not only red lights but speed cameras
- Thread starter clyde
- Start date
Sierra39
Hairball Magnet
I think the cameras are STUPID – for traffic lights OR for speeding! Same reasons everyone else is saying... And if I have a "violation" I want to be able to discuss it then and there with a real, LIVE officer, who will be able to make an IMMEDIATE decision about whether I should get a ticket or not based on the circumstances...
And besides, I already know where all the speed traps are on Rt. 2/4...
And besides, I already know where all the speed traps are on Rt. 2/4...
Larry Gude
Strung Out
Warron,
My bad. I knew you were kidding! I was trying to being sarcastic about your sarcasm. Guess I need a filter. (JOKE!)
My bad. I knew you were kidding! I was trying to being sarcastic about your sarcasm. Guess I need a filter. (JOKE!)
Craw4d.org
New Member
Spy on the Pole
It is easy to say, "if you're not breaking the law, you have nothing to worry about."
The cameras don't allow for any exceptions. Weather, traffic conditions, emergencies...
Their very presence means the mechanism for abuse is in place.
It is easy to say, "if you're not breaking the law, you have nothing to worry about."
The cameras don't allow for any exceptions. Weather, traffic conditions, emergencies...
Their very presence means the mechanism for abuse is in place.
SmallTown
Football season!
Th driving regulations state you go the posted speed. It also states that in inclement weather, this speed is reduced to a level that will allow for safety and obeying the law. If it is wet and MUST go through the light, you were going to fast.
Traffic conditions? Now sure how that changes anything.
Emergencies? You run a light because your wife next to you is in labor and needs to get to the hospital. You crash into a car killing a lady and her children on the way home from soccer practice. Do you just apologize to the grieving father / husband ? Should you not be charged with involuntary manslaughter?
Does anyone know if the cameras that were proposed for calvert took into account the speed of the vehicle. I know some allow the user to set a certain speed minimum the car must be traveling before the camera will click.
The calvert county issue is over, but it doesn't mean it won't rise up again. I'm sure if the county decided to outlaw cigarettes in the county because of health concerns, over half of the population would be against it, but it doesn't change the fact that cigarette smoking can kill you.
Traffic conditions? Now sure how that changes anything.
Emergencies? You run a light because your wife next to you is in labor and needs to get to the hospital. You crash into a car killing a lady and her children on the way home from soccer practice. Do you just apologize to the grieving father / husband ? Should you not be charged with involuntary manslaughter?
Does anyone know if the cameras that were proposed for calvert took into account the speed of the vehicle. I know some allow the user to set a certain speed minimum the car must be traveling before the camera will click.
The calvert county issue is over, but it doesn't mean it won't rise up again. I'm sure if the county decided to outlaw cigarettes in the county because of health concerns, over half of the population would be against it, but it doesn't change the fact that cigarette smoking can kill you.
So can...
a fall down the stairs
a slip in the tub
riding your bicycle on the road
eating at a church dinner in SoMD (I may be wrong, but there were an awful lot of sick people.)
On the other hand...
We had this arguement in the "rude people" (?) thread--could have used your help. Seems some people are in such a big hurry (they can get there faster) but they are willing to stop for a cop or an accident and waste their precious time explaining why they are speeding. Go figure?
C
calvertguy
Guest
These Camera's are strictly a Money making machine. I almost got in an all out ass kickin contest at the Suitland and Stanton road intersection. There is a camera there and when the light turned yellow.............I slammed on the brakes and the car behind me just about came thru me. This guy was pissed. (I didn't blame him) Well, you can imagine, both of us are out of the car...........BLAH BLAH BLAH.
If safety is our number 1 concern and Calvert County one day does get these cameras, then I say we do what someone else suggested, and that is donate all monies to a charity. ALL of the money. The County Commisioners would NEVER pass this proposal because money is what this is about, and they would be able to SCAM on the Taxpayers behind the word Safety.
If safety is our number 1 concern and Calvert County one day does get these cameras, then I say we do what someone else suggested, and that is donate all monies to a charity. ALL of the money. The County Commisioners would NEVER pass this proposal because money is what this is about, and they would be able to SCAM on the Taxpayers behind the word Safety.
B
Bruzilla
Guest
I'm all for red light cameras because they are a significant means of improving safety. I would bet that anyone who has screwed up and been ticketed thinks twice before running a light again. I don't buy these arguments of emergencies, weather, divine intervention, etc. How often does anyone get involved in these situations to an extent that they would be forced, through no reason of their own, to run a light? Never? Once in a lifetime? I've been driving for close to 30 years and I've never been in a position where I had to run a red light.
I also don't buy the facing your acuser argument. Can you imagine a mafia kingpin telling the judge that he shouldn't be convicted because he doesn't have the ability to cross examine the tape recorder that recorded him talking about killing someone? Sounds as stupid as the can't question the camera argument.
