Red Light Camera Locator Map

[David]

I like this article, it brings up a good point:

http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/Red-Light-Cameras-Go-Dark-189370741.html

you make a right hand turn half a second or barrel through a light at 12 seconds almost killing somebody, it's the same price. That doesn't make sense," he said.

What Filner needs to do is retool the system and put justice and equity in the system," Mehdy said.

[Overstreet]

The Mandarin camera  location has bus stops on both corners. There are pedestrians going both ways. I know hard to believe. I often cross there on the bike as well. Got to keep your "head on a swivel" if you are moving in traffic.

A comment earlier was that if you loaned your car out and they got a ticket it shouldn't come back to you....and that no other tickets do. Well not quite. Parking tickets come back to the registered owner.  Have your car get in a hit and run and see what comes back. Sure you may not get the ticket but you never really excape responsibility.

[spuwho]

Red-light cameras in Schaumburg screech to a halt

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-red-light-camerasjul15,0,7535797.story

Schaumburg, Illinois gave up on the cameras.

They are sold as safety enhancements, but when the complaints outweigh the revenues, they tend to remove them.

[If_I_Loved_you]

Red-light cameras in Schaumburg screech to a halt

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-red-light-camerasjul15,0,7535797.story

Schaumburg, Illinois gave up on the cameras.

They are sold as safety enhancements, but when the complaints outweigh the revenues, they tend to remove them.

So the people of Jacksonville Fl have become the latest Guinea pigs?

[urbaknight]

I think the ticket revenue should go directly towards mass transit and pedestrian improvements. (Such as sidewalk widening, bus stop shelters, ADA accessability to bus stops, better bike lanes, etc) That would be a real slap in the face to inconsiderate drivers that hate bicyclists and pedestrians!

And furthermore, repeat traffic offenders shout be charged out the ass to get privilege to be able to drive. And If they can't afford to pay for their mistakes, they can just take the bus like some of us have to.

 Driving is not a God given right! I don't care what people think around here! It's a privilege that can and should be taken away if it's not done correctly and with consideration.

[ben says]

Why is it every time I see a post from If_I_Loved_you my blood pressure shoots through the roof?

[Kiva]

I think the ticket revenue should go directly towards mass transit and pedestrian improvements. (Such as sidewalk widening, bus stop shelters, ADA accessibility to bus stops, better bike lanes, etc) That would be a real slap in the face to inconsiderate drivers that hate bicyclists and pedestrians!

Great idea, urbaknight

[If_I_Loved_you]

Why is it every time I see a post from If_I_Loved_you my blood pressure shoots through the roof?

Because you hate the Truth?

[Trainman]

Let me preface this commentary with the fact that I am a State Trooper. I got a red light camera ticket driving my personal auto through Green Cove Springs. I had a few seconds distraction looking at the car in the lane next to me and that's all it took to miss the green light change to yellow. Got over 3/4 of the way through when the flash told me I got busted. No crying. No whining. I ran a red light and I paid the ticket. My wife laughed. You see, cops are human and make mistakes too. My incident was unintentional but the camera is a great equalizer for intentional and accidental infractions. It was also a great reminder to me to stay focused while driving. I've been to my share of traffic crashes in the Jax area and red light/stop sign runners are usually the worst. Based on my experience I welcome red light cameras. Rear enders wouldn't increase to any measurable level if people wouldn't tailgate (which the majority of drivers do). There are far more rear enders with cars making left or right turns from a travel lane into side streets and parking lots. As far as the "California stop" goes: illegal. Stop means STOP. Just because the other lemmings run off the cliff doesn't mean you have to. Other driver: Be careful who you loan your car to and get a written affidavit if you do loan it out. It's your car and you're responsible for it. Remember this: Florida Statute 316 is very clear that you don't have the "right" to drive in our fair state. It is a priveledge and can be easily lost if you don't protect it.

[David]

I view following arbitrary traffic laws as being a lemming.

