Slashdot Mirror
Chicago Red Light Cameras Issue Thousands of Bogus Tickets
mpicpp points out a report in the Chicago Tribune saying that thousands of the city's drivers have been wrongfully ticketed for red light violations because of "faulty equipment, human tinkering, or both." The Tribune's investigation uncovered the bogus tickets by analyzing the data from over 4 million tickets issued in the past seven years.
Cameras that for years generated just a few tickets daily suddenly caught dozens of drivers a day. One camera near the United Center rocketed from generating one ticket per day to 56 per day for a two-week period last summer before mysteriously dropping back to normal. Tickets for so-called rolling right turns on red shot up during some of the most dramatic spikes, suggesting an unannounced change in enforcement. One North Side camera generated only a dozen tickets for rolling rights out of 100 total tickets in the entire second half of 2011. Then, over a 12-day spike, it spewed 563 tickets — 560 of them for rolling rights. Many of the spikes were marked by periods immediately before or after when no tickets were issued — downtimes suggesting human intervention that should have been documented. City officials said they cannot explain the absence of such records.
That's why there are three. Unfortunately that doesn't seem to be enough.
1,000 out of 4,000,000 tickets makes a 0.025% error rate. That's a perfectly acceptable margin of error.
This is clearly a case for Unsolved Mysteries and ranks right up there with Yetis and UFOs.
English language has rules, such as capitalization of the first letter in a sentence. FOLLOW THE RULES, BOOTLICK!
So log the workorder, then repair the system, then close the workorder. Just like in the municipal code manuals.
:)
You, uh, didn't even make it through the summary, did you?
But hey, you got 1st p, so, I guess that counts for something.
A few weeks ago the one right by superdawg was in a endless flashing mode
If it were only as simple as that. Invariably red light cameras lead to officials treating it as a revenue stream and trying various ways to "maximize" that revenue.
6 Cities That Were Caught Shortening Yellow Light Times For Profit
http://blog.motorists.org/6-cities-that-were-caught-shortening-yellow-light-times-for-profit/
City’s ‘gotcha’ traffic cameras use short yellow lights to increase ticket revenue
http://nypost.com/2012/10/08/citys-gotcha-traffic-cameras-use-short-yellow-lights-to-increase-ticket-revenue-study/
Florida Officials Shortened Yellow-Light Times to Increase Violations
http://archive.wtsp.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=316418
They should just say that they'd all been emailed, and that the emails somehow were mysteriously lost. And all the backups.
I happen to know the President himself will vouch for that one.
-Styopa
Couldn't even finish reading the first sentence?
Except when turning right.
Authoritarianism is far more common than people realize... but then people don't know what it really is to begin with. It's not simply Nazi and then everything else.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
The article does not mention anything about the video of the violation which can be used to verify proper operation of the equipment. The video shows the intersection, your car and the intersection lights -- very hard to dispute. Perhaps the peaks were caused by the camera lens being cleaned?
Seems to me like the investigative reporter is riding a wave of public sentiment instead of thorough journalism.
I don't know about your state, but in the two I've lived in, both allowed right turns on red. You need to stop first, and if you can turn without disrupting traffic, you may do so. The same applies to left turns on red, if you're turning from a one-way street onto another one-way street.
This is retarded for several reasons, the first and most obvious being your suggestion is illegal at a red LIGHT.
Except when turning right.
Except when in NYC (or other places that make right turns on red illegal city wide, and all without posting any signs to that effect)
1,000 out of 4,000,000 tickets makes a 0.025% error rate. That's a perfectly acceptable margin of error.
Bullshit. That's a HORRIBLE error rate. Remember that whole "innocent until proven guilty" part of the Constitution? If they are going to be used at all these things have to be tuned to have a false positive error rate of close to zero. If that means a higher false negative rate (people who ran the light but didn't get a ticket) then so be it. That's the way it is supposed to work in our justice system. If that means foregoing some traffic penalty revenue then so be it. Better that a hundred people get off without penalty than one person be falsely convicted.
That depends entirely on the state and municipality.
Most states allow you to turn on red when it is clear, but some don't. A few don't even require you to stop when making a right turn, if the way is clear. Conversely, municipalities in states that allow a turn on red can disallow it by posting notice at the intersection. And finally, a scant few states don't allow turns on red at all and are happy to ticket drivers for doing so.
Typically, people do 99% of their driving locally (or at least in their home state), so they know the relevant law. If not, err on the side of caution.
Innocent people getting executed is perfectly acceptable to me as long as the error rates are low.
Then you are a pathetic cowardly inhumane sociopath who I pray never is put on a jury. I don't care if you support the death penalty or not but the notion that it is ever acceptable to execute an innocent person is just reprehensible. Of course for someone who talks so tough you apparently can't be bothered to post under your own name.