Another problem is that people wrongly think that if they can no longer see the light when it turns red, they're legal. Wrong. If any part of your car is in the intersection when the light turns red, you've broken the law.
Red light cameras rarely catch people making room for ambulances, or sliding through a light due to snow, etc. They do catch lots of people who see the light turning red and think they can get through the intersection before the cross traffic starts moving, and these buttmonkeys deserve their tickets.
I also don't buy the facing your acuser argument. Can you imagine a mafia kingpin telling the judge that he shouldn't be convicted because he doesn't have the ability to cross examine the tape recorder that recorded him talking about killing someone? Sounds as stupid as the can't question the camera argument.
Another problem is that people wrongly think that if they can no longer see the light when it turns red, they're legal. Wrong. If any part of your car is in the intersection when the light turns red, you've broken the law.
Red light cameras rarely catch people making room for ambulances, or sliding through a light due to snow, etc. They do catch lots of people who see the light turning red and think they can get through the intersection before the cross traffic starts moving, and these buttmonkeys deserve their tickets.
I was in one of these situations not 3 months ago. Sitting at a red light with a concrete curb on one side and a car on the other when a fire truck came up behind me with lights flashing and siren roaring. I had nowhere to go but through the light. If there had been cameras on that light I would have had to take a day off from work, loosing $250 bucks in the process, to go and fight a $75 dollar ticket. That is the problem, you end up loosing out more if you try to fight it, even if it was given unfairly, then if you just pay the thing.
In court the mafia kingpin would have a chance to face his accuser, because it would have to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the person on the tape was him. And he would have the chance to challenge that proof. There is no such opportunity with the picture of a license plate. And once again, if you want to challenge it, you end up having to pay more then the fine would cost you to begin with. This is the catch. Suck it up and pay the fine, or loose twice as much money to prove you are innocent. The originators of these systems know exactly what choice most people are going to make and I’m sure they count on it. If the government was made to reimburse lost wages and travel expenses for every case in which the violation was thrown out by the court, I’d bet these schemes would still be some paranoid persons bad dream. There has never been one scrap of proof these systems result in increased safety or decreased accidents. They are there for one reason, to make money.
Could you please cite where in Maryland law it says that? According to the 2002 statutes under Transportation at 21-202 (g)(1) it says;
"Vehicular traffic facing a steady yellow signal is warned that the related green movement is ending or that a red signal, which will prohibit vehicular traffic from entering the intersection, will be shown immediately after the yellow signal."
My take on this is, if the light is red before you enter the intersection you have broken the law, but if you have already entered the intersection (on a yellow light) you are required to continue so that you clear the intersection.
I faced this very dilema (sp?) several years ago and was told by the cop that I ran a red light. I said that I most certainly did not, it was yellow (I was about one car length from the intersection when it changed, therefore, no time to stop). He in turn told me that the light turned red before I exited the intersection, which was not true.
I went to court and beat the ticket. Yea for me!
I have been reading the post pro and con for the red light camera's. Today we buried my wife's Aunt Joanie because
someone plowed into her near the farmers market while
she was waiting for the light to change. According to the news
paper he bump a car while changing lanes, continued on and
ran a red light, then at the next light where she waited for
the light to change, he plowed into the back of her pushing the
back up into her and crushing her.
The only thing that a red light camera might have gotten was
some unbelievable pictures of a slaughter in action.
The report said that there was the smell of alcohol on the
driver who hit her.
I don't want camera's watching me. I am more infavor of
removing the problem that causes so many deaths in maryland.
Perhaps if bars must exist them they should be required to take
keys as soon as you come in and only give them back if you
can pass a breathalyser. Bar owners would complain but, how bad do they want the money.
I am not in favor of camera's. How about red lights that disable the car if it goes through a red light and can only be reset by a service call from the on call wrecker service?
You tell me.
someone plowed into her near the farmers market while
she was waiting for the light to change. According to the news
paper he bump a car while changing lanes, continued on and
ran a red light, then at the next light where she waited for
the light to change, he plowed into the back of her pushing the
back up into her and crushing her.
The only thing that a red light camera might have gotten was
some unbelievable pictures of a slaughter in action.
The report said that there was the smell of alcohol on the
driver who hit her.
I don't want camera's watching me. I am more infavor of
removing the problem that causes so many deaths in maryland.
Perhaps if bars must exist them they should be required to take
keys as soon as you come in and only give them back if you
can pass a breathalyser. Bar owners would complain but, how bad do they want the money.
I am not in favor of camera's. How about red lights that disable the car if it goes through a red light and can only be reset by a service call from the on call wrecker service?
You tell me.