforcement technique of "sitting–in" described in the "Selective Traffic Enforcement Manual" by the International Association of Chiefs of Police, Inc. (January 1972). The technique of "sitting–in" is explained in the manual’s introduction as follows:

Sitting–in usually occurs at locations which, in police jargon, are referred to as "duck ponds" or "cherry patches". The sitting–in practices are particularly objectionable when two or more enforcement units group together to work an intersection which generates frequent driver violations. Usually, where this situation occurs, the officers are doing nothing more than reaping the harvest of inadequate or poor traffic engineering. These locations frequently encourage noncompliance by the motorist to traffic signals or turning regulations. Very often, however, the real culprit is faulty traffic engineering rather than the driver. Poor positioning of signals and channelization deficiencies are characteristically present at the "duck ponds".

It appears that the red light camera program in San Diego is nothing more than a modern day, computerized version of the age–old law enforcement technique known as "sitting–in" where police officers seized on poor traffic engineering practices to ensure high citation rates. But, in this case, it isn’t police officers who are doing the "sitting–in" so much as it is the private company that operates the program. By placing cameras at intersections where drivers are actually forced to run the red lights due to seemingly poor traffic engineering practices, the company that operates the program ensured that the program would generate millions of dollars in revenue each year.

 

This is Hilarious
One of the advisors is a perv
In the aftermath of his arrest on misdemeanor sex charges, retired Sacramento Superior Court Judge Allen P. Fields, who has worked part time as a visiting judge in Northern California for almost 10 years, may never be a judge again, according to state officials.On Monday, he resigned from his other job as chief justice of the Supreme Court in the Marshall Islands. The Marshall Islands where Fields has worked off and on for the past 10 years, many people still don't know.

"This is going to have a colossal blowup in the community," said Jerry Cramer, executive board member of the Chamber of Commerce in Majuro, the islands' capital city.

Justin deBrum, a former senator and Cabinet member in the Marshall Islands, said news of the arrest of the Supreme Court justice is trickling into his country.

According to Marshall Islands officials, Fields submitted his resignation as chief justice Monday from a job that paid about $25,000. He heard fewer than a dozen appeals a year. Fields collects about $108,000 annually in retirement pay and was making $513 a day when he ruled as a visiting judge in California.

 

What makes you think that the Red Light Company chooses the locations for the cameras?

That's not the point. The point is, and has been, the RLCs. I posted the board of advisors as ballast to your list of supporters, both meaningless.


It crushes me that you can't even like me now. Really. I'm hurt. Please stop.

 

Arrested for solicitation. Sounds like an old man trying to get laid. Sad end to an otherwise distinguished career.

One of Ronald Reagans Judges.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...100301844.html

The analysis shows that the number of crashes at locations with cameras more than doubled, from 365 collisions in 1998 to 755 last year. Injury and fatal crashes climbed 81 percent, from 144 such wrecks to 262. Broadside crashes, also known as right-angle or T-bone collisions, rose 30 percent, from 81 to 106 during that time frame. Traffic specialists say broadside collisions are especially dangerous because the sides are the most vulnerable areas of cars.

At the start of the program, police officials said they also received advice on camera placement from residents and from the private contractor that operated the devices.


Friday marked the end of an nasty 18-month battle for the lucrative LA contract. Nestor's win was essential as the company is desperate for revenue to stay alive, with $59.1 million in debt. Nestor paid lobbyist Arnie Berghoff at least $54,000 to work the city. Redflex offered powerful lobbyist Ken Spiker Jr. a $100,000 contingency fee to land the contract and poured money into the campaign coffers of city councilman Dennis P. Zine and Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa last year. Zine responded by voting against any contract that failed to include Redflex and by going on trips with Redflex lobbyist Spiker.

"I'm not carrying anyone's water," Zine told the LA Times. Instead, he maintained that the Redflex system was superior and could issue more tickets, generating more revenue for the city.

 

The first sentence pertains to the intersections with RLCs. The rest of that data is city-wide. How do I know this? I read the entire article and caught the line in red below.

Let's get some context on the rest of your point because you seem to be selective in your quotes from the article you cite:
The article goes further into which intersections are currently covered (only 17 out of the 45 worst) and quotes a local Professor of Civil Engineering's recommendation that the deployment of the cameras be examined but that cameras continue to be used.

Politics as usual. Nothing here to say the cameras are ineffective.

 

And every single study on the cameras, has shown an increase in accidents at the intersections they have been placed. But you wont see, your not going to see it, and you will never see it.
Are you still under the belief Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11 too?

Again Google is MY freind. How does your foot taste?

 

Yes accidents go up. Rear-enders. We established that already.

I'm not the one that can't hold up his side of the debate without lowering myself to insults.

 

Ive held up my arguments with proof. You dont want to acknowledge it.
Again what do your shoes taste like cause you keep putting your foot in your mouth. On every count. Dont want the personal insults, stop inviting them

 

You've proven that accidents go up a RLC intersections but you don't quantify your statements with any facts about what kind of accidents they are. You also don't even touch on the effects they may have on injury or death rates or even the lowering of property loss.

You've thrown Prohibition, Saddam Hussien and my feet into the mix. Sounds like you're the one grasping.

