If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(South Jersey Courier-Post)   Red light cameras have brought New Jersey a 20% increase in rear-end collisions and an additional $1 million in property damage per intersection   (courierpostonline.com) divider line 170
    More: Asinine, New Jersey, red light cameras, seat, prices, South Jersey, Gloucester Township  
•       •       •

7177 clicks; posted to Main » on 27 Nov 2012 at 1:14 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



170 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2012-11-27 10:00:48 AM
The next question is, are the new statistics accurate or trimmed to make the cameras look better? Among the techniques used previously: only report accidents with both cars over the stop bar (eliminating approach accidents), only report accidents coded as "red light running," lie, apply inapplicable corrections (like taking a list of injury accidents and throwing out rear-enders because they don't usually cause injury).
 
2012-11-27 10:47:47 AM
But collisions are paid for by drivers and insurance companies, while government gets that sweet camera loot.
 
2012-11-27 10:48:15 AM
Only problem is the rear ends and the property damage is all private while the revenue generated is all going to the guberment. There is no incentive for the guberment to change.


guberment
 
2012-11-27 10:48:51 AM

Snarfangel: But collisions are paid for by drivers and insurance companies, while government gets that sweet camera loot.


I just had to get wordy....
 
2012-11-27 10:52:43 AM
But hey, the cameras make the roads SAFER.
 
2012-11-27 10:53:40 AM
FTFA:
"And O'Scanlon argued the program has changed drivers' behavior in a negative way.

"What we are doing is making people paranoid - causing them to slam on the brakes at the slightest hint a light might change, or deciding to fail to make even an absolutely safe right turn on red," he said."


Paging Mr. Romero...
 
2012-11-27 10:55:38 AM
No, the real question is how many countless lives have actually been saved by this. Consider this scenario:

Bobby Ericson, 9, is playing in his yard. He kicks the softball and runs out into the street to retrieve it. What he doesn't know is that Douglas Macavoy, 34, is speeding up the residential street, which has a 25-mile-per-hour limit, at 43 miles per hour. Mr. Macavoy is going that fast because he just finished running the red light at the previous intersection, which had started turning yellow even as he approached it. However, seeing no camera on the pole, he floored the accelerator and ran the light. Now, as he rounds the Pete's Plumbing van parked on the curve, he's shocked to find little sandy-haired Bobby crouching in the street right in front of him. And, splat, just like that, two lives are irreparably destroyed -- Bobby is paralyzed from the neck down for the rest of his life. Mr. Macavoy is in jail. His wife leaves him after a few months after starting an affair with his probation officer. She takes his children. Despondent, alone, he attempts to take his own life by jumping out a window in a ramshackle motel, but he lands on a pedestrian and breaks her neck. Now he's in jail again, only for murder this time. And all he can think on those long nights as he's gripped in Bubba's sweaty embrace is: If only I had stopped for that light. If only there had been a camera, I would have stopped for that life.

Would you seriously, subby, weigh a little bit of property damage, a bent fender, against these two shattered lives. What's one million dollars when compared to infinite suffering and shattered lives? Next time, remember Mr. Macavoy's sad tale before you post.
 
2012-11-27 11:29:44 AM
Replace them all with roundabouts!

//runs
 
2012-11-27 11:47:40 AM

tallguywithglasseson: Replace them all with roundabouts!

//runs


I love roundabouts.

That is all.
 
2012-11-27 12:02:32 PM

Snarfangel: But collisions are paid for by drivers and insurance companies, while government gets that sweet camera loot.


Yup. Around here (AZ) I watch idiots tap their brakes on green lights "just in case" it's about to turn yellow. I had to do an emergency stop from 50mph because the yellow at a particular intersection isn't long enough (no surprise there either).
 
2012-11-27 12:25:53 PM

Pocket Ninja: Would you seriously, subby, weigh a little bit of property damage, a bent fender, against these two shattered lives. What's one million dollars when compared to infinite suffering and shattered lives? Next time, remember Mr. Macavoy's sad tale before you post.


PN delivers.
 
2012-11-27 12:34:10 PM

tallguywithglasseson: Replace them all with roundabouts!

//runs


Works for me. There are several still in use near here (Along NY6 and the Palisades Pkwy) I remember the ones in Wayne on Route 23 too. They worked amazingly well considering that they were full of NJ drivers.

They'd work even better if driver education and training in the USA wasn't such a farking joke.
 