I know "the city" is pretty big, but I don't believe it's made it all the way to Chicago, yet.
The Quirkz Handbook of Self-Improvement for People Who Are Already Pretty Okay
Is there anything not corrupt about Chicago by this point? From crooked politicians like Obummer, allowing Asian carp into the Great Lakes, to bogus tickets.... Good god no wonder the rest of the world holds the USA in contempt with cities like that for examples...
Obviously you don't live in Chicago and have never driven on it's roads. But odd driving practices aside as a Chicago resident I have to say that I wouldn't be surprised at all to find out that the city was quietly adjusting the thresholds on intersections occasionally to make a quick buck. I mean it is Chicago we are talking about, the only city where the officials are more corrupt is probably Detroit and the corruption never stops at the top.
By appealing and not agreeing to "settle" with the prosecution — in fact, I did not even want to "talk to them" other than during a hearing and in judge's presence. This made it necessary for the actual officer, who (supposedly) reviewed the ticket before it was issued, to appear in court — which he didn't do. Maybe, I was just "lucky" at that and, maybe, Chicago would've allowed the prosecution to avoid presenting the officer for testimony, but...
The automatic cameras allow for issuing a massive number of tickets — because human police don't need to do much work. If more people appealed — thus necessitating the human policemen's presence in court for each such ticket, maybe, they wouldn't be such a valuable proposition for the local authorities.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Nobody is fooled by the name "red light camera" . The entire point of these things have always been generation of revenue by ticketing people for rolling right turns. They serve no credible public safety interest of any kind.
As always with these cameras. It's NOT about the law, what's legal, or enforcing the law.
It's about making a profit. A revenue stream. I'd say "first and foremost", but that implies there's another reason. And there just isn't. It's about extracting ever more money from the citizens through any means necessary. Even though Chicago's signing away 90% OF THE TICKET REVENUES TO THE CAMERA COMPANY!
And the cameras aren't set up "everywhere" to give uniform coverage.
They're set up in areas and in such a way as to maximize the APPEARANCE of a violation from the camera's perspective.
Basically these sorts of camera deals need to be illegal.
If the city isn't going to buy the systems outright and administer/enforce them itself, they shouldn't be allowed to go through a third party company who has a profit motive involved in what is otherwise a law enforcement issue. It's a total conflict of interests.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
It is time to accept that it has superheros among us and we need to welcome them with open arms, and stop accussing one another of having made mistakes. Show yourselves!
1. Get local government to outsource red light camera operations to you.
2. Set up contract including "per use" license.
3. Provide "maintenance" to red light camera 30 days before quarter end.
4. Profit!!
In many states it is also legal to turn left on red when turning from a one-way street to a one-way street.
Exactly. My first impression reading TFA is that the headline is wrong. It should read: "Red Light Cameras Issue Thousands of Bogus Tickets"
Although, put that way, it's probably a couple orders of magnitude higher.
(And yes, officials were caught shortening the yellows in our town as well. It appears to be standard practice when putting in red light cameras.)
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Yeah, if you look, you'll find that phrase is not found in the US Constitution.
No those exact words are not there but I refer you to the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh and Eight amendments, particularly the Fifth. Innocent until proven guilty is the shortened version of what they collectively say.
It's merely an inference (by the courts) that it exists as part of US jurisprudence.
It is nothing of the sort. Explain to me how "nor shall any person... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law" be anything other than different phrasing of innocent until proven guilty. (That's from the Fifth Amendment BTW)
So log the workorder, then repair the system, then close the workorder. Just like in the municipal code manuals.
You, uh, didn't even make it through the summary, did you? :)
But hey, you got 1st p, so, I guess that counts for something.
Aww, give Chicago a break.
They had a pen and a phone, and just did their job.
And if you like your ticket, you really will get to keep it.
The occasional error in the court system is perfectly acceptable to an orderly society.
It may be inevitable but it is NEVER acceptable. Only a sociopath would think otherwise.
It's worse in my town. they shortened the green light on busy cross streets along the main drag with the red light cameras. You are lucky to get two cars through now and if you are waiting for apposing traffic before turning left, you will be in the intersection when your light turns red. They did this right after the cameras went up.
Luckily, soon after the cameras went up, the state and a court said they couldn't be used pending a couple court cases over them. One judge already called it "criminal" in one of the cases and another called it racketeering so I think the state supreme court might not allow them either. The state (Ohio) is not banking on the courts, they are trying to pass legislation that would bar their use unless a cop was at the intersection witnessing the infraction.
