Slashdot Mirror
Florida DOT Cuts Yellow Light Delay Ignoring Federal Guidelines, Citations Soar
New submitter zlives writes in with news that Florida's DOT changed some language in their yellow light timing regulations, leading to a decrease in the yellow delay. Especially at lights with red light cameras. "From the article: 'Red light cameras generated more than $100 million in revenue last year in approximately 70 Florida communities, with 52.5 percent of the revenue going to the state. The rest is divided by cities, counties, and the camera companies. In 2013, the cameras are on pace to generate $120 million.' I wonder what the camera company cut is?"
At least one area has promised to undo the reduction now that they have been caught.
This has been proven to put the public at risk of property damage, of injury and of loss of life.
The people who made this decision need to be removed from office at the very least and potentially criminally prosecuted for endangerment [of a child].
There must be sufficient time for a fully loaded semi-trailer to react to the change, and safely come to a stop, or proceed through the intersection, from at least 5mph under to 5mph over the posted speed limit, in wet road conditions, or it's not safe. These cities are risking your safety to raise more money from bogus fines.
make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
The #1 thing you can do to reduce collisions in an intersection is lengthen the yellow. Go ask AAA, they've got plenty of data on it.
Shit like this, and this is not the first time it happens, proves that traffic cameras are 100% NOT about safety, they are about money.
Wont someone think of the kickbacks?
Doing this *endangers* the public. Switching from yellow to red too quickly for drivers to safely stop will end up causing accidents, either from slamming on their brakes or paying more attention to the light instead of the road. The point of the traffic lights is to regulate traffic flow and keep the public safe. Adjusting the time so that fewer drivers can safely stop and need to have lightning reflexes and be staring at the light instead of the road will lead to more accidents.
I smell a lawsuit brewing which will undo all the revenues. $120 million dollars? Well, now the lawyers for the next person to get run over at one of these modified lights can sue the government for on account of the timing adjustments to "increase revenue". And you just know some lawyers out there are going to advertise their services in these areas...
The trick is to prevent people thinking of this as revenue. It's indication of a problem. You don't want that indicator to go up. Perhaps state or federal law should pressure local governments to make that indicator go down.
San Diego (and several surrounding communities) recently discontinued it's red-light camera program, citing inflated fines to motorists with minimal payouts to the city, and and *increased* accident rate after installations of the cameras.
We also had the short-yellow problem several years ago when they were first installed, which was quicky fixed after public outcry.
Our new mayor is a jerk. But in this case, at least he is being a jerk to folks that deserve it.
Like any government agency, police departments don't exist with the main priority of protecting and serving. Their primarily purpose is to generate revenue.
Here's a better idea that wouldn't make as many people angry. Keep long yellows and remove the redlight detection. Instead, just have a camera. It takes pictures of every plate. Each hour it plays a lottery between the plates. Whoever's plate gets pulled out gets the $138 ticket.
Sounds a bit ridiculous, but the politicians would still be getting their kick backs from the manufacturers of the lottery system, the state would still be getting income without all the bad publicity of raising taxes, and drivers would be happy not crashing into the person that slams on their brakes to stop at the light the instant it turns yellow. It's a win for everyone
Brake hard, brake often. And if you are rear-ended at an Intersection in FL, remember that the State has hundreds of millions of dollars in the pot. Sue appropriately.
It does not matter if the intersections actually has a red light cameras, nor does it matter if the length of the yellow at that particular intersection has been decreased. It is the threat that counts.
No, their primary purpose is to assert the force of government.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
The people who made this decision need to be removed from office at the very least and potentially criminally prosecuted for endangerment [of a child].
I bet you that they have immunity of some sort. That is the problem
If people who make such decisions knew it could really bite them in the ass (as in fines and jail), they would think twice or thrice on these decisions.
This pisses me off so much. Research studies have shown that increasing amber delays is one of the best ways to reduce both fatal and non-fatal collisions at intersections.
These municipalities think that more red light camera revenue = more money = great and glorious government. They forget two things:
- Fines, cost of repairs, and insurance premiums eat away at their citizens' bank accounts. Less money = less spending = less sales taxes, and a lot of angry, pissed off citizens.
- It's not a zero-sum game within the closed system of citizens and the government. The vendors get a lot of those fines.
So the net result is a slower economy, tax revenue is not nearly as high as expected, and vendors line their pockets.
(I recently worked for years in the highway safety sector, and one of my colleagues, a former cop, did a research paper on this subject. He started the research with a high opinion of red light cameras, but found that red light cameras had no significant effect on fatalities while significantly increasing non-fatal collisions.)
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
The problem with that is in a lot of cases if you follow at a safe distance, somone will merge into your lane in between you.
I worked as a traffic accident investigator for a few years. Part of my job was figuring out the timing of traffic lights and if they were the cause of an accident. Shortening yellow lights kills people, old people and big trucks dont stop very fast. This is the Florida government killing people for money.
The really sad part is if they were really clever they would shorten the yellow 1/2 a second but keep the whole intersection red for a 1/2 a second. That way they could rip off Floridians without killing them.
AdFuel
Where do you live, rural Alaska? In many urban areas, if you do that you will in fact get someone merging into that space about every 5 seconds.
(I recently worked for years in the highway safety sector, and one of my colleagues, a former cop, did a research paper on this subject. He started the research with a high opinion of red light cameras, but found that red light cameras had no significant effect on fatalities while significantly increasing non-fatal collisions.)
I'll ask you since I'd like to know: I've heard that one of the most positive innovations for traffic lights is the inclusion of a "timer bar". A bar light along side the normal traffic signals indicates how long the single has until it changes. I've heard that the places it was tested vastly reduced the number of collisions and injuries. Is there any truth to that?
