Just moved to wonderful Puyallup, going through a divorce, and now this….

Any break or am I screwed?

The cameras only generate revenue if people pay fines they shouldn’t. That aside, the cameras do have a deterrent value, but it is based on a false threat.

Having said that, if the cops were enforcing red light infractions there would be no need for these cameras. They are indeed solely a source of revenue as accidents increase once people are aware of the cameras. It is ridiculous to expect everyone to be perfect and to penalize us for all of the errors of our ways. There are times when it is prudent to ‘run’ a light to avoid an accident. To force an extra tax on that decision is short sighted in the least.

A good site on traffic laws: http://www.thenewspaper.com/

People have taken to looking for the countdown and stopping if there’s 5 seconds or less to go.
If everyone habitually slows down @ 10 seconds anticipating that the guy in front might brake within the next 5 seconds, the risk of rear-end collisions shouldn’t be that great.

Anyone not smart enough to heed these ample warnings deserves a ticket, IMHO.

I realize that in some jurisdictions the city hasn’t given fair warning that the cameras are there, nor have they given motorists the plainly-visible green light contdown and that those places are truly just in it for the money.

Logical extenstion is speed cameras, but in the end I cant say why vehicles are not speed governed to match local sopeed limits. GPS shold enable this. Nobody here will like that.

Do you prefer the promise of safety to freedom?

We have basic principles of justice upon which our free society is built. One of which is the right to face your accuser in court. In the case of automated systems, who (or what) is the accuser? I am deeply worried about this question because as a professional software developer, I know how easy it is to rig a system. Furthermore, I know how difficult it is to track down whomever might be responsible.

Finally, we have to realize that there are no easy answers. Justice depends upon hard, honest work of police and the courts. It takes tax dollars to provide it. As citizens, we have a responsibility to see that we share the burden (taxes) and benefit (justice) equally. Shifting the burden to “offenders” is a dangerous mistake, lest we all morph from being taxpayers to “offenders”.

However, that said, I think Winnipeg’s light system is better. There, the cross traffic’s lights go green the moment the other direction’s lights go red. No 1 second wait, no ‘grace’ period for red light runners. And there, I didn’t see anyone run a red light either. When you know you don’t have that 1 second to get through the intersection, I guess you don’t even try.

Of course, the fines need to be stiff enough to justify the cops. And the cops need to be willing to actually enforce traffic law during peak drive time.

I doubt anything will happen/change. Cameras will be used. Fines issued. Of course, no one will lose a license.

Maybe something will change in 10 years. With black market in-car YouTube and other distractions, annual fatalities might hit 60K.

The problem isn’t the red light cameras per se, but rather the gradual slide that happens after.

People have a natural tendency to find ways to game a system in their favor over the good of other people. So, public officials see that raising taxes is unpopular and doesn’t get them reelected, but that traffic cameras are approved by some people, and hey, they make a lot of money! So, They’re put in. Then, the yellow is shortened to make more money. Once people get used to that, more cameras are put in. Eventually the United States resembles Britian: a camera at every corner, making millions for the state and observing your every move, 1984 style.

I’m interested to hear what other people who agree with the red light cameras have to say. What is your response to this argument?

(Edit to clarify) Essentially, the question is: Do you prefer safety to freedom?

It’s injustice when municipalities depend upon fines and, as such, have a vested interest in creating lawbreakers.

I have absolutely no problem with punishing people who break the law. But gaming the system with shortened yellows and cash kickbacks to the manufacturer is most definitely unjust.

Well put. My view exactly.

It’s injustice when municipalities depend upon fines and, as such, have a vested interest in creating lawbreakers.

I have absolutely no problem with punishing people who break the law. But gaming the system with shortened yellows and cash kickbacks to the manufacturer is most definitely unjust.

Sorry, but these things are just lame. Juniper makes my point. The problem he described tells me that no one at his city has done their job in managing the roads, intersections, and traffic lights. The light running behavior is mostly a consequence of managerial delinquence by municipalities. The right or wrong of fining the offenders is completely besides the point. The real issue is getting the cities to do their jobs rather than making money off of their delinquence, or in the case of San Diego, willful disregard for life.

Fines should serve only one purpose: to be a deterrent. The problem is that because they redistribute wealth, there are vested interests involved who would gladly look away so long as it is someone else who’s on the receiving end of the injustice.

Machines (installed by, financed by, operated by and programmed by people who stand to gain) dispensing so-called justice? Only sheep would allow this to happen.

Exactly.

John

How about cities use proper traffic engineering to insure that people trying to make left hand turns don’t end up wanting to play chicken?

Many many intersections give left hand turners such a small amount of time to get the job done that it is no surprise when people try to push the yellow as hard as they can to avoid waiting 1-3 light cycles.

I’m all for punishing bad behavior, but only in conjunction with serious efforts to fix the root problems of that behavior…

The fact that they’ve already projected annual revenue proves that it is VERY much indeed about the money. In fact, I imagine there was much hand rubbing and chanting of [Mr. Burns Voice] EXXXCELLENT![/Mr. Burns Voice]