2012-11-27 01:17:56 PM
Revenue boost *and* localized economic stimulus? Brilliant!
 
2012-11-27 01:18:22 PM
Increase in rear collision because people are driving to fast, but how many seriously accidents have been reduced? (T-bones, etc)

No no that would hint at the red light cameras working, and we can't have that here on Fark.
 
2012-11-27 01:19:19 PM

Eddie Adams from Torrance: tallguywithglasseson: Replace them all with roundabouts!

//runs

Works for me. There are several still in use near here (Along NY6 and the Palisades Pkwy) I remember the ones in Wayne on Route 23 too. They worked amazingly well considering that they were full of NJ drivers.

They'd work even better if driver education and training in the USA wasn't such a farking joke.


Whatter y'all talk'in about?? We has NASCAR!!!
 
2012-11-27 01:21:10 PM
PocketNinja improves my day.

And is it bad that I took his tale as a reason why we should allow more speeding to teach kids to stay out of the street?

I think all the time on the politics tab is blackening my heart.
 
2012-11-27 01:21:11 PM
So.... people shouldn't follow too closely?

Problem solved.

(You shouldn't run red lights... it's dangerous)
 
2012-11-27 01:21:37 PM

Snarfangel: But collisions are paid for by drivers and insurance companies, while government gets that sweet camera loot.


Follow the money, it leads you to the answer almost every time.
 
2012-11-27 01:21:37 PM

Snarfangel: But collisions are paid for by drivers and insurance companies, while government gets that sweet camera loot.


Except rear-end collisions (which tend to be low speed) are up massively and total collisions (including T-bone crashes, the ones that tend to be high speed) are down so there is only a very slight climb in total collisions. Fewer bad crashes, slightly more less minor collisions.

I'll bet you any money the number of people hospitalised has fallen.
 
2012-11-27 01:21:46 PM

Slaxl: tallguywithglasseson: Replace them all with roundabouts!

//runs

I love roundabouts.

That is all.


Me too! Feeling the roundabouts love in this thread
 
2012-11-27 01:22:22 PM
Putting aside the issue of whether or not cameras are good, people who slam on their brakes and cause a collision because of red light cameras ARE FARKING IDIOTS.

Do you really think risking the destruction of your car and your health is worth it to avoid a petty ticket? Grow a brain, morans.
 
2012-11-27 01:22:57 PM

ZAZ: like taking a list of injury accidents and throwing out rear-enders because they don't usually cause injury


Sorry, but if your concern is the safety of human beings, then it is not inapplicable to remove accidents that don't cause injury.
 
2012-11-27 01:25:22 PM
Sadly, red light cameras are a solution to a problem that doesn't really exist. Sure, we can all agree that running red lights is bad, but it's nowhere near an epidemic and a vast, vast majority of drivers stop for red lights. When it happens, something awful may result, but it's also like saying that sometimes airplanes crash, so we should outlaw airplanes. Statistically, red-light running is a non-event.

However, it is BIG money and a cause the public will blindly get behind. Never mind that it changes the dynamics of accidents around the light and that they are specifically designed to cause MORE people to run red lights (and thus drive up revenue).

It's a money grab, pure and simple. There are no statistics in favor of red light cameras except those the companies supply to municipalities telling them about the money they can collect from them.
 
2012-11-27 01:26:03 PM

Drakin020: Increase in rear collision because people are driving to fast, but how many seriously accidents have been reduced? (T-bones, etc)

No no that would hint at the red light cameras working, and we can't have that here on Fark.


None. Literally none. We're only considering drivers who are coherent enough to realize there's a camera, right? It doesn't deter people from running it after 2 seconds after the light turns red, as the cameras stop taking pictures around that time. Those who run the light under 2 seconds after it turns red don't t-bone cars, as they haven't had enough time to get that far into it. Satisfied? No reasonable person proposes that red light cameras have literally any effect on t-bone accidents.
 
2012-11-27 01:29:04 PM
Anyone who is surprised, raise your hand... so I can slap you.

I have personally witnessed this phenomena since the red light cameras have been installed in my area. Hell, I feel a quick twinge of anxiety every time a light goes yellow just before I cross the line, and I have above average driving and riding capabilities thanks to race experience. I can comprehend, from a psychological point of view, why average joe or jane stomps the brakes and skids to a stop - because they aren't good at what they're doing and can't judge whether they'll cross that line before the light goes red. Then the person who is following too close behind or having a lapse of concentration slams into them, causing thousands in injuries and property damage over the scare provided by a $150 ticket.

