Slashdot Mirror


Traffic Cameras in D.C.

Kappelmeister writes "The Washington Post has an article about red-light-running and speeding cameras all over D.C. that have issued over half a million citations to date. (Police send you a ticket and photographic proof up to a month after the fact.) Though the cameras successfully reduce dangerous driving and boost the city's revenue, a lot of wrongful citations fall through the cracks and give some that guilty-until-proven-innocent feeling. Once again, how far is too far?" I came across this much more informative investigation of D.C.'s traffic cameras a few weeks ago. It's heavy on facts and figures, and hammers home the observation that an extra second of yellow light is at least as good at promoting good behavior, but much less lucrative for the local government and the contracting firm.

6 of 487 comments (clear)

  1. Not only D.C. but Maryland too.. by antis0c · · Score: 5, Informative

    I live about 15 minutes from D.C. north in Maryland and we have the same traffic cameras. Same up all over baltimore city. My father works as a Fleet Manager for a contracting company that rents out trucks to do city work for Baltimore city. They get about 10 of those traffic citations a day.

    My father tells me there are only 2 ways to win a case in court contesting the citation. One, you have convince the judge that the license plate on the vechicle in the picture isn't yours, or isn't clear enough to establish 100% that it is indeed your license plate.

    Or two, you have to prove the yellow light you were photographed at wasn't 4 seconds. State law mandates that the yellow lights must be at least 4 seconds long, so if the yellow light was say 3, the light was malfunctioning and you weren't at fault. This of course means you have to go out there with a video camera and get the light being yellow for less than 4 seconds.

    Down near DC they don't seem to use flash photography, I think they use actual video cameras, all the cameras around my place are the security camera style ones. Up in Baltimore City they're flash style, and you can tell when you've gotten caught because they produce a large flash. They also look a little like bird houses on a poll next to the intersection.

    Thats about all I know personally about these, I don't care for them that much, but ever since they put them in, I carefully pick and chose which yellow lights I'm going to try and go through.

    --

    ..There's a-dooin's a-transpirin'
    1. Re:Not only D.C. but Maryland too.. by cvd6262 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Or two, you have to prove the yellow light you were photographed at wasn't 4 seconds. State law mandates that the yellow lights must be at least 4 seconds long, so if the yellow light was say 3, the light was malfunctioning and you weren't at fault. This of course means you have to go out there with a video camera and get the light being yellow for less than 4 seconds.

      I read about these ticketing-lights in a Car & Driver editorial a few months ago. It seems that they are not installed to improve safety, but to generate more income for the state. They cost much less per ticket than a patrol car and policeman would.

      The problem is that many states use the four-second-yellow-light rule regardless of speed limit. If I'm driving 25MPH, it's likely that I will have sufficient time to decide whether to safely stop or continue through the light. However, at 55MPH (eg on an expressway), four seconds is not enough time for a driver to decided whether or not they should stop (safely) or run the light.

      If states were honestly interested in improving public safety at traffic lights, they would study the situation and vary yellow-light duration based on speed limit (and weather conditions).

      --

      I'd rather have someone respond than be modded up.

  2. Re:such cameras deemed unlawful in another state by Null_Packet · · Score: 5, Informative

    The issue of legality came down to the fact that the company running the system of red light cameras was also controlling the timing of the lights. In fact, the courts found that the contractor was actually shortening the yellow times on lights, as they got something like 70 percent of the fines for each red light violator/victim. This at least was the case in San Diego, CA.

    http://www.kfmb.com/results.php?storyID=3166&is= y

    http://www.kfmb.com/search_results.php?curPage=1 &s Text=red+light

  3. San Diego Scameras by John+Jorsett · · Score: 5, Informative

    San Diego had its red light cameras shut down when some attorneys established in a civil lawsuit that Lockheed Martin had deliberately misplaced the sensors, causing many drivers to be ticketed unfairly. LM got around $70 per ticket, so they had a large incentive to make sure as many were issued as possible. (How'd you like to have cops get a percentage of every ticket or fine they wrote?) This business was so profitable for LM that they installed and maintained the cameras at their expense in return for their cut. The city and other governmental agencies got the rest of the $271 tickets, so they were ecstatic. San Diego got millions of dollars a year from these devices before they were shut off.

    The trial brought out many other interesting revelations. For example, each ticket was supposed to be issued by a sworn police officer, who had to review the 'evidence' and sign off on it. Turns out that a spate of tickets were issued when the officer was on vacation. Testimony revealed that the officer frequently just signed a bunch of blank forms and let LM fill them in. Another interesting aspect is that LM fiercely resisted having their hardware and software examined by the plaintiffs. In fact, they threatened the law firm with a suit if they persisted in pressing for discovery of those items. People who have fought their red light tickets in court and who wanted the design details and calibration records for the camera that photographed them were routinely refused this information, even though it's vital to a defense. Another interesting fact revealed at trial was that the cameras were NOT placed at 'the most dangerous intersections' as the city had been contending all along, but at intersections whose yellow light intervals were revealed to be set far shorter than state guidelines. As has been discussed here in other posts, the yellow light duration is a major factor in whether a light will be run or not.

    These cameras, at least as operated in San Diego, are a scam. They ticket innocent people, are unexaminable for a defense, and are just a way for the city to rake in big money.

    Here's the web site operated by the attorneys who got these cameras shut down: Red Light Lawyers

  4. Re:If you drive fast enough.... by PSC · · Score: 4, Informative

    wouldn't the picture show just a long blur of your car

    In Germany, we have this kind of cameras (both for speeding and at traffic lights) for over a decade and unfortunately, they work pretty much as designed. Even in excess of 120 mph, the picture will be clear enough to identify your face.

    That said, the automated speeding control has inaccuracies in the single-digit percent level, especially when the radar device wasn't properly aligned with the lanes, as the ADAC (German version of AAA) found out.

    And at least in Germany, it is illegal to muck with your number plates in order to avoid being identified. If the police catches you, you will be screwed. Seriously.

    The best way to avoid being photographed is, of course, to stick with the speed limit. (Which IMHO is easier in Germany than for example in Illinois with its suppressive speed limits.)

    And this is my favorite traffic sign :-)

    (The sign invalidates speed limit, interdiction of overtaking etc. Best viewed on the Autobahn!)

    --
    --- The light at the end of the tunnel is probably a burning truck.
  5. Re:/. Knee Jerking by cmorriss · · Score: 5, Informative
    Obviously you didn't read the detailed investigation that clearly presented a mountain of evidence against your arguments for cameras at red lights. Here's summary, but I suggest you read the whole thing.

    (3) The cameras are nothing more than a money making scheme.

    The article pretty much proves this point through unambiguous data. The cameras are not placed at the most accident prone red lights. Just to drive this point home, MOST of the worst accident lights in the cities with red light cameras were not chosen for the location of the cameras. They're placed at the intersections with the shortest yellow lights and most volume. Many of the lights they're placed at don't have any accident problems at all!

    Most importantly, the reason these cameras are there is to reduce accidents. Is it working? NO!!! Read the article. All CREDIBLE studies done on this have conlcuded that the cameras at least do nothing and often increase accidents. Mainly rear end accidents because people slam on their brakes to avoid getting a ticket. In fact, at many of these intersections, the rear end accidents have doubled or more.

    Intuition says these cameras should help save lives, but the statistics don't lie. This red light camera business is simply a Bad Thing in its current form. Maybe red light cameras could be used in certain places, in certain ways for good, but that's not what's going on now.

    --
    10 minutes working on a sig. What a waste.