They Can't Resist Red Light Cameras For Smc

[royhobie]

I submit that every time any person drives a car, they violate some traffic law. Did you come to a complete stop when you pull out of your driveway, came to the stop sign, or when you made a right turn on red? Not slow and go, but a complete stop. Did you signal every time you made a turn or lane change? At any time during your trip, did you exceed the speed limit? How about when going down a steep hill? Did you brake to stay below the speed limit? Did you drift onto the shoulder or over the centerline??

Since safety is the ONLY concern for people who endorse red light cameras, why stop at red light cameras?? With GPS and wireless technology, the government has the capability to watch your car the whole time it is being driven. Every one of the above infractions (and more) can be determined with GPS coupled with the information new cars monitor and record (speed can be determined with GPS only). For efficiency reasons, Traffic Control, Inc (or whoever wins the contract) will send you a monthly bill detailing your infractions. Speaking of efficiency, since Eye-in-the-Sky will be watching your every move, fewer police officers will be required. You think the Eye-in-the-Sky made a mistake, it will be up to you to prove it.

Since safety is the only consideration, why not???

Too technical for people that are too dumb to understand the numbers. What you say is within reason. In fact, the technology exists to detect cars that goes through stop signs. Pretty easy to do. Sensors are implanted in to the pavement, or counters above the pavement. The counter strips is the cheapest and the easiest to maintain.

 

[Lennyni]

OK put the cameras up. Once a month review the violations. The intersection with the most violations each month should be surveyed by a county or State engineer and changes to the intersection should be made to reduce or eleminate violations within a 3 month deadline. Yea Right!

 

[glhs837]

Guards!!!!! Grab that man, the one above me!!!!!! He's using that "common sense" and that was banned last year.

 

[royhobie]

Guards!!!!! Grab that man, the one above me!!!!!! He's using that "common sense" and that was banned last year.

When you first log in to Southern Maryland on Line, did you see the study about cameras that claim they are not what they are all cracked up to be?

 

[glhs837]

Yeah, Roy, saw that. But those are the same sources all the cam fans have already dismissed as biased becuase it doesnt agree with what they want to hear. Of course, many of these same folks that blindly accept the stats from the companies and governments that stand to make millions off of these things

Can I assume you will be at the BOCC public meeting tomorrow?

 

[royhobie]

Yeah, Roy, saw that. But those are the same sources all the cam fans have already dismissed as biased becuase it doesnt agree with what they want to hear. Of course, many of these same folks that blindly accept the stats from the companies and governments that stand to make millions off of these things

Can I assume you will be at the BOCC public meeting tomorrow?

I was. The Commissioners believe the money from the red light cameras is going to go to them. I talked to several of them prior to the start of the meeting. I guess they haven't read the legislation. It goes to the Sheriff's Office. Because the Commissioners believe they can dictate where the money goes by their own legislation, they are seeing dollar signs. What they don't seem to understand is they can't over rule the State. The Commissioners, as expected cut folks off at 3 minutes. I am no different. What I had to say takes longer than 3 minutes. You can email them. However, there is no guarantee that they read their emails. Jackie Russell, the President of the Commissioners is an interesting person. One person actually stood up and said he was a police officer in some other County and administered the camera program. He claimed it freed up officers and saves lives. Again, he painted one side of a picture. He didn't mention how many accidents the red light cameras "caused" in his county. He loves the speed cameras as well.

 

[Baja28]

When you first log in to Southern Maryland on Line, did you see the study about cameras that claim they are not what they are all cracked up to be?

Yea lets post all the facts shall we? It's not always about the money and who (besides you and gls) gives a rats ass? Don't speed, don't run red lights and you're not affected. Why is this such a tough concept for y'all to understand?

WASHINGTON - Increased ticketing has resulted in a significant change in driver behavior, the chief of D.C. police told WTOP on Thursday, thanks to more traffic and speed cameras and a focus on the skyrocketing number of cyclists on the road.

Police have quadrupled the number of tickets issued to drivers blocking bike lanes, Cathy Lanier said on WTOP's "Ask the Chief." And last year, the number of speed enforcement tickets issued dropped by 170,000.