I trust my judgement and determine on a case by case basis if a turn warrants a full stop (pending pedestrians, oncoming traffic) or if perhaps, in order to not be stuck on the corner of San Jose & Claire for the next 5 minutes I need to go ahead and make that right hand turn, at a very low speed, even though the light is "red"

Sidewalk is closed currently, so there is little to no pedestrian traffic in that particular area as well

But I get it. It's "illegal" and I "shouldn't do that". I'll secede my property from the United States and start my own nation, where we can all perform California Stops free of tyranny and judgement.

Or just stop. Those tickets aren't cheap.

[ChrisG]

I am ok with red light cameras. Why does a private business (Redflex Traffic Systems of Arizona) get to share in the profit of a citation, just because they are willing to put the cameras up at no cost. Cities across the nation getting caught shorting the timed yellow light length below the norm when they find out how much revenue these devices generate.
Quote from the National Journal:
The NMA wants the FHWA to mandate minimum national standards for yellow-light duration. Currently, the federal agency offers only “guidance” suggesting that yellow lights should last between 3 and 6 seconds. “There’s an ongoing debate in the traffic-engineering community about what the standard should be,” said NMA spokesman John Bowman.
When New Jersey passed a law allowing red-light cameras in 2008, the Legislature established a formula for yellow-light duration. The minimum yellow time is 3 seconds at intersections where traffic is moving at 25 miles per hour, and the time goes up by a half-second for every 5 mph increase in traffic speed. So for intersections where traffic is approaching at 55 mph, the yellow light must be on for a minimum of 6 seconds.

Be sure you have uninsured motorist coverage. Buckle up and brace for for a rear end impact when you abruptly brake to stop at those intersections.

[KenFSU]

The weekend edition of the Wall Street Journal had a pretty balanced look at red-light cameras:

I'm personally against them for a variety of reasons (particularly in that cities seem to be installing them for purposes of revenue rather than safety), but the article does a pretty good job presenting both sides of the argument fairly.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323701904578276382784487080.html

Hard to Put Red-Light Violations Under a Lens

As red-light cameras have proliferated around the U.S. over the past two decades to hundreds of cities and towns, there is one troubling detail: They don't always make traffic intersections safer.

Police departments in more than 500 cities and towns use the cameras—and, usually, signs warning of their presence—to record motorists who run red lights and to ticket them. The goals are to deter drivers from going through an intersection after the light has turned red and to prevent dangerous crashes.

But local results can vary. In recent years, municipalities including Los Angeles, Philadelphia and St. Petersburg, Fla., have found that crashes increased at intersections where cameras are installed. Everything from the choice of intersection, to how long a light stays yellow before turning red, to the methods used to evaluate the cameras can influence whether they are deemed successful.

Counting rear-end crashes, for example, can sometimes mean the cameras increase the total number of accidents—as drivers slam on the brakes when they see a warning—though even an overall increase in collisions can be worthwhile, some researchers say, if the most severe crashes decline.

"We don't have a laboratory where we can look at these things," said Kimberly Eccles, a principal at Vanasse Hangen Brustlin Inc., an engineering consulting firm.

Red-light cameras have been controversial for several reasons. Privacy advocates regard them as intrusive, and many motorists complain they have been unfairly ticketed for relatively minor infractions, such as rolling right turns on red.

The conflicting research results on cameras' effectiveness have made them a contentious issue for local authorities, too. Municipalities must strike a balance between using peer-reviewed studies from other towns or cities—which include advanced statistical analysis and control for traffic volume and other factors—and using their own raw numbers, which may not account for all factors but do reflect local conditions.

"It's sort of a mistake in some ways for every city to try to conduct a comprehensive analysis of a countermeasure"—such as red-light cameras—"applied on a limited basis, where they don't have the data or, in some cases, the expertise to do the analysis," said Richard Retting, a consultant with Sam Schwartz Engineering in Fairfax, Va.

Close.Mr. Retting worked for 20 years for the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, or IIHS, an insurance-industry-funded group, where he published several studies finding safety benefits from red-light cameras. He compares conducting studies of every camera-equipped intersection in a region to doctors conducting individual research papers on each patient rather than relying on published medical studies.