The fundamental flaw with the logic behind red light cameras is that they generate revenue when the drivers are unsafe and generate none when the drivers do what they should; this is a similar logical error to the for-profit (privatised) prisons, which make more money when more criminals exist.

The correct way to make the roads safer is through stricter licensing requirements and more driver training, NOT punishing silly mistakes like crossing the line .10 seconds too late. The dangerous red light runners are the ones who blow it after the light has gone red and t-bone the cars that are already moving in the other lanes, not the ones that get the majority of the tickets; the guys who cross the line long before the other lights go green.
 
2012-11-27 01:29:54 PM

Jument: Putting aside the issue of whether or not cameras are good, people who slam on their brakes and cause a collision because of red light cameras ARE FARKING IDIOTS.

Do you really think risking the destruction of your car and your health is worth it to avoid a petty ticket? Grow a brain, morans.


It should not even be a problem. If you travel at the legally allotted sleep limit and pay attention you should never be put in a position to have to choose from slamming on the breaks and having the person behind you ram into you or run a red light.

You can also easily avoid a rear-end collision in which you are the potential rear-ended by following at a safe distance and paying attention. If the person in front of you slams on the breaks at a yellow light because they weren't paying attention, it shouldn't be a problem for you since you should already started to apply the breaks to make a safe stop at the up coming red.
 
2012-11-27 01:31:50 PM
Sure doesn't say much for the over all level of driving skills in New jersey. If your to close for the car in front of you to stop at a red light then you my friend are driving like an idiot.

Of course we cant be honest about these things, like blaming the morons who run the lights in the first place. With out them we would not need the cameras. And any one who rear ends a car stopping for a light should not be driving in the first place.
 
2012-11-27 01:31:53 PM
If the yellow light times are set to proper standards the lights don't make enough money to pay for themselves and have to be scrapped.
 
2012-11-27 01:33:08 PM
Curious, what's the insurance companies' take on this?
More expenses?
Or more reason to raise premiums?
 
2012-11-27 01:33:56 PM
Rear ends typically aren't fatal. 90 degree crashes (the kind that result from red light running) typically are.
 
2012-11-27 01:34:42 PM
Perhaps you shouldn't speed and tailgate people. Typically, if one follows traffic laws, the risk of an accident is minimal.
 
2012-11-27 01:35:40 PM

Gig103: Snarfangel: But collisions are paid for by drivers and insurance companies, while government gets that sweet camera loot.

Yup. Around here (AZ) I watch idiots tap their brakes on green lights "just in case" it's about to turn yellow. I had to do an emergency stop from 50mph because the yellow at a particular intersection isn't long enough (no surprise there either).


There is a major road that I have to take. It leads to my development. The speed limit on that road is 45 mph. Since they put a speed camera there, everyone slows down to well below 40 mph when they hit that stretch of road. Of course, it's also right after you come down a hill. I'm sure they got lots of tickets generated when the cameras first went up, but we have them all over town now, and I can't remember the last time I saw someone get flashed by one.

We vote on every other thing in this silly state. I don't understand why we can't get a referendum on the ballot to get rid of the cameras.
 
2012-11-27 01:36:18 PM
here in florida i looked at one of the kids books for driving
and in it it had the sentence...
that you should slow down at EVERY intersection
in case someone runs the stop sign
AAAAAAAAAAAH HOW WOULD YOU GET ANYWHERE
it is not a law but a suggestion for drivers but still???
 
2012-11-27 01:36:37 PM
Around here they have been modifying pedestrian walk lights with a digital countdown timer which makes it very easy to see when the light is about to change and make a judgement call on whether you should begin stopping or make a run for it. Very handy and avoids the anxiety of knowing there's a red light camera and only seeing a flashing no walk light which could be anywhere from 1-10 secs before the light changes.
 
2012-11-27 01:37:02 PM
Yeah, but at least a faceless corporation made a killing off a government contract.
 
2012-11-27 01:37:48 PM
So, the roads are safer!
img839.imageshack.us
Strategery.
 
