Slashdot Mirror
Red-Light Camera Grace Period Goes From 0.1 To 0.3 Seconds, Chicago To Lose $17 Million (arstechnica.com)
The Chicago Department of Transportation announced a new policy earlier this week that will increase the "grace period" -- the time between when a traffic light turns red to when a ticket is automatically issued. The decision has been made to increase the time from 0.1 seconds to 0.3 seconds, following recommendations part of a recent study of its red-light cameras. Ars Technica reports: This will bring the Windy City in line with other American metropolises, including New York City and Philadelphia. In a statement, the city agency said that this increase would "maintain the safety benefits of the program while ensuring the program's fairness." On Tuesday, the Chicago Tribune reported that the city would lose $17 million in revenue this year alone as a result of the expanded grace period. Michael Claffey, a CDOT spokesman, confirmed that figure to Ars. "We want to emphasize that extending this enforcement threshold is not an invitation to drivers to try to beat the red light," CDOT Commissioner Rebekah Scheinfeld also said in the statement. "By accepting the recommendation of the academic team, we are giving the benefit of the doubt to well-intentioned drivers while remaining focused on the most reckless behaviors."
Did you hear?
Going faster through a red light means the camera won't get you!
Seems like any fines going to the department that makes them fines is a conflict of interest. These things should clearly be decided by direct democracy, at least how the money is spent, and should not go to their budgets by default.
They should scale the fine, eg: $25 for 0.2 seconds, $50 for 0.4 seconds, $100 for 1 second..
Maybe in the same way that a thief loses everything he's pocketed when he gets caught...
I hate when people use the word "lose" to mean "not anymore have the opportunity to gain as additional income (under certain additional conditions)". See also: "the machine that will utterly bankrupt the music industry" by Peter Sunde: https://boingboing.net/2015/12...
My first program:
Hell Segmentation fault
Before the government haters are triggered :
TEN 9/11's on the road EACH year in the US alone.
Why change the red light grace period? Red light is red light.
If you want to reduce accidents, increase the yellow period. People who push the limits of an extended yellow don't deserve grace. All this is going to do is now make people more comfortable running a little bit of red.
since that money stays with the drivers. Just like Media companies claiming billions lost from file sharing when in reality that money was spent on different market sectors and the gov probably made more off corporate taxes since small businesses can't get the same tax loopholes.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
Leave the cases within the grace period to actual cops who need to fulfill their daily harassment quota.
Should be zero. People waiting for the lights to change will have to wait another .03 secs.
The maybe best solution ever I've seen in Austria. Here is a quick comparison between US vs. Austrian traffic lights.
Basically, their lights flash green 5 times before they go to yellow, giving you ample time to know that the green period ends. Also, before switching to green, it shows red and yellow for about a second or two to give you an idea that you should put your car into gear and prepare to accelerate, thus improving the reaction time of people and improving the usage of the green phase.
All in all, a WAY better solution. Of course their law also says that there is ZERO grace period for entering with a red light. You have ample time to know it's going red. Actually, I don't even know whether there isn't already some kind of provision that you're supposed to not enter when it goes yellow.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Excuse me nice gentlemen. I don't mean to interrupt but, I've been searching news articles trying to find my cat. Have you seen my cat?
Seems to me that needing a grace period after the signal switches to red is an admission that the yellow isn't long enough to allow people to cross if they can't safely stop (i.e. without slamming on the brakes).
...that if I pass that white line before it turns red, really REALLY fast itll be OK.
A 'singular oddity' is an event that cannot be explained and only happens when you are alone.
Just cut short the yellow phase by half a second and you'll get more than enough compensation for allowing 0.2 seconds more of red. Maybe the traffic system can be electronically coupled to the city's bank account? It would make it easier to get a balanced budget at the end of the month.
For safety.
we are giving the benefit of the doubt to well-intentioned drivers while remaining focused on the most reckless behaviors.
No shot first and ask question later? Is this fake news?