"That's good for us" because it means people are modifying their behavior, she said. Chief: MPD asks for help with violent crimes; 170K fewer traffic tickets - WTOP.com

 

[vince77]

Yea lets post all the facts shall we? It's not always about the money and who (besides you and gls) gives a rats ass?

much wiser to listen to professionals like chief Lanier than those with a lead foot and a disregard for traffic signals and speed limits....

 

[glhs837]

There you go again, deciding you know about me and how I drive because I don't agree with these things. Roy, it's easy to bypass the restrictions. You make any expenditure for SMCSO public safety in the budget, and pay for it using camera revenue. Me, I won't pay a dime because I don't go 12mph over, and certainly don't run red lights. We will see how this plays out. . One last bit to ponder, folks who support these things.

The folks you have chosen to listen to? They all have skin in the game. The. BOCCC gets to look safety minded while not having to raise taxes. Sheriff gets same, and a real budget boost. Company of course makes money. How will you feel when they change it to just being over the stop line, not running tghrough the red?

 

[Baja28]

There you go again, deciding you know about me and how I drive because I don't agree with these things. Roy, it's easy to bypass the restrictions. You make any expenditure for SMCSO public safety in the budget, and pay for it using camera revenue. Me, I won't pay a dime because I don't go 12mph over, and certainly don't run red lights. We will see how this plays out. . One last bit to ponder, folks who support these things.

The folks you have chosen to listen to? They all have skin in the game. The. BOCCC gets to look safety minded while not having to raise taxes. Sheriff gets same, and a real budget boost. Company of course makes money. How will you feel when they change it to just being over the stop line, not running tghrough the red?

Not sure who your post is directed to but just what is your beef if it isn't about the money? I have been out of this discussion for awhile but I thought you had issue with it being about making money and not about safety?

And to answer your line question, I'd stop before the line. I fail to see the difficulty here. :shrug:

 

[tom88]

Ironically, the County Commissioners wife was hit by a red light violator. I doubt the Commisioner will understand that if there was a red light camera, all it would do is take a picture of they guy hitting his wife and the guy would get a $75.00 ticket. It would not stop someone from violating a red light if they choose to do so. In fact, I wonder about double jeporady had a police officer issued a ticket to the person that hit his wife. I don't know if both are thrown out, or can they decide which ticket is used? I asked Sheriff Cameron this question. He said it would be up to the judge. I plan to meet with the District Court Judge for St. Mary's County to get the answer to this.

I will be attending a County Highway Safety Board meeting on February 19th. I'll be bringing up this issue again. I also plan to attend the County Commissioners meeting and explain to them that the County Highway Safety Board voted for an issue with only one side heard. And therefore, they were not totally informed before making a decision. I talked to Senator Dyson. He said he is totally against red light cameras.

I can answer that question for you. It wouldn't have to be left up to a judge. A states attorney could nolle prosequi the non-point citation and proceed with the point and greater fine citation.

As far as this not preventing the accident which injured the commissioner's wife, you don't know that the person driving that vehicle, might have been more aware of the light coming up had she thought she might get a ticket in the mail.

I for one am for the red light cameras because I believe they make the drivers more aware of their surroundings. Good luck with your arguments, however I think you have lost your battle at this point.

 

[glhs837]

Not sure who your post is directed to but just what is your beef if it isn't about the money? I have been out of this discussion for awhile but I thought you had issue with it being about making money and not about safety?

And to answer your line question, I'd stop before the line. I fail to see the difficulty here. :shrug:

It is about the money, and that in the case of RLCs, there is no net gain in safety, so the only reason for doing it is money. If it made money, and increased safety, I would be okay, but it doesnt. According to the studies done by those not being paid by the RLC companies, there is at best, no change in safety.

I too stop before the line, but again, when have we ever had an crash in the county due to someone stopped a foot over the line? I would venture to say never. We get back to the point that we are enforcing the law for profit, not because we are trying to make stuff safer.

I would love to see the raw data used, since down here at least, I was told by both the MSP and the SMCSO that you cannot draw data on just red lights, it's lumped under a larger heading. So how will we tell results with no "before" data? And if they do have before data, lets see it.

