Red-Light Camera Ticket Revenue and Short Yellows

NicknamesAreStupid writes "A Fort Meyers news station reports a nerdy husband getting his wife out of a red-light camera ticket by proving the light was set with too short of a yellow. Then he goes out and proves that nearly 90% of the lights are set an average of about 20% too short. Is this a local incident, or have local governments nationwide found a new revenue source? What puzzles me is how a single picture can tell if you ran a light. If you are in the intersection before the light turns red, you have not run it, even if it takes a little while to clear it (say to yield to an unexpected obstacle). Wouldn't you need two pictures — one just before the light went red showing you are not in the intersection, and another after the light went red showing you in the intersection?"

Comments

Re:if you're in the intersection and it's red

[Anonymous Coward]

if you're in the intersection and it's red you're doing it wrong.

Unless the light turns red before it's supposed to, which is the basis of the story.

Re:-1 False Assumption

[0123456]

Anyone paying attention and driving an appropriate speed for traffic conditions will be able to stop before the intersection for a red light -- assuming, of course, that the yellow light is of proper duration

Back in the real world, various cities have been shown to have reduced yellow light duration in order to increase fine revenues. It's hardly rocket science for a city that's low on cash. There were several newspaper articles about this in one city (DC, I think) a few years back.

And, back in the real world, the only method I'm aware of which has been proven to reduce collision at stop lights is to increase the duration of the yellow; red light cameras merely result in more rear-end collisions as people slam on the brakes to avoid a ticket. While you can argue that's better than being hit from the side as someone runs the light, if you actually want to reduce accidents rather than rake in the fines, it would be much better if cities just increased the duration of the yellow.

Re:Red light cameras in St. Louis, Missouri

[Game_Ender]

But in this case you are just using the legal system in the worst possible way: To screw someone out of a legitimate outcome. If you were fighting an illegal ticket, or something the company legitimately did wrong it would make more sense.

Re:hay kdawson

[boarder8925]

I'm pretty sure that articles labeled Your Rights Online are for discussing people's rights in an online format. If the articles were about rights on the internet, then the category would probably/hopefully be called Your Online Rights.

Re:-1 False Assumption

[Red Flayer]

Ever been pulling a trailer during some rain and had the light turn yellow when you're 50' from the crosswalk? Good luck stopping in time. At 30 mph you're covering ~45 feet per second.

What are you doing pulling a trailer at 30 mph in the rain in a town with crosswalks? Why aren't you driving at a safe stopping speed in those conditions?

Re:Red light cameras in St. Louis, Missouri

[ChaosDiscord]

The city is using the camera not for safety, but for profit. The third party law enforcement doesn't give a rats ass about safety, just the profit. Fuck 'em. If you can weasel out of it, more power to you!

Re:Red light cameras in St. Louis, Missouri

[Angst Badger]

But in this case you are just using the legal system in the worst possible way: To screw someone out of a legitimate outcome.

New to the legal system, are we?

But yeah, he should pay the ticket. It's not like he got snared by a rigged light, as happens to a lot of people. He made an illegal right turn. End of story.

Re:Red light cameras in St. Louis, Missouri

[navyjeff]

Why not just pay it, considering you actually broke the law?

Because a private company is not law enforcement. There is no reason you should pay a corporation or private party for a perceived criminal, civil or traffic law infraction without it going through a government entity. To do otherwise is to invite fascism.

Re:-1 False Assumption

[Spacepup]

"Why does this seem like guilt is assumed unless innocence is proven? Why can't they simply check the lights and rescind the tickets?"

A better question is why are we letting our letting our local government's treat it's citizens this way?
A private, for profit company should never issue traffic fines, officer reviewed or not. There is far too much room for abuse. The government should not look upon criminal penalties as a revenue system lest it turn all it's citizens into criminals.
Governments who treat the people as enemies of the state may find themselves the enemies of the people.