So basically all the money the government has collected as fines and penalties is distributed evenly to all taxpayers. That money was collected as compensation for crimes against society, and this way it gets distributed back to society.
That's exactly how it works in other countries (e.g.: Switzerland).
Fines don't go to the department (e.g.: to the police)
Fines go to the public spending budget, so the country has more money to do things (in addition to the tax money), or more practically, gets less indebted to do the same things...
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
It's 2017 and we're still trying to figure out how to not kill each other on the roads. For all our achievements we're still just stupid apes.
You are sent a ticket, that is a "civil" ticket...no points. You are considered GUILTY unless you can PROVE you are wrong. Tell me how that is constitutional?
"I wanted to beat the light" isn't. "I know yellow means I should only enter if I can't stop, but I did it anyway." isn't. If you're in the intersection when the light turns red, you ran it. Just because you can't get away with it anymore doesn't mean your intentions were good.
If the problem is that drivers don't have enough time when driving the speed limit to safely slow to a stop when they see a yellow light, the solution is not to allow them some go-time when the light is red. The correct solution is to extend the length of time of the yellow light.
Yellow light does not mean speed up so you don't get stuck at a red light. Yellow light is an instruction to come to a steady stop before the intersection if speed and distance allow. This requires a light to be yellow for the appropriate length of time. Fix that (perhaps it already is), and let the ticketing commence. Some day drivers will recognize that ensuring that accelerating to make the light puts other people in danger, or at the very least, hits 'em in the wallet.
Support a few technologists in Washington.
Chicago has reason to rejoice, as it was found that by trimming the red light duration from 1.7 to 1.3 seconds it will lose only 17 million and not $29M as originally estimated.
Camera shutters will not be altered in any way, saving even more of the city's budget on any unnecessary upgrades.
WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
they need to install red light cameras that ticket you for *thinking* about running the red light.
I get seriously offended when I hear this expression.
I bought a lottery ticket last night and lost 15 million dollars due to not winning 15 million dollars. Sound right to you?
The easy solution is to shorten the yellow light, that way we catch everyone in the red.
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
Yes, we're gonna have to go right to... Ludicrous speed!
~~"Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~~Dennis Miller
just add an orange light, in between the red and the yellow.
orange is the new yellow.
A lot of intersections in Chicago have a count down timer for pedestrians which is a good indicator when yellow/red will kick in.
I remember a red-light camera in Queens where the amber was unusually short, about half as long as normal, so it would turn red when you didn't expect it to and you ended up with a ticket.
soylentnews.org
right on red issues as well!
There was a place where they removed the camera after lot's of people where stopping after the line as they need to stop after the line to be able to see if they can make a safe right on red.
Problem is, the way traffic flows in chicago, left turning motorists often are in the middle of the street when the light changes, and can only complete their turn once the light has turned red and the ticket has been issued.
Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
I can't wait until self-driving cars become the norm and totally screw these local governments out of these sources of "revenue".
Better known as 318230.
Here in Toronto (and the surrounding cities), the camera system takes two to three pictures: First indicating the car is still before the solid white line when the light is red, the second indicating the car is in the intersection (after a brief delay from the first), and the third, if needed, is aimed at the driver so that the owner of the car knows whodunnit (if the car was loaned out). Such a system proves that the driver ran a red, instead of this half-assed camera system that allows the city to fiddle around with the lights to get more tickets.
I don't recognize the authority of a machine to enforce the law.
Even parking meters don't cite automatically; that requires a traffic cop to make a judgment.
"Chicago to Lose $17 Million" Hogwash. Chicago will keep that $17 Million. The *real* Chicago, not the city government.
If your car is that fast, I think you will have more pressing matters to attend to, like staying on the planet.
Actually given the amount of air resistance and therefore friction at that speed the large plasma fireball which will surround you will make you very detectable, although not really identifiable, and your immediate problem will be avoiding instant cremation, not staying on the planet.