2012-11-27 01:38:13 PM
You know, the worst part about it isn't that people stop 'safely.' The idea of yellow lights is to say, "The light is going to turn red in a few seconds. Stop if you can, keep going if you can't." People are usually pretty damn good at being able to figure it out. The problem is now when a lot of people see yellow lights, they lock their brakes up. We're talking smoking tires and completely losing control of their car. Problem is if the person behind them takes an average time to respond and doesn't ALSO lock up their brakes, they're going to hit the person in the ass. It's already a problem before you factor in people doing their make up in the car, reading the internet, watching movies, texting friends, impaired drivers, etc. I've personally witnessed countless numbers of people lock their brakes up the instant the light turns yellow, likely afraid that the light is only going to last about half a second before turning red (which happens a lot in some areas..yellow light times were shortened significantly in order to increase violations).

So you get people slowing down to anticipate the green to yellow change, which slows down traffic flow, increases chances of an accident (increased number of red light interactions, also slowing down decreases separation distance between cars), etc, etc.

I would be alright with the use of red light cameras if they didn't tread so much on common sense. Any time there's a zero tolerance policy in effect, there's probably plenty of derp around. Red light cameras are an example of a zero tolerance policy. I've gotten ticketed for going right on red before (after stopping...apparently I didn't stop for long enough), for moving out of the way of an ambulance (they refused to undo the ticket, so I had to pay), and for going 1mm over the line after I had been stopped for a good two minutes. Not once have I gotten one for actually running a red light.
 
2012-11-27 01:38:16 PM
It's not a rear-end collision, it's "Getting McGreevey'd"

Sheesh subby, it's like you aren't even from the Garden State...

:-P
 
2012-11-27 01:38:24 PM

max_pooper: If you travel at the legally allotted sleep limit and pay attention you should never be put in a position to have to choose from slamming on the breaks and having the person behind you ram into you or run a red light.


Sleep limit?... I have a hard time paying attention when I'm sleeping.
 
2012-11-27 01:39:17 PM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Rear ends typically aren't fatal. 90 degree crashes (the kind that result from red light running) typically are.


"Typically are"? Really?

The English language gives up.
 
2012-11-27 01:40:53 PM

Contribution Corsair: PocketNinja improves my day.

And is it bad that I took his tale as a reason why we should allow more speeding to teach kids to stay out of the street?

I think all the time on the politics tab is blackening my heart.


That's why I avoid the politics tab altogether.
 
2012-11-27 01:41:01 PM

DubyaHater: Perhaps you shouldn't speed and tailgate people. Typically, if one follows traffic laws, the risk of an accident is minimal.


The yellow light duration is reduced and people are either terrified of running the red or anxious to make the light on green and yellow. The combination is not good. They're also inexplicably slow in moving forward on the green, but that's normal.
 
2012-11-27 01:42:02 PM

Pocket Ninja: No, the real question is how many countless lives have actually been saved by this. Consider this scenario:

Bobby Ericson, 9, is playing in his yard. He kicks the softball and runs out into the street to retrieve it. What he doesn't know is that Douglas Macavoy, 34, is speeding up the residential street, which has a 25-mile-per-hour limit, at 43 miles per hour. Mr. Macavoy is going that fast because he just finished running the red light at the previous intersection, which had started turning yellow even as he approached it. However, seeing no camera on the pole, he floored the accelerator and ran the light. Now, as he rounds the Pete's Plumbing van parked on the curve, he's shocked to find little sandy-haired Bobby crouching in the street right in front of him. And, splat, just like that, two lives are irreparably destroyed -- Bobby is paralyzed from the neck down for the rest of his life. Mr. Macavoy is in jail. His wife leaves him after a few months after starting an affair with his probation officer. She takes his children. Despondent, alone, he attempts to take his own life by jumping out a window in a ramshackle motel, but he lands on a pedestrian and breaks her neck. Now he's in jail again, only for murder this time. And all he can think on those long nights as he's gripped in Bubba's sweaty embrace is: If only I had stopped for that light. If only there had been a camera, I would have stopped for that life.

Would you seriously, subby, weigh a little bit of property damage, a bent fender, against these two shattered lives. What's one million dollars when compared to infinite suffering and shattered lives? Next time, remember Mr. Macavoy's sad tale before you post.


Don't be THAT cable guy!
 
2012-11-27 01:43:59 PM

ringersol: Revenue boost *and* localized economic stimulus? Brilliant!


I know (or at least hope) you're being sarcastic. The "economic stimulus" you are referring to is more properly known as Broken Window Fallacy.
 
2012-11-27 01:44:35 PM

Jument: Putting aside the issue of whether or not cameras are good, people who slam on their brakes and cause a collision because of red light cameras ARE FARKING IDIOTS.

