SHA says no Red Light Cameras, Sheriif cant give it up

[glhs837]

So, front page of the Enterprise. SHA says they wont approve of them because their analyses shows that the majority of the accidents are rear end collisions. Unsaid, of course is that that number would increase even more were RLCs put in. Glad to see someone at the table has the ability to apply facts and logic instead of wishes and conjecture. Of course, the Sheriff had to make a wordy statement that effectively says He's going to keep trying to find a way to justify them. I suspect he means via violation counts. He wont actually ticket folks who run red lights, or gather crash data, jut count who goes through. The commissioner who works in the industry backed the SHA, while Commissioner Morgan of course backed the Sheriff. I do wish he wouldn't let his loss color his judgement, but thats' understandable. Both the Sheriff and Commissioner Morgan mentioned folks who block the box, as if that had anything to do with safety. It doesnt, of course, but when you are desperate to justify a thing that doesnt make sense, you grab any emotional argument and they both know county residents are pissed off about box blockers.

 

[BernieP]

No, he and Commissioner Morgan are determined to get cameras on 235.
Interesting, the deputies can't enforce the traffic laws because of the traffic - there is no shoulder. Last I checked there was a right turn lane and at other times of the day the troopers and deputies don't have a problem pulling people over in that lane.
It's becoming blatantly obvious that this is about money. The heavy volume and unpredictable movement of traffic strands people in the intersection.
I've sat at the light on 235 at Chancellors Run Road and watched the number of vehicles turning left to go north on 235 - after the light turns green on 235 north.
Every night, but I've never witnessed an accident there.
Oh, there are rear end collisions down by the Toyota dealer, south of Walmart, probably short of every intersection as traffic suddenly stops (at a green light) and people get caught not paying attention.

 

[glhs837]

Well here's the thing though. For all their talk about blocking the box, I dont believe you can enforce that here in MD with them. At least I'm fairly certain you cannot. I can't recall hearing of any other govt entity here in MD using them that way. Pretty sure MD laws says that automated enforcement systems can only ticket people who enter the intersection after the light has turned red, which is not the case with box blockers. Azzholes they might be, but red light runners they are not.

 

[DEEKAYPEE8569]

Well here's the thing though. For all their talk about blocking the box, I dont believe you can enforce that here in MD with them. At least I'm fairly certain you cannot. I can't recall hearing of any other govt entity here in MD using them that way. Pretty sure MD laws says that automated enforcement systems can only ticket people who enter the intersection after the light has turned red, which is not the case with box blockers. Azzholes they might be, but red light runners they are not.

Speaking for myself, I am improving on that point. I now deal with the impatient behind me, who "stand" on the horn when I don't proceed into the box if I can't see room to clear it, in a universally well-known way; "YOU'RE #1!"
Funnier yet, is the panicked look on the driver's face when my driver-side door opens and I get out to ask, 'Are you alright?'

 

[glhs837]

Speaking for myself, I am improving on that point. I now deal with the impatient behind me, who "stand" on the horn when I don't proceed into the box if I can't see room to clear it, in a universally well-known way; "YOU'RE #1!"
Funnier yet, is the panicked look on the driver's face when my driver-side door opens and I get out to ask, 'Are you alright?'

Good work, I know making that change is tough.

 

[DEEKAYPEE8569]

Good work, I know making that change is tough.

Next task to master.....restraint.....keeping myself from grabbing the collar/throat of the impatient S.O.B. and asking, "Is there something I can help you with?!!" I'll work on it.

 

[bilbur]

In the past two days I have seen an increase of red light runners. I am not talking about the ones in the intersection when the light turns red I am talking about full red before they enter the intersection. One of them in Hollywood went through the light after it was red and the other lanes started to go. I thought it was going to be a bad accident but the guy in a truck who had the green light saw the jerk running the red just in time. At the speed he was going it was sure to be a fatality. I could chalk it up to not paying attention if it wasn't for the fact he was driving a car with a wet fart muffler and I heard him gas it from way back when the light turned yellow. People like them make me so angry, they show no concern for anyone's life and safety just to save 2 minutes on their commute. I really wish they would step up patrols at the Hollywood light, one day someone is going to die because of an impatient driver. Maybe if they start charging these people with criminal indifference they would take what they are doing seriously. Running a red light is the only offence I can think of where a person knowingly puts other peoples lives in danger and the only thing they can get is a slap on the wrist and a small fine. Oh well, be safe out there and make sure everyone is stopped before you proceed on a green light.

