Slashdot Mirror
NYC Mayor Wants Traffic Camera On Every Corner
Mr_Blank writes "New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has made it clear that he wants to see more traffic light cameras in the Big Apple, saying that he'd have the devices on every street corner if possible. According to The New York Daily News, the city brought in $52 million in fines generated by red light cameras last year alone. Bloomberg doesn't just want a jump in the number of cameras, however. He also wants to publish the names of those who blow through the stop lights in local papers to help shame wrongdoers into changing their ways. What's more, the mayor wants to look into the possibility of adding speed cameras to the mix. Big brother is coming to NYC."
Is this really necessary?
Car insurance companies harvesting the names of people who blow through red lights from the newspaper.
I'd love to see THIS law put to a direct vote. Of course it won't be, and Bloomberg will probably get booted out next opportunity, but the cameras would of course still stay.
It's all in pursuit of another revenue stream. New York City is full of this kind of nickel-and-diming. Check out this parking ticket scam on truck drivers.
but not LA/Socal? They're actually tearing them down in LA (at the police commission's request, amazingly) after realizing that yellow light time adjustments help as well: "My main objection to this whole thing is that I believe the same safety can be achieved by signal timing changes," Councilman Paul Koretz said. "I believe DOT has been pretty resistant to this concept. In budget committee, we found that DOT was not planning on immediately implementing the measure that the council had passed twelve to nothing to change the signal timing on all the signalized intersections [with cameras], plus the additional ones that were identified as more dangerous.... DOT claims it complies with the MUTCD, but the times in the manual are minimums." The same thing also appears to be happening in Houston as well. Does NYC know something the other cities don't? From what googling I've done, red light camera making firms are reporting major drops in revenues. What makes NYC different?
Publishing a persons name in the paper does not seem like a good deterrent. We all run red lights from time to time, almost every time I awaiting to make a left turn I end up violating the red light rule. There would be no space in the papers left to report the news.
If he wants to be able to track everyone, then I suppose he wouldn't have a problem with the public knowing what he is doing at all times either right?
I'm struggling to grasp how these traffic control cameras catch anyone. They are marked with signs that say "Photo-radar in 500 yards" or "This intersection patrolled with Red Light cameras". You can speed and run red lights all you want but good glory when there is a sign that indicates which intersections are actually watched, why can you... stop or slow down? I go flying down the freeway with everyone else and when I see the sign I move right and slow down and people still blow past me like I'm standing still and then bitch up a storm when they get a ticket. Is it really that hard to stop at red lights and not speed?
I do realize there are a few false positives, like stopping in an intersection for emergency vehicles or malfunctioning equipment but not $52 million worth.
Personally, I'd love it if governements found a way to tax only those who break the law in some way or another. Would leave me greatly financially happier.
If bloomberg really wants these cameras to stop speeding, red light jumping etc. then fine. My thought is that he wants to use them as a direct took for law enforcement to "get their men". Once every single intersection is cam-mined, it takes a very small investment in facial recognition software to track your citizens.
Much easier than mandating that people swipe a locating-card whenever they cross a street.
Light watch you!
Red light running morons kill people.
And traffic camera's usually cause more accidents cause everyone does a break stand 1 microsecond after it turns yellow
well they trigger on right on red, just over the line, short yellow and other BS.
They turned out to cost more than they brought in. People aren't as willing to run the light when they know they're being watched. It's the same reason the highway patrol cops hide in the ditch. Visibility is a deterrent. Invisibility is a money-maker.
well they trigger on right on red,
Which, as it turns out, is an illegal thing to do in New York City.
Palm trees and 8
...wasn't about having cameras everywhere. Go back and read it again until you get the point of the book.
...just hire more cops for traffic patrol? more people with income and no big brother concerns.
i really prefer the idea of spike strips that pop up when you run the light. nothing like instant gratification!
No incumbents, not no where, not no how.
Vote them out every term.
IF and only if no one under any circumstances is exempt from name publishing. And police cars are subject to the same when their lights are not on and are not responding to emergencies.
But that's not going to happen.
Better link to the actual source, the sometimes-sketchy New York Daily News:
http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2011/08/22/2011-08-22_mayor_bloomberg_pushes_for_traffic_light_cameras_on_every_corner.html
We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
i bet sales of BB/pellet guns and paintball guns increase exponentially
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
Harsh punishments used as a deterrent don't work.
What does work as a deterrent?
Knowing with certainty that one will be caught.
