AZ to Stop Speed Cameras on Interstates

[Five-0]

Good for them. I have voiced my opinion of camera enforcement in the past, and this is a step in the right direction. Again click the link for the full story.

Freeway speed cameras to be turned off this week | Phoenix News | Arizona News | azfamily.com | Yahoo News

Freeway speed cameras to be turned off this week




by Catherine Holland
azfamily.com
Posted on July 12, 2010 at 7:25 AM
Updated today at 7:38 AM





PHOENIX -- Dozens of photo-enforcement cameras on freeways throughout the state are coming down this week.
A total of 76 cameras will cease operation on Thursday.
The photo-enforcement program, which was meant to catch speeders on Arizona's freeways, has been controversial from the beginning. The cameras first went up nearly two years ago.
While the cameras have done a good job at snapping speeders, drivers have been ignoring the tickets.
According to the Department of Public Safety, the cameras led to more than 700,000 tickets in the first year of operation. Many of those people, however, never paid the fines.
Some say that's because the tickets were mailed, making them easy to ignore.
Any driver who ignored a photo-enforcement ticket was supposed to have been served. One problem was that process servers were inundated and simply couldn't get to everybody. If a person was not served, his or her ticket became invalid after three months.
The speeding tickets should have generated about $90 million in the first year of the program. About one-third of that was actually collected.
Gov. Jan Brewer, who has always been critical of the program, decided earlier this year not to renew Arizona's contract with Redflex Traffic Systems, the company that runs the cameras.
Opponents of the cameras were thrilled with that decision. They called the cameras a distraction that actually caused wrecks. They also said the cameras were a violation of people's constitutional rights.
Supporters of the photo-enforcement program said the camera saved lives.
"We actually had almost 22 percent fewer fatality collisions in Metro Phoenix," said DPS Lt. Steve Harrison in October 2009. "That equates to 12 actual fatal collisions that didn't happen, which statistically equates to about 13 lives that were saved."
A full audit on the program's effectiveness will not be complete until this fall.
While the cameras on the freeways are going dark, many cities will continue to run speed and red-light cameras on their streets.

[Bob Loblaw]

What's the problem with them? I've always thought that red light/speeding cams make the roads safer, which seems to be supported by the decline in fatalities...seems like the people who are so against them just don't wanna get a ticket for driving too fast or running a red light......

[SPD]

What's the problem with them?

I don't like the decision on whether or not to write someone being left up to a machine. I'm not "all or nothing" on traffic enforcement, and these seem to be all or nothing devices.

If I see someone sitting at a red light at 2 AM and it obviously isn't cycling - I think that person should be able to run it if there is no traffic.

I think that someone going a few MPH over the speed limit to pass someone or on a huge, flat, open stretch of road becuase they are looking at the road and not watching their speedometer is not worth a second thought.

I think there needs to be the filter of a human being who can make decisions on what is appropriate as far as citations is the standard we expect. And I don't think a camera hooked up to a radar has that ability.

But maybe I'm just weird.

[depdog]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vh8VC2LMoCY]YouTube - Red Light Runners Beware! The Cameras Will Catch You Night and Day. Here's Proof.[/ame]


This is from my agencies web page, from our four cameras, as well as this one.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVuEQyZKsQg]YouTube - Round 2: More Red Light Runners Caught On Video[/ame]

This is why I feel the are needed. We can't be everywhere all of the time.

[Bob Loblaw]

We've got a particular light that has a TON of traffic at almost all hours of the day and people are CONSTANTLY running the red light (there are 7 traffic signals within a mile of each other, so it's not uncommon during a busy time to be stuck there for 20 minutes). If you're in a car, it is nearly impossible to get around through traffic to stop violators because there is so much traffic (and it's right next to the interstate, so a lot get on the highway and are 3 miles down the road before you can get up there). This one NEEDS a red light camera bad...I would estimate that 75%+ of people who run the light don't get stopped.

I understand the value of human decisions and officer discretion, but when you put up a shitload of signs that say "WARNING: RED LIGHT/SPEED ENFORCED BY CAMERA" then there should be zero excuse (except in dire emergencies) where people are not driving in accordance with the law. The bottom line to me is that Arizona shows that this system works in reducing traffic fatalities, and reducing crashes/injuries/fatalities is the only primary of traffic enforcement.

[Bob Loblaw]

YouTube - Red Light Runners Beware! The Cameras Will Catch You Night and Day. Here's Proof.


This is from my agencies web page, from our four cameras, as well as this one.
YouTube - Round 2: More Red Light Runners Caught On Video

This is why I feel the are needed. We can't be everywhere all of the time.

holy shit....those are some of the worst red light violations I've ever seen!!!!!! You must have a trillion crashes at that intersection!!!!!!!!!!

[cajunguy]

. . . when you put up a shitload of signs that say "WARNING: RED LIGHT/SPEED ENFORCED BY CAMERA" then there should be zero excuse .

Signs should not be needed.

When you get a driver's license in ANY state in this country, you should know - and abide by - the laws that say "When you see a red light in front of you - S--T--O--P."

That red light means the same thing whether you're in Louisiana, Wisconsin, New Jersey, or even in the Republik of Kalifornia.

It does not mean it's OK to go through it, it does not mean hammer the gas pedal to try and beat the yellow, it means S--T--O--P.

If people would abide by traffic laws it might just put companies like Redflex out of business. (We have 'em here too.)