This is just debate here Duker. It's not personal, it's actually kind of fun, until you start with the insults.

If you dug into this issue with an open mind you might have been able to sawy me a little.

Hey, I have an idea. Let's switch sides. You defend the lights and I'll argue that they are bad.

You go first.

 

See i cant do that. The use of the lights is indefensible with all the data received to date. A more effective and cost saving measure would be to lengthen yellow light times to that suggested by goverment traffic engineers. This simple solution saves lives property much more effectively than red light cameras.
Unfortunalty it doesnt produce the road tax you so willingly wish to support.

 

Why do you insist on talking out the wrong end of your body?

I never have ONE TIME said I support road taxes. Heck, I never thought we were talking about taxes, I thought we were talking about Red Light Cameras.

Silly me.

Anyway, I'll play along.

How long would you set yellow lights for. 4 seconds? 5?

Go ahead, answer. I want to see how far you've thought this one through.

 

3 seconds minimum 1 second for every 10 mph over 30 or fraction of second there after with a red light clearance time (Both intersections displaying a red light for 1-3 seconds) This simple little adjustment reduces red light running 80%.

And another thing. When you think of red light runners, you automatically think of people going thru red lights with cross traffic. Not the case, The RLCs catch people on the other side of the intersection that have already pretty much cleared it.

 

Okay. Good start. So we fix the yellows, which are a problem all over, then what?

What about the people that think they can get through before the traffic begins to move across their path?

What about those that follow through the turn signal even though it was red before they got to the intersection but figure they can trailer along with the car ahead of them?

What about the people that just don't respect the law because there's not a cop car parked on the side of the road with a hat on the headrest?

 

House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-Texas) recently called for congressional hearings in the wake of a report that claims local governments have progressively shortened yellow-lights since 1985 to maximize fines, and have endangered motorists in the process. The study, released in a 23-page report by Armey's office to The Washington Times, shows that since 1985, yellow traffic light timing has been cut from an average of five seconds to three seconds in duration and that revenue collected from intersections with these shorter durations have become a mainstay of many local governments. The report states, ''When people come upon an intersection with inadequate yellow time, they are faced with the choice of either stopping abruptly on yellow (risking a rear end accident) or accelerating. The options for those confronting such circumstances are limited, and unsafe. But each time a driver faces the dilemma, the government increases its odds of cashing in.''

And cashing in they are. In Washington, D.C. a single camera raked in $1 million in revenue from an estimated $16 million for the city's 37 red-light cameras. In San Diego, a single camera brought in $6.8 million in a mere 18 months. Baltimore County, Maryland has taken in $6 million since January of this year. With each camera costing $50,000 (not to mention maintenance and program costs), it is no wonder that cities are looking to recoup their investments.

Intersections became more of a challenge for drivers in 1985, when the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) changed its Proposed Recommended Practice for signal calculations, just three years after New York City began to research how it would utilize red light cameras. As the cameras became more prevalent, the ITE continued to change its Proposed Recommended Practice to shorten yellow light durations. The ITE's 1994 report states, ''When the percentage of vehicles that entered on a red indication exceeds that which is locally acceptable, the yellow change interval may be lengthened (or shortened) until the percentage conforms to local standards, or enforcement can be used instead.''

Simply stated, if too many people are running red lights, the city does not have to look into problems with the intersection or signal timing, it can just ''use enforcement'' by putting up a red-light camera. Engineers from across the country that disagree with the ITE's calculations have found that at many of the red-light camera intersections, it is impossible to stop a vehicle safely within the posted speed limit with the three-second yellow-light duration. This results in increased rear-end collisions and higher amounts of red-light violations. Hardly the "safety measure" that cities say they are trying to implement.

Reports released by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) have touted red-light cameras as a highly effective safety tool, but the facts don't add up. The IIHS has a vested interest in the success of red-light camera programs. In most states that use the programs, "violators" also have points added to their driver's licenses, resulting in higher insurance rates -- a clear bonus for an organization that represents the insurance industry. The IIHS methodology and its "studies" are suspect in that they are for short durations of time, fail to use actual accident reports and don't consider the timing of the signal and other factors that influence traffic flow. In addition, the IIHS studies rarely mention the increase of rear-end collisions that are caused at red-light camera intersections.

The answer to the "rash" of red-light violations is relatively simple. Increase yellow light duration. Almost 80 percent of red light entries occur within the first second of the red light indication. Studies in Arizona, Georgia, Virginia, and Maryland have shown a reduction of 73 percent to nearly 100 percent in red light entries after an increase in yellow light duration. Several cities have dropped their red-light camera programs after adding only one second to yellow light durations at intersections because infractions were "virtually eliminated."

Armey's complete report, "The Red Light Running Crisis -- Is It Intentional?", can be found at www.freedom.gov/auto. As the Athens-Clarke County Commission considers the installation of red-light cameras in our community, the report might shed some light on some of the problems with these controversial monitoring devices.

This was written by Holly Preston, a University of Georgia graduate and a resident of Athens. She is Public Relations Coordinator at the Georgia Center for Continuing Education and is a member of the Clarke County Democratic Committee.

 

How about you just admit your wrong, and that red light cameras are a bad Idea?