If the goal of the camera is to make money .. forget it .. as soon as people know they'll get caught, that revenue stream is gone. .. this is a brilliant plan. The newspapers should have big bold headlines reading
If the goal of the camera is to improve traffic safety
"TRAFFIC CAMERA, 100% CONVICTION RATE STILL STANDS"
While camera equipment is getting cheaper, I wonder what it would cost the police department to have the newspapers run the names or pictures or whatever of the red stop runnies.
In this day of people wanting to be famous for anything, i would think getting your name in the paper would be a good start.
Be seeing you...
What happens if a police officer is recorded? Wouldn't this constitute wiretapping? Oh nevermind, the "evidence" would come up missing.
Why on earth would people who live in NYC drive cars?
DRM: Terminator crops for your mind!
Interesting Houston has been going through traffic camera limbo, first they voted to have them, then not have them, then have them again because of some contract and now finally the city has decided to break the contract and repeal the ordinance that allowed them in the first place. So all the traffic cameras that are up are going to be turned off and to get them back on again or install any new ones the mayor and the city council will have to pass a new ordinance which likely won't happen any time soon. It's been a surprisingly big issue locally.
My father recently got a 'fine' for not coming to a full stop on a red when he was going to make a right trun he slowed down stopped and then made the turn but the camera decided no it wasn't kosher he didn't come to a 100% complete stop for the required amount of time so he got a fine. All they could do was fine him 75 bucks and say he couldn't renew his registration till he did it. Turns out you can renew online and bypass any such thing so that's what he did and he still hasn't payed the silly fine.
Bloomberg's development is entirely predictable if one knows European history. He started out believing in government improving the lives of the "populace" by forcing it to eat right (his campaigns against canned soups, sodas, etc.), to buy into government health care (his first hypothesis regarding the Times Square bomber was "maybe someone unhappy with the health care bill", which is very telling of what was on his mind as to the most credible terror threat his city faces), to give up means of "violent" self-defence (his "mayors against illegal guns" initiative, which was very obviously meant to make guns extremely expensive by suing the manufacturers; makes as much sense as fighting malware by making SDKs expensive and totally registered). So now he goes straight on to forcing the messy and ungrateful masses to behave through total surveillance and collective shaming. Hurray for technology - poor KGB and STASI had to recruit a crapload of informants to achieve the same goal.
This is EXACTLY how totalitarian groups like Bolsheviks and Fascists got that way, from their elitist but well-wishing Socialist beginnings and the idea that progress could be forced on people for everyone's benefit. The XXth century produced nothing scarier than a frustrated progressive.
Bring back the pillories. Ignore the past 300 years of attempts to make civilization actually civilized. Get medieval on them. Give'em the rack! Lord Mayor Bloomberg of The New York demandeth order! Burn the heretics!
And in every car, home and business.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Seriously, at very least, this pretty much assures Bloomberg's re-election, as who could compete with an incumbent financed by every traffic camera maker in the world?
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Yes, we can tax the city for being irresponsible. Don't shop in those cities that use and abuse red light cameras. Boycott. That's what I do. I checked Plano TX, and they cheat. They claim that for a 40 mph speed zone, their yellow lasts 4 seconds. It does not. It lasts 3.9 seconds. Yes, they do bust people for violations of less than 1 second, so, yes, 1/10th of a second matters. In any case, the old rule of thumb of 1 second per 10 mph is known to be too short, so even if they followed their own standard, it wouldn't be good enough. If enough people boycott, the fall in sales tax revenue will more than offset what they make with these cameras.
These cameras aren't about saftey, they're all about the money. Everyone ought to realize that. The biggest safety improvement is making certain that the yellow light is long enough. If the city makes sure the lights aren't rigged to create violations, by for instance making the duration of the yellow unreasonably short, if they don't split hairs and bust people for missing the light by half a second, if it doesn't actually make safety worse by inducing more rear end collisions, if the intersection isn't negliglently designed and timed with ureasonably long reds that goad people into pushing the limits of the yellows, then maybe I could go along with the idea. But if they do all that, actually do a good job of designing the intersection, what tends to happen is that cities abandon the red light cameras because they don't generate enough revenue. We don't have much in the way of standards for how long a yellow light should last. Last time a standard of sorts was made was 1976, and it has considerable slop in it. This is actually quite deliberate. With no good standard, who can say how short a yellow is too short?
Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
Not surprisingly, the comments on this item are full of unwarranted panic and claims of Big Brother coming to a corner near you. I live in Manhattan, and I would welcome speed cameras and traffic light cameras. These are cameras intended to catch people who are violating traffic law, which makes them an enormous hazard on the crowded streets of the city. Cycling in NYC is basically running the gauntlet (fortunately, Central Park is a bit of a haven for cyclists and pedestrians), and reckless drivers are a hazard every day on the streets as a pedestrian. I really think that some deterrence would be an excellent thing for Manhattan and would encourage people to drive much more safely. I'd say they should go so far as to do the same thing for cyclists who disobey the law, as well.