But Declan O'Scanlon, a New Jersey state assemblyman, said the state department of transportation's initial study of crashes at camera-equipped intersections—which didn't control for traffic volume or other factors—was critical in forming his opinion that cameras "do not reduce accidents, which makes them not worthwhile." The state, in a report published in November, found that crashes in most categories of severity increased at camera-equipped intersections in the year after they were installed.

Researchers caution that raw data could mislead in several ways. For one thing, simple counts of crashes lump together rear-end hits that damage cars but not people with more dangerous right-angle crashes. Some studies, such as the New Jersey report, translate types of crash into their typical cost equivalent—for instance, $216,000 for disabling injury compared with $7,400 for crashes that damage only property. Just a few fatal crashes can skew the results because they are assigned a cost value in the millions of dollars.

Simple before-and-after comparisons also won't do, researchers say. For one thing, intersections typically are chosen for camera installation because they have had a spate of accidents. That makes them due for a fall just by statistical chance. Also, other traffic trends or enforcement measures, such as speed cameras, could account for changes in crash rates. And choosing another site for comparison isn't easy: Choose one too close to intersections with cameras and it could experience a so-called spillover effect, when camera-less intersections along the same route are affected by motorists conditioned by cameras.

Some traffic engineers say other types of interventions can be at least as beneficial as cameras, without their privacy issues. Lengthening yellow-light intervals, for example, gives motorists more time to hit the brakes.

Simon Washington, a civil-engineering professor at Queensland University of Technology in Brisbane, Australia, co-wrote a study for the Arizona Department of Transportation in 2005 that cited other work showing that extending yellow-light intervals can reduce red-light running by 50% to 70%.

But Prof. Washington isn't sure that is the way to go. "If you increase yellow times all around, you reduce the capacity of intersections," he said.

Extending yellow times could also backfire by causing longer queues at lights and more rear-end crashes as motorists are surprised by the stopped traffic, said Ms. Eccles, the transportation-engineering consultant.

She added that red-light cameras generally are effective when deployed correctly. However, "because of the controversial nature of red-light cameras, I do believe an agency should consider everything else" before installing them, she said.

[Adam W]

The weekend edition of the Wall Street Journal had a pretty balanced look at red-light cameras:

I'm personally against them for a variety of reasons (particularly in that cities seem to be installing them for purposes of revenue rather than safety), but the article does a pretty good job presenting both sides of the argument fairly.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323701904578276382784487080.html

Hard to Put Red-Light Violations Under a Lens

As red-light cameras have proliferated around the U.S. over the past two decades to hundreds of cities and towns, there is one troubling detail: They don't always make traffic intersections safer.

Police departments in more than 500 cities and towns use the cameras—and, usually, signs warning of their presence—to record motorists who run red lights and to ticket them. The goals are to deter drivers from going through an intersection after the light has turned red and to prevent dangerous crashes.

But local results can vary. In recent years, municipalities including Los Angeles, Philadelphia and St. Petersburg, Fla., have found that crashes increased at intersections where cameras are installed. Everything from the choice of intersection, to how long a light stays yellow before turning red, to the methods used to evaluate the cameras can influence whether they are deemed successful.

Counting rear-end crashes, for example, can sometimes mean the cameras increase the total number of accidents—as drivers slam on the brakes when they see a warning—though even an overall increase in collisions can be worthwhile, some researchers say, if the most severe crashes decline.

"We don't have a laboratory where we can look at these things," said Kimberly Eccles, a principal at Vanasse Hangen Brustlin Inc., an engineering consulting firm.

Red-light cameras have been controversial for several reasons. Privacy advocates regard them as intrusive, and many motorists complain they have been unfairly ticketed for relatively minor infractions, such as rolling right turns on red.

The conflicting research results on cameras' effectiveness have made them a contentious issue for local authorities, too. Municipalities must strike a balance between using peer-reviewed studies from other towns or cities—which include advanced statistical analysis and control for traffic volume and other factors—and using their own raw numbers, which may not account for all factors but do reflect local conditions.

