Do these still go to collections and affect your credit score? Because that sounds like a consequence...

Treygreen13: I look forward to the day when we look back on these and laugh.

That day is today. Unfortunately, it's one of those really pathetic, half-hearted laughs that eventually sublimates into downtrodden whimpering and crying.

Goopotato: Do these still go to collections and affect your credit score? Because that sounds like a consequence...

It's not real money

They've been saying this much for years. You notice these traffic tickets aren't issued by any court, they don't have a picture of you as the driver and they're not handed to you by a cop. That would mean they're unenforceable. And THAT would mean payment is not just optional, but stupid. :)

OregonVet: $480 for a red light? Holy shiat.

When you compare it to the price of everything else in Southern California, it doesn't really make you go holy shiat.

Yeah, in Houston these cameras were voted out by a landslide and turned off. A few months later, they were quietly turned back on because of the contract we had with the camera company.

Now, I have no problem in they turn them on til that one contract ends, but they won't be. It will probably be re-upped and continued. The voters spoke, and were given a hearty "up yours."

These cameras are sold as "improving road safety" but that's complete bullshiat. Collisions increase at intersections with these cameras. Hatehatehate them. And that my vote was for naught.

When Bob Brickman got a ticket generated by a traffic camera last fall for running a red light at the corner of Wilshire and Sepulveda boulevards, he spent months fighting it.

You know who else hated Sepulveda? (new window)

Well they can solve this problem, by actually making it a legal fine that you have to pay.

Hello Budget Crisis - Meet violators of the laws of traffic.

Goopotato: Do these still go to collections and affect your credit score? Because that sounds like a consequence...

FTA: "They said you can and if it was going to affect anything, I might, but if it's not going to affect my credit or if I don't have to go to court or have a boot on my car, then I won't."

Sounds like its not really a consequence....

The City of Cleveland sent me a photo radar ticket a day after a big newspaper story about how less than 20% of them get paid. I figured that with that backlog, they're going to take a lot of time to get around to me, if ever, especially since they don't know who was driving. Fail bureaucracy is fail.

Tossed it in the trash, never heard from them again.

Argh, you're not supposed to tell people that. Now they'll just run the red light people will die and burn and explode.

Walker: algrant33: They've been saying this much for years. You notice these traffic tickets aren't issued by any court, they don't have a picture of you as the driver and they're not handed to you by a cop. That would mean they're unenforceable. And THAT would mean payment is not just optional, but stupid. :)

Exactly THIS!

Only cops can issue tickets. Not some bureaucrat, not some minimum wage making office temp, not some person in India.

My wife got one in MD (where we also live). They somehow sent the first and second notice to our old adress (which was funny because the DMV gave her a license with the correct one before all of this). We got a third notice from the DMV saying her license was going to be suspended if we didn't pay up.

So while I agree with you in principle, and the law may actually back you up, the reality is unless you pay it in many places you risk a long expensive legal battle if you don't pay.

Walker: algrant33: They've been saying this much for years. You notice these traffic tickets aren't issued by any court, they don't have a picture of you as the driver and they're not handed to you by a cop. That would mean they're unenforceable. And THAT would mean payment is not just optional, but stupid. :)

Exactly THIS!

Only cops can issue tickets. Not some bureaucrat, not some minimum wage making office temp, not some person in India.

If a cop isn't around, it's ok to break the law!

algrant33: They've been saying this much for years. You notice these traffic tickets aren't issued by any court, they don't have a picture of you as the driver and they're not handed to you by a cop. That would mean they're unenforceable. And THAT would mean payment is not just optional, but stupid. :)

Kinda like parking tickets huh?

chewielouie: algrant33: They've been saying this much for years. You notice these traffic tickets aren't issued by any court, they don't have a picture of you as the driver and they're not handed to you by a cop. That would mean they're unenforceable. And THAT would mean payment is not just optional, but stupid. :)

Kinda like parking tickets huh?

Parking tickets are not written to a person. They are written on the license plate of the car.

And technically you don't need to pay that either. You won't be taken to court etc. (atleast in WI)

/the plates won't be renewable though.

erik316wttn: Walker: algrant33: They've been saying this much for years. You notice these traffic tickets aren't issued by any court, they don't have a picture of you as the driver and they're not handed to you by a cop. That would mean they're unenforceable. And THAT would mean payment is not just optional, but stupid. :)

Exactly THIS!