I'd like to see cameras installed in all elected officials offices.
Sometimes the light at the end of the tunnel is the headlight of an oncoming train.
52 million in fines, 520 million in expenses, 1.5 billion in insurance claims.
Yeah - good idea dumbass
The systems rely on registered owner data to serve tickets. Wrap your car in an LLC and if the ticket goes to collections (Even IF you are served) the collection company has no recourse. It's a $50 get out of all traffic harassment free card. ALSO: If you register your car out-of-state and your home state doesn't have photo enforcement laws you can completely ignore the ticket on the grounds of the state-to-state ticketing reciprocity arrangements.
Redflex executives deserve nothing less than a Bullet in their heads. They make money by increasing traffic accident injuries and call their bullshit technology a safety enhancement.
This should help make our guests from London feel right at home.
What color should a red light camera be triggered on? Mauve? Chartreuse?
You have a point that running into a red intersection just a split second after it turned red (let's call that a "cold red") is not actually as dangerous as flat-out bolting through a red light when it's already green for the other stream of traffic ("hot red").
The infraction has actual degrees of severity.
But bolting through a hot red should be grounds for a length driving suspension and a $1000 fine.
In other words, if the red light camera system were to take into account the severity of the infraction, the penalties would become more severe, not more reduced.
What for? There isn't a single traffic law that's enforced in the city. Wrong way on a one-way? Wrong way on a two-way? Blocking an intersection? Holding down your horn? Double parking? Blocking traffic? Driving on the sidewalk? Driving in two lanes at once? Turning while not in the turn lane? They don't enforce anything and the drivers are horrible. What would they do with cameras, sell admission to watch the insanity?
If they don't intentionally change the timings to create more people "running reds" because there's no longer any such thing as yellow, then calling out people who do it sounds like a good idea. [Insert raucous laughter here at the idea they won't intentionally shrink yellow to zero]
I'm a bit touchy because yesterday, while I was riding my bike across the street [after waiting for green], I saw this car coming up and not stopping. I had time to gently stop, look up, confirm I had green and he had red, before he blew through the red at least 10mph above the speed limit. I fully support that kind of motherfucker getting ticketed, shamed, sent to remedial driving school, and if equipment permits being air-horned as he passes.
In every city where these cams were installed, the duration of the yellow light was reduced shortly thereafter.
This is because a shorter yellow means more people run the light and get ticketed. Of course, this also makes the intersection more dangerous, since people going the speed limit will have to slam on their brakes the instant the yellow light comes on.
And, for some reason, the people put up with this.
A few years ago I received a red light camera citation from New York. Only problem, I have never driven through this state and the car doesn't match mine. They determined my guilt from a blurry and crooked photograph of the plate. Multiple attempts to notify them weren't successful. They ignored my multiple notices. There is a Judgement now and on my record and I would love to sue their ass. Only if I wasn't living in Florida the whole time. Any suggestions?
New York City Mayor Does NotvWant to Get Re-elected.
NYC Mayor plans to reduce police staff by hundreds effectively eliminating the traffic enforcement division due to the labor saving devices. Oh wait, this just in... he will be using the new revenue to hire more police.
In every other line of business, people would lose jobs from this, but not in government. They spend tax dollars to contract with vendors on these devices. Then collect fines from the public. Then hire more police. Then the revenue drops shortly after deploying these devices as it has in every other jurisdiction that deployed these, new hires are unsustainable, they scream "Won't somebody think of the public safety!?!?!" and then rob some other government agencies expense accounts or raise taxes.
In the end the tax payer gets raped 3 ways to Sunday.
Nope. Studies have shown that red light cameras increase crashes.
Unfortunately, when opinion and reality conflict, most people choose their opinion over reality. http://www.motorists.org/red-light-cameras/
Learn to love Alaska
Okay, that has privacy problems. Why don't they just let us shoot at asshole drivers who burn through red lights? If they think they're so special that they're above the laws and need to get to their "super important" hair appointment or whatever after they failed to plan properly enough to allow enough travel time, maybe a few bullets in their tires and windows would convince them to leave early. In fact, just put a bounty on assholes and pay people who disable their vehicles. That's basically the same thing, just more fun.
Big brother is already THERE. There's cops everywhere. They demand (and have gotten) the power to arbitrarily search anyone entering the city, or using the subway. Their enforcement of the law is, of course, haphazard and largely unjust, but there's no shortage of enforcers.