 

[glhs837]

Looking over CCSOs program, that sort I would not object to. It has been used not as a cash cow, and it's funds have only been used to run the program. Is this the sort of program SMC is considering? I'll bet it isnt. I'll bet they are looking at a moneymaker from ATS or Redflex.

 

[Baja28]

It is about the money, and that in the case of RLCs, there is no net gain in safety, so the only reason for doing it is money. If it made money, and increased safety, I would be okay, but it doesnt. According to the studies done by those not being paid by the RLC companies, there is at best, no change in safety.

I too stop before the line, but again, when have we ever had an crash in the county due to someone stopped a foot over the line? I would venture to say never. We get back to the point that we are enforcing the law for profit, not because we are trying to make stuff safer.

I would love to see the raw data used, since down here at least, I was told by both the MSP and the SMCSO that you cannot draw data on just red lights, it's lumped under a larger heading. So how will we tell results with no "before" data? And if they do have before data, lets see it.

Read post 27 and tell Chief Lanier that she's full of it. She has more credibility than any link you've provided. How would YOU explain 170,000 less tickets in one year? How do these FACTS support your claim that it's for the money?

Dude, you're fighting a useless and ridiculous battle.

 

[vince77]

Red Light Cameras: Nanny-State Nuisance Or Life-Saving Technology?: Gothamist

 

[glhs837]

Read post 27 and tell Chief Lanier that she's full of it. She has more credibility than any link you've provided. How would YOU explain 170,000 less tickets in one year? How do these FACTS support your claim that it's for the money?

Dude, you're fighting a useless and ridiculous battle.

Officials: DC Red Light Cameras Not Catching Enough People, Ticket Revenue Lower Than Projection | wusa9.com

Then why was it covered in press conferences that the expected 20 million was only 8.5 million? If it wasnt about money, that wouldnt even be mentioned.

Washington D.C. Red-Light Cameras Fail to Reduce Accidents

And this is a bit dated, but note the source, I think the WaPo is a farily credible one, dont you?

A reduction in citations doesn't equal a reduction in accidents. Note that Lanier referenced the IIHS study, of which I have already posted links to reputable university studies that tore that one apart. Odd that she had no DC stats on accident reduction, isnt it?

District of Columbia expanding cameras | POI Factory

she does cite a drop in the last ten years, but traffic stats have shown a drop nationwide for quite some time, not just citys with revenue enhancement cameras in place. Note that the AAA is looking askance at them also.

I am not fighting a battle, I am simply giving folks information about this technology so when it comes time, they will have all the information, not just what the folks who want money put out.

 

[glhs837]

Red Light Cameras: Nanny-State Nuisance Or Life-Saving Technology?: Gothamist

Heres a funny. That survey mentioned? Guess who produced it? The National Coalition for Safer Roads......it has three officers. All three are American Traffic Solutions corporate officers. Astroturf, anyone? So, the company who stands to make millions for every major city or state that signs up fronts anon-profit to produce articles and studies in favor of the thing that makes them money?





National Coalition for Safer Roads Run by American Traffic Solutions

 

[vince77]

most people prefer safer roads, roads made safer because of RLC's and speed cameras....making money is just another advantage to RLC's and speed cameras...everybody wins but the lawbreakers....

 

[Baja28]

most people prefer safer roads, roads made safer because of RLC's and speed cameras....making money is just another advantage to RLC's and speed cameras...everybody wins but the lawbreakers....

Excellent point. What is the down side?

 

[glhs837]

most people prefer safer roads, roads made safer because of RLC's and speed cameras....making money is just another advantage to RLC's and speed cameras...everybody wins but the lawbreakers....

Excellent point. What is the down side?

Sure they do, but the myth they make the roads safer is the downside. A myth generated and perpetuated by companies and politicians who think the money is worth screwing the occasional innocent person. Do folks falsely ticketed by speed cams win? Nope. Do the folks who are involved in increased amount of rear end collisions win? Nope.


So, not just lawbreakers lose. That's your downside.