The "reason they haven't been implemented" is supposedly because they vastly reduce people running red lights while being significantly more expensive, and so vastly reduce red light camera revenue while raising operating costs. Having worked in a government office, I'm willing to believe that the "more expensive" portion alone was enough to make municipalities avoid them. I'm just curious if there's any truth to it.
The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
In my town, the walk/don't walk signs have a display that counts down the seconds left for the "walk" time. Then the red "don't walk" symbol pops up, and shortly after that the light turns yellow.
It's extremely helpful -- if I'm half a block away and the sign says 12 seconds left, I know I'm going to get through the light on green. If I see 2 seconds left, I know it'll be red and there's no point in doing anything other than coasting.
The signs we have look sort of like this (but without the glasses looking symbol on top): http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/tools_solve/ped_scdproj/webinar052809/las_vegas/images/image081.jpg
What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
Then move back to a safe distance again.
So what you didn't see because you are so totally oblivious to how traffic really works, is that your repeated braking/slowing to get back to a safe distance is causing huge traffic snarls for miles behind you as the effect of slight variations in speed is magnified massively in a ripple effect behind you. This is pissing everyone off, putting many drivers in a bad mood and everyone at greater risk of an accident.
Rather than making things safer, you have made everything much worse.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I don't think he was suggesting the baseball bat be used against the cameras...
If the masses can keep you down, you're not the Ubermensch.
If you just want to disable them, a can of spray paint is probably your best bet. But you'll still need a ladder and some time.
Two words: paintball gun
No ladder required, takes seconds and relatively quiet.
One of the things that has been missed in the progressive enlargement of government by both the left and right is that the constitution has not been updated.
At a general level, the constitution is an agreement on HOW the people agree to be government.
So for things like say police powers, we have pretty good laws on it. There are problems here and there, but the DISCUSSION is always around the limits.
We grant the police the power to enforce the law, but we impose various limits on them (need warrants, trails, juries...)
Yet, when the progressive mentality took over on both the left and right, they made the argument that the constitution held back what people wanted government to do. Whether true or not, it left a vacuum. Government took over power in new areas without any constraints on itself. In all the 'new' areas, government can basically do whatever it wants. The only recourse people have is the ballot box. This might work for big issues, but not so much for all the little issues that ultimately affect government.
Government have begun using regulations to control people's behavior to a large extent. Again, whether you agree with it or not is not important. What is important is what are the regulation ON government to make sure it is acting in the correct interest.
Here's an example of the kind of constraints on government to regulate it to help it acts correctly.
1. All fines shall go to a fund used solely to compensate victims of such activity. So all traffic fines go to traffic victims. This pretty much removes the incentive governments have to use fines as revenue. Heck, I don't even think fines should pay for the regulating agency.
I have a saying that goes like this: "If something is worth regulating, it is worth regulating via general taxation"
While not law in Sweden, Sweden has experimented with having a lottery for traffic fine revenue... again... a much better system of making sure the law is not being used for revenue and creates an incentive for drivers to follow the regulation. If you are not caught speeding, you are entered into a lottery to win the money collected by the fines.
But like I said, as the progressives on both the left and right moved towards expanding the power of government, they skipped any amendments to the constitution in favor of a living constitution, and thus skipped the process of setting any regulations on themselves in the new areas.
Worrying about the people who made such a decision is hardly an effective mechanism. Democracy has many such short comings. Part of the reason we have rights and regulations on governments and other such items, so that we are not simply at the mercy of elected politicians.
I'd be more worried about those that created the highway traffic act and other such rule books without any concern for regulating government itself.
I got a bullshit citation for bicycling on a sidewalk in Queens NYC to avoid getting hit by traffic and went to the Queensborough Criminal Court where they have traffic court and did what the poster above did.
I waited the entire day in court and declined all half price off deals and kept pleading not guilty to the judge since we all knew the cop wasn't going to show up to testify. Fucking uppity judge gave a postponement to the City prosecutor without giving me a chance to speak about my case that day and made me come back again in a few weeks. I had no chance to say anything or protest, was told come back in a few weeks.
Well I came back to see those fucks. Same bullshit again, half price deals and pressure to cop a plea deal to pay the fuck up at the casheer at the exit and go the fuck away. Continued to plead not guilty and at the end of the second day the fucking judge called me up, told me in my face that what I did was wrong and I was guilty but since the cop isn't here I am lucky to get away with it and dismissed my case.
All of this shit after me sitting on my ass in his kangaroo traffic court for 16 fucking hours that cost me then equivalent to $800 USD in lost wages for a $50 USD bicycle citation so I could avoid getting hit by a fucking truck while on my bicycle.
Saw lots of scams by them taking attendance over a bad microphone and PA system in the morning and after lunch. Saw a guy loose his case because his hearing wasn't good and he missed attendance and defaulted to guilty on his case for a no show with a bench warrant being issued while he was sitting in the back waiting the whole time. Hope the old guy said something before he left otherwise he'd be fucked by NYPD. Heard them lie that the plea deals won't go on their record or increase their insurance, it does both because it's a guilt plea.
Fuck Florida DOT yellow light shortening bastards as much as NYC injustice system. Not enough outrage and action anymore these days.
One thing that would be cheap and effective in my mind would be to take the yellow time multiplied by the speed limit, and paint a line on the road that distance away from the light. That would take some of the guesswork out of yellow lights. That is, if you are driving the speed limit and the light turns yellow - if you past the line you can proceed through the intersection, and if you are behind the line you need to stop. No having to make a quick judgment of your speed and your distance from the light and guessing of the length of the yellow. This would have a secondary benefit that once the line is in place, it would make it tougher for them to arbitrarily change the yellow light time because then they would have to send a crew out to repaint the line on the road.