Only cops can issue tickets. Not some bureaucrat, not some minimum wage making office temp, not some person in India.

If a cop isn't around, it's ok to break the law!

More like these machines can't possibly take real world road conditions into consideration, and I don't like them judging my driving with the sole purpose being to suck money from constituents UNDER THE GUISE of "we're improving your safety, citizen."

I do not run red lights. I do not speed (much). I have had 1 speeding ticket in 16 years going 40 in a 35 while running late to work. But, if I come to a red light and need to turn right and there is NO ONE coming the other way, it only serves to waste gas and slow the line behind me to come to a 100% complete stop in that scenario.

A cop witnessing such an "infraction" would let it pass 99% of the time as responsible driving to ease traffic flow. The machine automatically says, "No. Fark you. Pay up, asshole."

Not to mention the false positives, purposefully shortening yellow light times to trigger more auto-tickets, and that they increase rear-end collisions... I would pay a higher direct tax for the services this money supports, but this underhanded bullshiat about safety just grinds my gears.

I wish it was that way in TN:
If you would like to request a hearing.....If you fail to attend you hearing, you will be found liable and will be responsible for the fine and any additional penealties

but further down in the Notice of Violation:
This violation is deemeda non-criminal violation for wich a penealty of $50 is assessed. Your failure to contest this Notice of Violation in the manner and time as instructed above, before the due date shown on the front of this notice, shall be an admission of liability and a judgement MAY be entered thereon

Or is it? I jsut got poped doing 58 in a 45 with one of these cameras and was happy to only pay $50 for that violation (but would of rather kept the money in my pocket)

(Pico and Sepulveda, Pico and Sepulveda)
(Pico and Sepulveda, Pico and Sepulveda)
Where nobody's dreams come true
(Pico and Sepulveda, Pico and Sepulveda)
(Pico and Sepulveda, Pico and Sepulveda)

"...unemployed alcohol and drug recovery counselor"
Relapse?

What many commenters fail to realize is that, in LA, there are very few left-hand turn signals. The only was to make a left is to hover in the intersection and wait for the (gridlocked) opposing traffic to stop at their yellow light. If they don't, you're forced to run the red.

LanguageLikeBonsais: What many commenters fail to realize is that, in LA, there are very few left-hand turn signals. The only was to make a left is to hover in the intersection and wait for the (gridlocked) opposing traffic to stop at their yellow light. If they don't, you're forced to run the red.

Sucks to be you, citizen. Camera knows best. They don't see the traffic, just your cars ass sticking out in the intersection after the red light changed. Pay up. It's for your saaaaaafety!

Some areas are now using camera radar to issue SPEEDING TICKETS.

/America has died, we're in a police state now
//nothing to see here citizen, move along

Sybarite: Brickman, an unemployed alcohol and drug recovery counselor

Wow, what does he do when he's depressed about being out of work?

At least he didn't work at the unemployment office. Imagine getting laid off and still having to show up to work.

LanguageLikeBonsais: What many commenters fail to realize is that, in LA, there are very few left-hand turn signals. The only was to make a left is to hover in the intersection and wait for the (gridlocked) opposing traffic to stop at their yellow light. If they don't, you're forced to run the red.

Sucks to be you, citizen. Camera knows best. They don't see the traffic, just your cars ass sticking out in the intersection after the red light changed. Pay up. It's for your saaaaaafety!

The law, as I am familiar with it, is as long as your back wheels are passed the white line then you are legally in the intersection. This includes turning and running the yellow light. I was taught in Driver's Ed in NY when I got my license that the driver making a left is supposed to pull into the intersection and make the turn when appropriate, including when the light changes red. This way at least one car turns left every cycle of the light. THIS MEANS DO NOT BACK UP! I will never understand why people do that.

Don't run red lights. (And don't drive like an asshat.)

That being said, red light cameras suck royally.

Yes, there are lots of crappy drivers doing lots of crappy things, but these corporate profit-machines aren't the answer.

My son got one last year, researched it and found the (California) loophole to just ignore it without penalty. He ignored it - no penalty, no repercussions whatever.

Bodgingbrom: Goopotato: Do these still go to collections and affect your credit score? Because that sounds like a consequence...

FTA: "They said you can and if it was going to affect anything, I might, but if it's not going to affect my credit or if I don't have to go to court or have a boot on my car, then I won't."