"It's sort of a mistake in some ways for every city to try to conduct a comprehensive analysis of a countermeasure"—such as red-light cameras—"applied on a limited basis, where they don't have the data or, in some cases, the expertise to do the analysis," said Richard Retting, a consultant with Sam Schwartz Engineering in Fairfax, Va.

Close.Mr. Retting worked for 20 years for the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, or IIHS, an insurance-industry-funded group, where he published several studies finding safety benefits from red-light cameras. He compares conducting studies of every camera-equipped intersection in a region to doctors conducting individual research papers on each patient rather than relying on published medical studies.

But Declan O'Scanlon, a New Jersey state assemblyman, said the state department of transportation's initial study of crashes at camera-equipped intersections—which didn't control for traffic volume or other factors—was critical in forming his opinion that cameras "do not reduce accidents, which makes them not worthwhile." The state, in a report published in November, found that crashes in most categories of severity increased at camera-equipped intersections in the year after they were installed.

Researchers caution that raw data could mislead in several ways. For one thing, simple counts of crashes lump together rear-end hits that damage cars but not people with more dangerous right-angle crashes. Some studies, such as the New Jersey report, translate types of crash into their typical cost equivalent—for instance, $216,000 for disabling injury compared with $7,400 for crashes that damage only property. Just a few fatal crashes can skew the results because they are assigned a cost value in the millions of dollars.

Simple before-and-after comparisons also won't do, researchers say. For one thing, intersections typically are chosen for camera installation because they have had a spate of accidents. That makes them due for a fall just by statistical chance. Also, other traffic trends or enforcement measures, such as speed cameras, could account for changes in crash rates. And choosing another site for comparison isn't easy: Choose one too close to intersections with cameras and it could experience a so-called spillover effect, when camera-less intersections along the same route are affected by motorists conditioned by cameras.

Some traffic engineers say other types of interventions can be at least as beneficial as cameras, without their privacy issues. Lengthening yellow-light intervals, for example, gives motorists more time to hit the brakes.

Simon Washington, a civil-engineering professor at Queensland University of Technology in Brisbane, Australia, co-wrote a study for the Arizona Department of Transportation in 2005 that cited other work showing that extending yellow-light intervals can reduce red-light running by 50% to 70%.

But Prof. Washington isn't sure that is the way to go. "If you increase yellow times all around, you reduce the capacity of intersections," he said.

Extending yellow times could also backfire by causing longer queues at lights and more rear-end crashes as motorists are surprised by the stopped traffic, said Ms. Eccles, the transportation-engineering consultant.

She added that red-light cameras generally are effective when deployed correctly. However, "because of the controversial nature of red-light cameras, I do believe an agency should consider everything else" before installing them, she said.

Good article. It's funny, though, that the author made pretty much all the points that the IIHS Q&A made:

http://www.iihs.org/research/qanda/rlr.aspx

[bubbalooey]

I was brought up in another era where driving was a privilege, not a "right" like so many believe today.  I learned from getting a few tickets to obey traffic laws, rather spend the fine money on myself rather than give the government.  Most comments tend to send a  message that running red lights/stop signs is ok, if you just avoid an accident, or an officer didn't see it.  Twenty years ago I saw the results of an accident on an interstate, a van was on the side of the road with the drivers door gone, inside lie a female with multiple injuries and obviously dead.  Drivers these day are in safer vehicles but most are raised playing video games and tend to treat driving like it's a game, one in which they won't get injured.  The most dangerous ones are the ones who swerve in and out of traffic and run lights/stop signs and speed.  They should lose their privilege to drive, some should never get it back.  It will only worsen until police start enforcing laws again.  Either enforce the laws or take them off the books.

[WJDII]

I am curious of how one would not be ticketed for turning right (or left if one is turning from a one-way to a one-way) on red. Would one be cited if one does not make a complete stop prior to the turn?

What about driving record? Would the infraction be attached to the driver's record or the vehicle record? Would insurance companies be able to factor these citations in when renewing policies?

Many questions. Few Answers. Thanks COJ.