And locals know exactly where every speed/red light camera is. You can watch the brake lights come on about a block before the camera, then hear 'em accelerate again after they clear the intersection.

[Bob Loblaw]

^^^ agreed...just saying about the signs for people who whine that they shouldn't be issued citations if they don't know an area is being enforced (there are TONS of people who think that way...I've never understood it. Drive correctly and legally and you'll NEVEr VER EVER EVER EVER get a citation. Ever.)

[MacLean]

If it's a matter of safety, then pay for a cop to sit there.

Oh wait, it *is* about safety right, not revenue?

[APB]

Here in Massachusetts I swear that people believe "yellow" means "accelerate".

[Bob Loblaw]

If it's a matter of safety, then pay for a cop to sit there.

Oh wait, it *is* about safety right, not revenue?

I'd honestly say it's about both. As long as stupid jerkoffs keep committing traffic violations, they should continue to pay for them. The solution to not having to pay a ticket issued by a robot is to not make a violation. I lived in Toledo for 2 years before we moved down here...the traffic signals near our house all had red light cameras. I took note and was EXTRA careful to not even go through on a borderline yellow light at these intersections. And you know what? The darndest thing...I never got a ticket! I beat the system!!!

[ChesCopPodz]

I like red light cameras. While some make the argument that rear end collisions go up, I'd rather deal with the upswing in minor rear enders and decrease the T-bones.

Speed cameras Im only for in neighborhoods, school zones, and work zones. Speed cameras don't belong on the interstates of main roads.

[MacLean]

I'd honestly say it's about both. As long as stupid jerkoffs keep committing traffic violations, they should continue to pay for them. The solution to not having to pay a ticket issued by a robot is to not make a violation. I lived in Toledo for 2 years before we moved down here...the traffic signals near our house all had red light cameras. I took note and was EXTRA careful to not even go through on a borderline yellow light at these intersections. And you know what? The darndest thing...I never got a ticket! I beat the system!!!

I wonder how you will feel about the system if you get deep trunked hauling on the brakes to stop at every yellow.

Sorry, discretion is part of our business.

[Five-0]

I don't like the fact that people are guilty until proven innocent. I don't like the fact that these companies get a cut of the "revenue" It is completely contrary to our justice system. I cannot imagine that these systems help traffic light synchronization either. As to the i would rather work an upswing in rear enders, that is an admission that the municipality is culpable to an accident. The fact that yellow lights are shortened at many of these intersections only adds to that glaring liability.

Math tutor uses numbers to fight red light camera ticket - NBC-2.com WBBH News for Fort Myers, Cape Coral & Naples, Florida

This is about money plain and simple.

[213th]

Sorry, discretion is part of our business.

That's how I see it. There are times as SPD said there are times that an exception should be made, but a machine can't do that.

[ChesCopPodz]

As to the i would rather work an upswing in rear enders, that is an admission that the municipality is culpable to an accident

No it isn't. Rear end collisions, with extremely rare circumstances otherwise, are the fault of the personal following too damn closely to be able to stop. Just because a local government puts cameras up to catch people running red lights, it doesn't mean its said government's fault if rear end collisions go up from idiots trying to get through on yellow rear ending those that actually stop for the light.

Now if they shorten yellow lights just to be able to catch more red light runners, then I agree. But if all they do is put up a camera, well I guess I just believe in personal responsibility instead of blaming the government for everything

[Five-0]

No it isn't. Rear end collisions, with extremely rare circumstances otherwise, are the fault of the personal following too damn closely to be able to stop. Just because a local government puts cameras up to catch people running red lights, it doesn't mean its said government's fault if rear end collisions go up from idiots trying to get through on yellow rear ending those that actually stop for the light.

Now if they shorten yellow lights just to be able to catch more red light runners, then I agree. But if all they do is put up a camera, well I guess I just believe in personal responsibility instead of blaming the government for everything

Red-Light Cameras Increase Accidents: 5 Studies That Prove It

2007 Virginia DOT Report Shows Red Light Cameras Increase Accidents

Rear-end collisions jump at red-light camera intersections in West Palm Beach

Chapter 12 - Safety Evaluation of Red-Light Cameras, April 2005 - FHWA-HRT-05-048


I'm a big proponent of personal responsibility too, but I trust the government and politicians as far as I can throw them.

[MacLean]

No it isn't. Rear end collisions, with extremely rare circumstances otherwise, are the fault of the personal following too damn closely to be able to stop. Just because a local government puts cameras up to catch people running red lights, it doesn't mean its said government's fault if rear end collisions go up from idiots trying to get through on yellow rear ending those that actually stop for the light.

Now if they shorten yellow lights just to be able to catch more red light runners, then I agree. But if all they do is put up a camera, well I guess I just believe in personal responsibility instead of blaming the government for everything

"Fault" isn't really part of the discussion. The stated goal is conflicted by study after study, and yet the camera enforcement continues.

That leaves the only identifiable reason for their existence - revenue.

"Revenue" is what the government calls your money after they take it.

[Bob Loblaw]

"Revenue" is what the government calls your money after they take it.

and that turns into your paycheck

[Bob Loblaw]

and I seriously, seriously can't stress this enough...if you don't want a ticket for speeding or running a red light that was issued by a cold-hearted traffic robot, then don't run a red light or speed. Problem solved! I like the idea of cameras at particularly dangerous intersections because, unless you post 20+ motor units, you won't catch all the selfish douchebags who think "It's OK if I run the light because I'm in a big hurry...I drive a Dodge Stratus!"