 

[spr1975wshs]

Out in Illinois where we spent 16 1/2 years, it is states in the driver's manual to not proceed right away on green, but to make sure there are no red-runners first.

 

[BernieP]

Out in Illinois where we spent 16 1/2 years, it is states in the driver's manual to not proceed right away on green, but to make sure there are no red-runners first.

I've seen that law in other states, you are not suppose to proceed into the intersection if there is cross traffic still there - no in Maryland and Southern Maryland (which can be two places) I'm not sure if that rule exists.

 

[3CATSAILOR]

Out in Illinois where we spent 16 1/2 years, it is states in the driver's manual to not proceed right away on green, but to make sure there are no red-runners first.

That's simply good defensive driving that any driver learns from experience.

 

[3CATSAILOR]

So, front page of the Enterprise. SHA says they wont approve of them because their analyses shows that the majority of the accidents are rear end collisions. Unsaid, of course is that that number would increase even more were RLCs put in. Glad to see someone at the table has the ability to apply facts and logic instead of wishes and conjecture. Of course, the Sheriff had to make a wordy statement that effectively says He's going to keep trying to find a way to justify them. I suspect he means via violation counts. He wont actually ticket folks who run red lights, or gather crash data, jut count who goes through. The commissioner who works in the industry backed the SHA, while Commissioner Morgan of course backed the Sheriff. I do wish he wouldn't let his loss color his judgement, but thats' understandable. Both the Sheriff and Commissioner Morgan mentioned folks who block the box, as if that had anything to do with safety. It doesnt, of course, but when you are desperate to justify a thing that doesnt make sense, you grab any emotional argument and they both know county residents are pissed off about box blockers.

I am not sure why our Sheriff is so hell bent on the cameras. As for Commissioner Morgan, I am sure he realizes that the young lady who ran the red light that killed his wife was texting at the time. Therefore, red light camera or not, it would have made zero difference. But, yet the Enterprise and County Times continue to run the same story line without knowing the complete facts. I believe the Sheriff feels that the welfare of the citizens is his primary responsibility. If it is, then why does he have only two or three deputies in the traffic enforcement division when distracted driving is out of control. Folks in this County are texting and talking on cell phone all the time. You can tell that the doubt a police officer will challenge them. As for the Sheriff afraid to have his deputies pull over people in the far right lane because he thinks it is unsafe, troopers do it all the time. I have even seen STS buses stop in this area with no problem at all. It tends to make me wonder what the "real" story is. The one he is telling folks doesn't hold water very well.

 

[glhs837]

I am in the same boat. His support for them doesn't really make sense to me. Unless he's a completely different guy than he's come across all these years. Greed is the obvious, but if his claim that his department returns a significant amount of money unspent, that doesn't make sense, plus he's never come across that way. The commissioners pushing him under the table doesn't make sense since most of them are opposed. If he truly thinks it will enhance the safety of the citizens, he's either been mislead by the vendor and is unwilling to believe or is far less intelligent than he comes off.

Out of all of them, the one that makes the most sense is that the vendor who sold him on the school bus cameras, ATS, has been whispering in his ear, and convincing him that all the naysayers are incorrect. His statement about the SHA data not being the whole story lends credence to that. It has the sound of a sound bite from an industry spokesperson when the stats show no benefit. If they have convinced him, based on his actions during the enrcypted comms debate, if he's firmly convinced he's right, he's not going to really listen to an opposing voice all that much.

Commissioner Morgan, well, it's hard to argue facts and logic when your life has been ripped apart. Maybe over time, but thats a maybe. Look at a lot of people who bring deaths of loved ones to gun control debates. Decades later, they can ignore facts and argue emotion all day long.