This guy must be George Orwell's number one fan bringing Orwellian concepts to real life... a dream come true. George Orwell was an AHole and his followers are super AHoles.
I think this decision has more to do with this incident:
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/australian-girl-dead-six-injured-in-horrific-two-vehicle-crash-in-new-york/story-e6frea6u-1226111170013
A few key quotes from the story:
He said a voice from the van asked: "Would you please help my babies?"
"She was just lying to the side, her little head bleeding," Mr Jaimes told the New York Daily News.
"The father was hugging the girl. The brother went to hug her, too. The mother was screaming, devastated."
"It appears the Nissan Sentra went through a red light at an intersection and struck the van," NYPD officer James Duffy said.
If you are not doing anything wrong you have nothing to worry about. If your a dangerous driver then tough luck. It might diminish the number of injuries and deaths.
Do you really think *that* much effort is put into the system to prevent crashes? The reason is stated in the summary. It's about the money. And once there is a reduction in revenue from people driving more safely, the cameras will either be repurposed, or new laws will be put into place that can use the cameras to create more revenue. Laws like "no right turn on red" at every stoplight because it confuses the cameras, so now every time a camera takes a photo, it really is because of an infraction, and maybe any license plate in the photo gets the fine (unless you bother fighting it in court).
What is this paper thing you speak of? Is it anything like cnn.com?
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Or at least it would not be if people did not keep going through a RED light. I am getting SICK and TIRED of people going through a red, through stops, accelerating to speed way past the speed limit , ignoring my fucking right of passage, and then crying they got a fine. Respect the FUCKING law and you won't get a fine. See how easy it was ? This is not about big brother, this is about fucking moron thinking they can get away with their way of badly driving. As for the big brother accusation : you realize that those red light camera (at least for the system here around) only save data when a vehicule go past the red light ? Those are usually not *permanent* camera, just traffic violation camera. Same for speed trap actually which do not permanentely film, only when a speeding car is detected.
And don't get me to LAUGH. 52 million USD per year , is about 520.000 traffic violation at maximum (http://newyork.drivinguniversity.com/red-light-cameras/fines-and-penalties-for-running-a-red-light/ $100-300 for the first offense $200-$500 for the second offense in 18 months $500-$1000 for the third offense in 18 months) and that is very cvonservative. That's about in average 1500 red light per day if everybody are first offender. But wanna bet there are multiple offender in this ?
If you want to complain, complain about your fellow idiot car/truck driving fellows. Not about the law enforcement/city which has the duty to squash the antics of those moron in engine vehicule.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Not every action taken by the government is a step towards "1984." Public shaming is pretty questionable, but installing cameras to catch /completely public actions/ that routinely /kill people/ is not some violation of sacred rights. They're not installed in your walls, they're installed in the street, where everyone can see everything that happens anyway. Capturing public data is not "Big Brother."
Actually, they've shown that partial red light camera coverage causes accidents. Putting cameras at all intersections may or may not increase crashes as much, as very few people will be speeding inside the coverage area.
Unless, of course, the city tweaks the yellows so that even if you're under the speed limit, there isn't enough time to stop safely. Not like they haven't done it before.
So our closeted gay mayor, who gave himself a third term, has decided to spend millions in tax dollars to fine the tax payers who pay those taxes?
It just seems like a shitty investment and a bad idea... not to mention a huge fucking pain in the ass.
Bloomberg is a fucking moron. He sucks cock, the whole city knows it. Democrats hate him. Trust me
We can't afford to run them anymore... and they keep getting burned by pissed off drivers anyway :D, Buy our old ones... then it wont be such a waste of money when you eventually get rid of them after realising they are the most expensive and least effective measure of traffic safety.
New Yorkers like to brag about themselves, but apparently it's just talk with no basis in reality. Seriously, how stupid do you have to be to continue re-electing Bloomberg. Sheesh.
re-read it..
they trigger on "right on red" aka they take pictures of people taking a right on a red light which in most places is legal as long as you first come to a stop for the red light
NYC might be different but that was the intent of his comment.
'...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
NPR has been running interviews concerning NYPD's climbing into bed with the CIA post-9/11. People who live in New York City accept a certain level of inconvenience just to live there, but NYC is now definitely the poster child for Big Brother in America. I can't say that I'm really surprised after everyone sat back and let Homeland Security and the Patriot Act become reality. What I'm really wondering though, is what has Barack Obama so frightened that he won't do anything about it.