Democrats want everyone jobless and on welfare so they will vote for more democrats.
A lot of those people vote for Greed Over Poverty
> Democrats just want to take from the rich and give to the poor.
And Republicans just want to take from the poor and give to the rich.
Do the rich really need more tax cuts? We've already seen that 'trickle-down' doesn't work as advertised.
Productivity has gone up while wages have stagnated. The gains have all gone to the top. The current system is rigged in favor of the rich, who are rapidly ending the middle class - soon there will only be "haves" and "have-nots."
Consider it a quirk of American culture and politics that the Great Depression didn't end in violent revolution.
0.1 sec is too fast. It takes your eyes 50ms (aks .05 sec) to notice, then there would be reaction time > 100ms (0.1s). If the yellow is 0.1s then that is instantaneous and no one or car could stop that fast! DOT say yellow minimally should be on for 3 seconds!
There is zero grace period here, I can tell you that from experience.
I have had 1 red light ticket in my life. the ticket shows that I entered the intersection 0.1 second after the light turned. This means that when I entered the intersection, by a human's perception, it was still yellow.
I guess next time I'll slam the brakes harder and not risk a yellow. Too bad I can't get the city to pay for the damage from being rear-ended for braking so hard.
This morning my vehicle got rear-ended at a red light camera intersection. I KNEW it was a camera intersection, thus I stopped rather than risk going through. I would certainly have gone thru the yellow-about-to-turn-red if it had been a NON camera intersection - because when it is that close of a decision, it is SAFER to go thru than to risk getting rear ended. The guy behind me not only assumed I was going thru, but was "gunning it" so that he could also go thru.
Have you reported this underprovisioned intersection to the city? How often have you done so? If it affects you daily, complain daily.
Wrong. Approximately half the nation likes them, because those voters are so gullible they'll happily vote for a bunch of assholes just because they spout some Christian BS (such as "God loves rich people more").
Neither this article nor the study's abstract lists any clear motivation for this change. What is the reasoning? "Ensuring the program’s fairness" implies that the study found it to be unfair currently, yet I see no evidence of that. What does "giving the benefit of the doubt to well-intentioned drivers" even mean? If anything, it seems like they should increase the time of yellow lights by 0.3 seconds instead. It will have the same effect—preventing the ticketing of individuals who legitimately entered an intersection when the light was yellow—but not send the message that there is a margin of error during which breaking the law is somehow acceptable. I just don't understand this.
Now, if cases in the .1-.3s range were being fought in court and costing the city more money than they were bringing in, that I could understand. But a $17 million loss? What?
I really wish we had traffic cameras (red light and speed) in Minneapolis. It's just ridiculous what people get away with. These people do not deserve to live happy lives.
And kill citizens in exchange for tax revenue. Really, short yellow lights do kill people. Municipal governments know this and some of them still shorten the lights beyond the acceptable range as dictated by DOT engineering standards.
In my opinion we should be able to draw and quarter the people responsible for intentionally turning human misery and death into tax revenue.
When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
I live in Chicago. There is ample opportunity to ticket drivers for breaking traffic rules and causing problems with safety and congestion. The CPD just doesn't have the time to address such things. If they would create a separate traffic enforcement division, I think it would more than pay for itself along with actually making the streets safer.
Instead of a reality check on whether traffic light cameras actually provide value in traffic safety the politicians that think they have some inherent right to the contents of your wallet lament lower numbers of fines. Typical.
NRRPT/RCT
How about jail time for the officials that had it set to .1 seconds to begin with when other cities had 3 times as long. They effective extorted money from the people of Chicago with this illegal scheme. Let's start with the Mayor. He belongs in jail.
So, the data tells us then that most drivers ignore the red light and push it by 0.3 seconds or so to "scrape through". If the priority was safety, as well as issuing tickets, the time between one route going red and the subsequent route going green should also be increased by 0.3 seconds as well to compensate for behaviour. This would have more of an effect of reducing danger than a fine after the fact...