Quote:
Originally Posted by Infiniti514
I don't know enough about it to say whether or not the light timing was changed. But I'm sure they had their own experts looking into this when planning for the cameras. I understand what you are saying about encouraging people to run the light since they know its a long light. It is human nature. I know someones I get pissed if I missed a light knowing its a long one. But this argument is like saying, you leave your door unlocked, you are inviting criminals in.....even though you might be "encouraging" criminals to come in your home, that doesnt make what they are doing right....and they shouldn't be doing it regardless.
|
See here's the point. Everywhere these camera guys go, you always get the same arguments. The legislators never address them. The experts give their recommendations and testimony, but the legislators do not follow the advice. It happens in every city these guys go to.
Again, the legislators are not treating the illness, they are treating the symptoms and trying to make money in the process. So if you have a cold and have the magic medicine to cure it, you don't give someone aspirin for the headache, antihistimine for the clogged nose, cough syrup for the cough.........you give them the pill to cure the cold.........no need for the money to treat the symptoms. In essence this is what is going on.
They need to listen to the DOT engineers who will recommend ammended traffic signal timing, coordinating amongst the traffic grid to move traffic, put in speed humps where called for, put in turnabouts, etc......
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Infiniti514
In regards to the Ambulance thing, I'm sure they must have thought of this. I don't know what they would do in that case but I'm sure they have some kind of plan. If anything, the Ambulance would have a record of calls they went on on a daily bases and what time the calls came in and where at. I guess thats one way of placing the Ambulance at the intersection. But, it is a stretch.....so I don't know how it would work....but hopefully they do. And jaywalkers definitely are a huge problem.....and should be ticketed more often. Maybe cameras for the jaywalkers  |
Let me put it to you this way. Do you think the company who administers the program has access to records of 911 calls? Do they know and do they have the authority to search records to eliminate items such as that?
Also, say you are stuck in an intersection because someone cuts you off. I often find myself in this situation because I do not enter the intersection unless it's clear, sure I get stuck sometimes because I'm not paying attention, but 90% of the time it's because I cannot see in front of the car in front and think the intersection is clear or some asshole who cannot and will not plan ahead changes lanes in the middle of the intersection screwing me over. Now when the camera goes off, who do you think is getting the ticket? It sure as hell isn't going to be the wrong-doer, it will be me.
If you have a trained and dutifully swarn officer of the law, he can make these distinctions, a camera cannot. In addition the operators of the cameras are not officers of the law, they are private citizens who get
paid by the ticket. Down here the company suggested that this be eliminated, but the legislators declined, so the incentive to run up the tickets remained. Now if you shift this into a lumpsum agreement, the company still has a break even point, they need to put out X amount of tickets or they will lose money. Do you think they will lose money? I don't.
The camera ticket system is inherently flawed. I view it as a poor idea, one of the worst out there. People talk about gateway drugs, this is a gateway enforcement that can and will lead to worse applications for the cameras.