One wonders what the Field of View and other technical details on these cameras would be. That is to say, how much, collectively, of the city streets would these be able to cover above and beyond the license plate of an alleged offender? Would they be inter-networked? To the citizenry, it seems like folly, but to governments, broad data collection rarely does seem like folly. I worry about the details though, you know, where "The Devil" rents a condo...
If cities and other governments want to increase income from fines, they should enforce litter laws. In Florida, the fines are between $50 and $500. The lower threshold for the fine is higher in Oklahoma. I see plenty of littering, especially stuff flying out of the beds of pickup trucks. No special equipment needed, just the dashboard-mounted camera that is already in place will provide the evidence.
"To stop the terrorists."
The ones in Redmond, WA don't trigger for that if you stop... but they did give me a warning once for not coming to a complete stop first. The speed I was going?
0.012 mph
Yes, technically illegal, but I had thought I had come to a complete stop. The precision they have is beyond what a human does.
Bloomy already has some red-light cameras installed, and where he has them now, the city has altered the timing of the lights to optimize revenue, not safety. These lights change much faster than other lights, going from green to red in about 1 second, not enough warning time for a driver going down the West Side Highway (aka West Street), and they are out of sync with the lights before and after them. This is entrapment at its worst, intentionally causing a dangerous situation for driver and pedestrian alike, and going after drivers wallets not only through high fines, but by raising their insurance rates through the roof. This man has done more to destroy my beloved city than Robert Moses on speed.
And studies have shown that red light cameras *decrease* crashes.
http://www.transalt.org/files/newsroom/reports/slowingspeeds.html
Really? In my city, there was a slight increase in total crashes in the first year (but a significant decrease in serious collisions - the kind with expensive damage, injury, and/or death). The second year, major crashes continued to drop, and minor crashes were back below pre-camera levels. The local media only reported on the "increase in total crashes" the first year (despite being given a clear explanation about the significant drop in serious crashes), and made no mention of the data after the second year.
LOL. The link to such a blatantly partisan website is to prove this statement correct, right?
What bullets were made for.
I can't tell if you're being serious or sarcastic. While I wouldn't advocate bringing back the physical punishments, I think the social punishments would go a long way to getting people to think before acting. Post it where their friends will see it, on facebook or google+. Stick a sign in their yard. Publishing it in the newspaper may work, but there are a lot of people that don't read newspapers. However, before you do, make sure the facts are right and you have the right person's facebook account.
Edward Burr
Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having a peeing section in a swimming pool.
He wants to make sure that the peons leave Manhattan each evening. Can't have them around in his playground, unless they are the hired help. Take a guess how many cameras will be stolen or destroyed by the first year.
Maybe New York City should consider emulating what London and Stockholm have done, which is charge an extra fee to drive through the city during business hours. Something exorbitant enough that it will actually affect behavior, reduce traffic congestion and pollution, and actually improve the environment there. Not to mention the number of idling and double-parked vehicles. Vehicle idling should be made illegal too, even though it would be difficult to enforce.
Until our personal vehicles stop putting out invisible soot, the fewer the better!
-- thinkyhead software and media
If I hadn't given a cite, I'd have a bunch if pricks demanding [citation needed]. Instead I get pricks complaining that the cite doesn't agree with their incorrect opinions.
Learn to love Alaska
Wouldn't it be great if the revenue from the cameras was used to create a new traffic system that creates better drivability in the city, instead of relying on stoplight timers, which doesn't work? They could create traffic corridors in the city that are directional and don't stop, etc.
Currently hooked on AMP
There already is no 'right on red' in NYC, except for a handful of places. Literally a handful.
Wouldn't it be great if the revenue from the cameras was used to create a new traffic system that creates better drivability in the city
Better drivability would reduce the revenue from the stoplight cameras. It would be great, but so would a pony.
When I walk to work every day in NYC there are 4 traffic cops that help me cross ONE intersection on the West Side Highway. Why are they there? Two reasons:
1. The drivers are horrible and have absolutely no regard for traffic laws.
2. The pedestrians are pretty bad too and run across the road any time then can.
Why? Because there is no penalty. The traffic cops can't write tickets, the real cops don't care, so nobody else cares either. So if we install red light cameras not only is there a penalty, but the city doesn't have to pay people to help grown men and women cross the street.
Don't like red light cameras? SOLUTION: Stop running red lights.
There already is no 'right on red' in NYC, except for a handful of places.
I'm sure they could think up something even worse, like using them for pedestrian jaywalking fines or tracking arab americans.
Literally a handful.
While I thank you for the correction, I can't pass up a chance to focus on the use of "literally". I can imagine a literal handful of jellybeans, but a handful of intersections escapes my grasp (figuratively).
There, that was easy.
Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nunc