Sounds like its not really a consequence....

I was curious because of this statement from TFA:

"The consequence is somebody calling you from one of these collection agencies and saying 'pay up.' And that's it," said committee member and Councilman Bill Rosendahl. "There's no real penalty in terms of your driver's license or any other consequences if you don't pay."

What many commenters fail to realize is that, in LA, there are very few left-hand turn signals. The only was to make a left is to hover in the intersection and wait for the (gridlocked) opposing traffic to stop at their yellow light. If they don't, you're forced to run the red.

That's just silly. Running the red entails entering the intersection after the light has changed, and the cameras are focused on a trigger point of you crossing the crosswalk (more or less.) By law, if you are in an intersection and the light turns red, you are required to clear the intersection, and traffic with the green is required to wait for you to clear it. You don't get a red light ticket for clearing the intersection, just for entering it when the light has already turned red.

I am one of the most cautious drivers I know, and ALWAYS stop fully (much to my significant other's frustration) but I just receives one of these for turning right at a red light (where right turns on red are allowed). It claims I didn't stop...

Anyone know the laws in Illinois? Or what the likelihood of it getting thrown out if I request a hearing is? It was "signed" by a local police officer, so I think technically it may be more valid than ones sent directly from the red light company (although it's a digital sig, so who knows).

/help!

territ: Collisions increase at intersections with these cameras.

If you can't avoid running into someone who is slowing down for a yellow light (like you're supposed to) or stopping for a red light, you are not qualified to drive.

Misch: territ: Not to mention the false positives, purposefully shortening yellow light times to trigger more auto-tickets, and that they increase rear-end collisions... I would pay a higher direct tax for the services this money supports, but this underhanded bullshiat about safety just grinds my gears.

It's not just rear-end collisions that increase, broadsides increase too.

Preaching to the choir here, mate. I cannot believe that anyone, outside of the government offices receiving millions from them, supports these things. They are about raising funds ONLY, through unreliable means. Hateeeeessss them, precious.

AntiNorm: If you can't avoid running into someone who is slowing down for a yellow light (like you're supposed to)

That's funny... my DMV handbook says a yellow light means "stop if you can do so safely" not OMFG BRAKES BRAKES BRAKES! trying to avoid skidding into the intersection before it turns red.

/one dangerously short yellow on the way to work every morning
//no camera there yet

When they first put them in around here, they put them at a stoplight on a 4 lane divided highway with speed limit of 55-60.

The yellow timer was CUT IN HALF. I couldn't but barely bring my small light car to a stop over the white line doing the speed limit.

Some people did 70 there, there's no way you're stopping in 2 seconds.

Lamune_Baba: AntiNorm: If you can't avoid running into someone who is slowing down for a yellow light (like you're supposed to)

That's funny... my DMV handbook says a yellow light means "stop if you can do so safely" not OMFG BRAKES BRAKES BRAKES! trying to avoid skidding into the intersection before it turns red.

/one dangerously short yellow on the way to work every morning
//no camera there yet

I just had to take a written test yesterday to change from IL to CA and that's the one question I got wrong.

Q: At what point is it safe to pass through a light turning red?
a) If you can pass through the intersection before yellow turns to red
b) I forgot, it was obviously not correct
c) Stop at the yellow if you can do so safely.

I chose C, but it was marked wrong. So in CA, they want you to run the yellow even if you can stop safely at the yellow. The correct answer was A.

We found that here in Albuquerque last Year. The news said, and the police confirmed it is not considered a crime if you get popped running a camera. Even though the mailed tickets make it sound as a crime, it is not enforced, and purely "voluntary" Wish I'd known that when I first moved here. Unenforced, get pulled over, will not get anything done if have that ticket outstanding. Turns out, the camera company got most of the cash, and the police only got 15%, mostly relying on those out of state to pay the tickets.

D'oh!

It's funny how there's never an outrage over fuzzbusters. But when they talk of mailing you the ticket, all of the talk shows (mainly conservative) light up, especially here in Charlotte. I was listening to this debate on the radio one day as I was driving down the road of a highway posted with 65 mph speed limit signs. I decided to put my cruise control at 70 just to be fair and for every car I passed, 30 passed me. We have become a nation of folks who regularly break laws when we get behind the wheel of a car...then we get upset when government wants to control it.