One of the very first yellow light studies was conducted over Chillicothe Ohio's cams. I don't know if this is the original or not (I originally remember reading a PDF about it and from another site) but this explains a lot of the problem with short yellows.
http://www.shortyellowlights.c...
As much as I don't like these cameras, when you get a ticket in Chicago, and most of the suburbs I know of around here, you're provided w/ the means to actually watch your car commit the violation. I got a ticket for a rolling right turn on red last summer. You key your license and the citation number into a city website (google it, you'll find it) and you can watch an mpeg4 stream of your car passing through the intersection or turning on red or whatever - with a little curl magic you can download it as a keepsake.
Armed with the video, you should be able to appeal the ticket if you truly didn't commit the offense or if the camera went bonkers and ticketed everyone going through the intersection.
If it's a borderline case, most people don't bother with the hassle of appealing and just pay the fine...miss a day of work and sit in a traffic court for hours (and possibly pay court costs) or pay $100.
My observation around the Chicago area is that people are mostly just butthurt because they're getting ticketed for infractions that were lightly enforced before due to labor / manhour constraints of the police forces.
I mean it is Chicago we are talking about, the only city where the officials are more corrupt is probably Detroit
So you have never heard about New Orleans?
The city is filled with dirty crooks in office, always has been. Chicago is the place where not only does the dead vote, but they vote TWICE!
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
The article doesn't list the days in question.
There are certain days in the winter where there are icy conditions and cars slide through lights or rolling right turns for safety reasons. Of course, the cameras don't care.
Deserve the government they get.
If you allow municipalities to a) collect the fines and b) game the system be prepared for problems.
In BC it is mostly the opposite. Ticketing and cost of enforcement IS covered by the municipalities (who fund the police) but the fines go to the provincial government. So increased enforcement (which may be a good thing) will cost the municipality more. And if they are willing to fund that then good for them. But they won't increase their revenues. And in fact may increase their policing costs if the ticketing officers have to attend court more often to defend the tickets they write.
Gaming the system (short Yellow lights for example) will result in higher revenue to the province. But more complaints to the municipality. So mostly doesn't happen.
While the province can (to some extent) game the system by trying to introduce things like traffic cameras, in practice they are more sensitive overall to campaigns to complain about them. So they move slower with more political caution.
We also have a provincially mandated insurance (for which there are lots of pro's and con's...) One of the side effects is that intersections that are expensive (i.e. high number of accidents) to the Insurance company will get money flowing from there back to the municipality to improve it. E.g. better signals, barriers etc. The point is that money to improve safety may be less than paying out for accidents. They also will make suggestions back to the city engineering department WRT to things like signal timing which will help reduce accidents.
I live in NJ. Aside from that problem, I have a friend who was recently auto ticketed for running a red light. When he received the ticket in the mail he was notified of a website where he could see a video of the traffic violation. We looked at the video and it was clear that he went through the red light. That seems like a fairer way to issue automatic tickets. If it's clear in the video that you didn't do what you're accused of then it would be worth fighting the ticket. Of course, videos can be faked but perhaps someone can think of a way to make sure that doesn't happen. In my friends case, I doubt that the video was faked.
These automatic tickets are CIVIL fines instead of criminal. No one has to show up. If you don't pay they just send you to a collection agency.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
A few [states] don't even require you to stop when making a right turn, if the way is clear.
What states are those? I travel around the U.S. *a lot*, and I've never seen this... I'm guessing it's going to be something like Wyoming, North Dakota, etc. (I'm asking sincerely - I think at one time some of those states had no real "upper speed limit" - the law was written to the effect "can't travel faster than the conditions allow" or something like that..)
The primary witness in all this is software.
As such the software needs to be available for cross examination the same as
any other software. Perhaps not open source but clearly open and testable
interfaces.
Further any revision and change must be subject to audit. The obvious issue
is bogus citations because code did not operate as per specifications in the
law. All citations issued while the bogus code was "live" would then need
to be reviewed.
A contract service should not be able to adjust anything not specified in
the law.
With a robot the notion of enforcement priority makes no sense. i.e. allocation
of staff and resources can justify priorities but a machine should simply
operate against a specification and within tolerances that make sense.
Anything else would be a legislative action and not allowed or empowered by law.
Tolerances that make sense would include normal reaction time expectations (not average).
Tolerances need to include sane and honest error parameter stackups.
Tolerances need to be population sensitive.... some are kids some have gray hair.
Consider any regulation that uses the word average is a regulation that
begins with an assumption that 50% would fail. Further average is not
a sufficient statistical metric to do anything with.
Contractors and contracts that share revenue need to be open to audit and
need to have a legal presence and legal liability in the same venue that the citations
are to be issued. Fraud and abuse should incur greater penalty than those cited.
i.e. it is not OK to simply say "my bad, here is your ten bucks back" when abuse and
fraud are involved.
Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't. Mark Twain.
...not to mention the latest sudden blackdowns and police chases...
If anyone needs these cameras it is Ohio. Some the the worst drivers I have ever come across...
http://www.youtube.com/channel...
This is a sig. This is only a sig. Had this been an actual sig you would have been informed where to tune for more sigs.
Maybe this isn't true at the state level, but here in Clyde, NC, there is at least one intersection where a sign explicitly instructs you to ignore the traffic signal (red or otherwise) and "keep moving" if you're turning right. Most residents here would say that this is "in town" (on a highway service road, with a posted 45 MPH speed limit).
In Ohio, being in the intersection waiting to turn left when the light turns red appears to be legal. http://publicsafety.ohio.gov/links/hsy7607.pdf "One may advance into the intersection as a prelude to turning, provided that no other traffic control devices prohibit this action."
But, be careful of the safety lines. They DO NOT define the limits of an intersection. http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/4511
"Intersection" means: (1) The area embraced within the prolongation or connection of the lateral curb lines, or, if none, the lateral boundary lines of the roadways of two highways that join one another at, or approximately at, right angles, or the area within which vehicles traveling upon different highways that join at any other angle might come into conflict. The junction of an alley or driveway with a roadway or highway does not constitute an intersection unless the roadway or highway at the junction is controlled by a traffic control device.
BTW - IANAL
Lol, In the 90s, I made a road trip to California. When I got home, later, I recieved a "camera" ticket complete with a picture of my tag and a fine.
I took a picture of the correct amount of money and sent it back....
Probably got a warrant for my bad self in California now. How f**kin cool is that?
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
A red light camera is also capable for measuring acceleration or deceleration at the yellow light. This would verify perpetrator's intent for running a stop light.
Montana outlawed 'em entirely, because of how they just naturally lend themselves to this sort of corruption and setting the public up to fail (ie. short yellows practically forcing 'em to get ticketed). Bozeman was all set to have an exemption but then Redflex whined about how they couldn't make any money under the new rules, and the state legislature decided enough of that shit and nuked the exemption. So... no camera enforcement. :D
http://www.thenewspaper.com/ne...
http://www.thenewspaper.com/ne...
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
So are you Steve Barkley?
Thanks to the War on Drugs, it's easier to buy meth than it is to buy cold medicine!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
It's now federal, and uniformly legal in the U.S. unless the intersection is signed otherwise.
And as it happens, right-on-red-after-stop was a western innovation, allowed in most western states as much as 50 years ago. I remember it becoming legal in MT somewhere around 1970.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
I haven't run into that anywhere, but I do know about a nice new trend I'm seeing in Tennessee. A lot of intersections are now getting right-turn arrows. Just after the light in your direction of travel turns red, and the opposing lanes get their green left-turn arrows as normal, a new green right-turn arrow lights up for you at the same time. Really helps to alleviate congestion.
Thanks to the War on Drugs, it's easier to buy meth than it is to buy cold medicine!
And the article is specifically about Chicago which does allow them.
That's a winner!
Tell him what he's won, Johnny.
A NEW CAR! Not only that, but we'll fly you and a guest non-stop to beautiful Juarez, Mexico for Coedine Margarita's poolside at Juans Motor Hotel and Pizzaria, then on for a tour of the factory that makes Rice-a-Roni; The San Francisco treat! And; you can do it all with a 5 piece set of luggage from Samsonite! Considerations paid for by sponsors, family and employees of Joes Car Wash excluded,taxes apply in N.Y., R.I. and Maine, taxes due upon receipt,local and state laws may apply, but they have to wait their turn for an interview like everyone else.
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
Nope, but I probably was inspired by the same story.
Never heard another word about it, guess I was too many states away for them to bother with.
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
If he appeals and, for whatever reason, the judge decides he doesn't have to pay, they can't just hand it over to a collection agency. If the judge decided there is nothing to pay, there is nothing to pay, so there is nothing for the collection agency to collect.
So, a heavily indebted city has a rogue revenue generation mechanism that would take time and effort to fix? Yeah, we'll get right on that.
Under criminal law you have the right to face your accuser. Is the court supposed to bring in the red light camera for testimony? Sure you can request a hearing on the ticket but I meant no cops have to show up. You guys are thick.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
> If anyone needs these cameras it is Ohio. Some the the worst drivers I have ever come across...
Said everyone everywhere.
Seriously, I've lived in 15+ states and in each state there were people saying exactly the same thing as you
"City officials said they cannot explain the absence of such records."
probably already "recycled" the hard drives in question.