Red light cameras
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2013 10:57 pm
Here's an article about red light cameras. On some level, I'm in favor of them. I don't like the complications that seem to be connected with them, though. It seems it would be pretty easy to have policy that yellow lights are as long as they are supposed to be. And any company or public official who is caught making them shorter (which has happened) should be prosecuted vigorously.
I have seen a few people belligerently (not accidentally) blow through red lights and it scares the pants off me. Nobody wants that.
To go almost anywhere, I have to go through a red light camera. There are two issues I have with the main one I have to negotiate: One, there are people who are "being rehabilitated" who stand in the intersection and sell or give away newspapers. These are folks who have exhibited bad judgment on a level that has.......well, I'm not too tolerant of their "rehabilitation program". A few times, they have created dangerous situations for me and Gretchen has had a few as well. Two, the timing on the next light, which is about fifty yards from the one with the camera, is off. That is to say that in heavy traffic, it's possible to need to stop at a green light because the next light is stacking up traffic. When their light changes, you can end up having to choose between sitting at a green light, which is illegal, and pushing your luck if the light turns yellow just as you should/could go.
After reading the article, I feel that cities that want to use the technology of red light cameras should buy their own equipment.
Here's a paragraph from the article that I found interesting:
Last October, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel barred Redflex from re-bidding on the city’s red-light camera contract after a Chicago Tribune investigation found that Redflex company executives and lobbyists had paid for hotel rooms and spent thousands on entertainment for the city official overseeing the red light program.
The linque:
http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/20 ... meras?lite
Chuey
I have seen a few people belligerently (not accidentally) blow through red lights and it scares the pants off me. Nobody wants that.
To go almost anywhere, I have to go through a red light camera. There are two issues I have with the main one I have to negotiate: One, there are people who are "being rehabilitated" who stand in the intersection and sell or give away newspapers. These are folks who have exhibited bad judgment on a level that has.......well, I'm not too tolerant of their "rehabilitation program". A few times, they have created dangerous situations for me and Gretchen has had a few as well. Two, the timing on the next light, which is about fifty yards from the one with the camera, is off. That is to say that in heavy traffic, it's possible to need to stop at a green light because the next light is stacking up traffic. When their light changes, you can end up having to choose between sitting at a green light, which is illegal, and pushing your luck if the light turns yellow just as you should/could go.
After reading the article, I feel that cities that want to use the technology of red light cameras should buy their own equipment.
Here's a paragraph from the article that I found interesting:
Last October, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel barred Redflex from re-bidding on the city’s red-light camera contract after a Chicago Tribune investigation found that Redflex company executives and lobbyists had paid for hotel rooms and spent thousands on entertainment for the city official overseeing the red light program.
The linque:
http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/20 ... meras?lite
Chuey