 

[chernmax]

I think the Sheriff and Commissioner Morgan may have to be reevaluated come election time! Tired of these RedLightCamera lovers looking for another source of income in the name of safety!

http://bigthink.com/ideafeed/study-red-light-cameras-ineffective-cause-more-accidents

http://www.uspirg.org/reports/usp/trafficcamreport

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...es-on-red-light-speeding-traffic-cameras.html

"Red-light cameras are backdoor tax increases, plain and simple. They're sold as safety measures, but they're really more about revenue,"

 

[BernieP]

"Red-light cameras are backdoor tax increases, plain and simple. They're sold as safety measures, but they're really more about revenue,"

It's obvious they make money and it's pretty plain that the vendor has to have the cooperation of the government to continue to meet their profit goals and the government to gets it's projected revenue.
If they told everyone the cameras were going up to catch people littering, there would be hell to pay.

 

[BernieP]

Almost witnessed the IMPACT of red light cameras on the way in. I was behind the big ol dirty dump truck as we cruised down the left lane of 235. When the light turned yellow the vehicle in front of the dump truck decided to stop. I watched the dump truck dance all over the lane as it stopped just in time.

 

[Merlin99]

I think the Sheriff and Commissioner Morgan may have to be reevaluated come election time! Tired of these RedLightCamera lovers looking for another source of income in the name of safety!

http://bigthink.com/ideafeed/study-red-light-cameras-ineffective-cause-more-accidents

http://www.uspirg.org/reports/usp/trafficcamreport

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...es-on-red-light-speeding-traffic-cameras.html

"Red-light cameras are backdoor tax increases, plain and simple. They're sold as safety measures, but they're really more about revenue,"

Morgan can kind of be excused just because the subject hit so close to home for him, Cameron hasn't got much beyond "it's for your own good" (and his dept. gets free money)

 

[glhs837]

Morgan can kind of be excused just because the subject hit so close to home for him, Cameron hasn't got much beyond "it's for your own good" (and his dept. gets free money)

Understood, perhaps, but not excused, I don't think. Past a certain point, refusing to acknowledge facts because emotion won't let you is inexcusable. Especially for an elected official whose job is to do what's best for the citizens, not for your grief. As for Cameron and money, he has said that his department returns large sums of money to the county every year, he's not using what he has, if that's true, then I can't see the profit motive.

 

[3CATSAILOR]

In the past two days I have seen an increase of red light runners. I am not talking about the ones in the intersection when the light turns red I am talking about full red before they enter the intersection. One of them in Hollywood went through the light after it was red and the other lanes started to go. I thought it was going to be a bad accident but the guy in a truck who had the green light saw the jerk running the red just in time. At the speed he was going it was sure to be a fatality. I could chalk it up to not paying attention if it wasn't for the fact he was driving a car with a wet fart muffler and I heard him gas it from way back when the light turned yellow. People like them make me so angry, they show no concern for anyone's life and safety just to save 2 minutes on their commute. I really wish they would step up patrols at the Hollywood light, one day someone is going to die because of an impatient driver. Maybe if they start charging these people with criminal indifference they would take what they are doing seriously. Running a red light is the only offence I can think of where a person knowingly puts other peoples lives in danger and the only thing they can get is a slap on the wrist and a small fine. Oh well, be safe out there and make sure everyone is stopped before you proceed on a green light.

You should expect MSP and SMCSD to address issues such as this and others with some on and off programs. However, like all of their programs in the past, they are short lived due to funding issues.

 

[3CATSAILOR]

I think the Sheriff and Commissioner Morgan may have to be reevaluated come election time! Tired of these RedLightCamera lovers looking for another source of income in the name of safety!

http://bigthink.com/ideafeed/study-red-light-cameras-ineffective-cause-more-accidents

http://www.uspirg.org/reports/usp/trafficcamreport

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...es-on-red-light-speeding-traffic-cameras.html

"Red-light cameras are backdoor tax increases, plain and simple. They're sold as safety measures, but they're really more about revenue,"

Yeah, everyone knows that. I have talked to our deputies, MSP and the base police. They all say the same thing as we do. I can't blame the Sheriff for trying to get more revenue to support his Sheriff's Office when the Commissioners are offering him less than what he was asking for. But, RLC is not the answer when it is well documented as the SHA Chief Engineer has said that RLC would cause more accidents than it would stop!