Do you really think risking the destruction of your car and your health is worth it to avoid a petty ticket? Grow a brain, morans.


You think allowing people to think that is worth the few thousand bucks the city will see once it's done paying off ATS? Also those tickets are farking expensive.
 
2012-11-27 01:44:48 PM
While I am tempted to say that I can't believe there are people in here defending red light cameras, sadly, I can believe it.

/Surrender to your betters, the government overlords.
 
2012-11-27 01:47:29 PM

moothemagiccow: DubyaHater: Perhaps you shouldn't speed and tailgate people. Typically, if one follows traffic laws, the risk of an accident is minimal.

The yellow light duration is reduced and people are either terrified of running the red or anxious to make the light on green and yellow. The combination is not good. They're also inexplicably slow in moving forward on the green, but that's normal.


I don't think you understood what he was saying so I'll repeat it: "you shouldn't speed and tailgate people. Typically, if one follows traffic laws, the risk of an accident is minimal."
 
2012-11-27 01:47:55 PM
Switch from cameras to a slowly raising barrier...

Have it start going up halfway in the yellow, so that if you feel the bump (which is now a speed bump by then) you know that you really pushed your luck.

For those that need to really make it across, then they floor it before it reaches the high point and are able to jump in Dukes of Hazard style, which would make them go over any other traffic anyways.

Once red, the barrier is fully erect and some jolly restraining teeth/spikes come out of it, ensuring that when they start going down again (this occurs in perspective of the other side's barriers starting to raise, that no early birds would start edging over the line as it would mean that their tires would be slashed.

Once the light goes green, the teeth/spikes go down and people can go forth.
 
2012-11-27 01:48:08 PM

Gig103: I had to do an emergency stop from 50mph because the yellow at a particular intersection isn't long enough


Yellow light means S L O W D O W N.
 
2012-11-27 01:50:39 PM
www.villageofworth.com
Another life saved by red light cameras!

Roundabouts: Built by local governments that are more concerned about the wellfare of their constituents than cashing in on their mistakes*

*only applies to roundabouts that aren't screwed up with stop signs in them or traffic lights in them coughThomasCirclecough
 
2012-11-27 01:52:40 PM

StrandedInAZ: The speed limit on that road is 45 mph. Since they put a speed camera there, everyone slows down to well below 40 mph when they hit that stretch of road. Of course, it's also right after you come down a hill.


Swan down to River isn't that bad. Uphill is pain, though, due to idiots hitting the brakes in front of the delivery trucks.
 
2012-11-27 01:53:35 PM

Kanemano: Gig103: I had to do an emergency stop from 50mph because the yellow at a particular intersection isn't long enough

Yellow light means S L O W D O W N.


3.bp.blogspot.com

What... ... ... does... ... ... a... ... ... yellow... ... ... light... ... ... mean?
 
2012-11-27 01:53:58 PM

Kanemano: Gig103: I had to do an emergency stop from 50mph because the yellow at a particular intersection isn't long enough

Yellow light means S L O W D O W N.


Yes it does. Slowdown =/= stop though. Also, when most red light camera's are installed, the duration of the yellow light is reduced to increase revinue from the camera. People who have driven for a while are accustomed to a standard timing of a yellow light. When this is reduced, it leads to more 'red light running' and thus more tickets and more sudden stops. More sudden stops leads to more rear end collisions.
 
2012-11-27 01:58:42 PM

bostonbd: Kanemano: Gig103: I had to do an emergency stop from 50mph because the yellow at a particular intersection isn't long enough

Yellow light means S L O W D O W N.

Yes it does. Slowdown =/= stop though. Also, when most red light camera's are installed, the duration of the yellow light is reduced to increase revinue from the camera. People who have driven for a while are accustomed to a standard timing of a yellow light. When this is reduced, it leads to more 'red light running' and thus more tickets and more sudden stops. More sudden stops leads to more rear end collisions.


Again, you should be prepared for the car in front of you to come to a sudden stop at all times - that means maintaining a safe following distance AT ALL TIMES. Why is this so farking difficult to understand?
 
2012-11-27 02:01:16 PM

Hrist: I've personally witnessed countless numbers of people lock their brakes up the instant the light turns yellow


Anybody who does that, I believe some would based on my mom's driving, is an idiot and should not be driving.

Maybe they should install a visible timer showing the number of seconds the yellow light will last. If they're truly interested in public safety that should be no problem. All revenue should go to driver education programs and not into general town/state coffers. Problem solved.
 
2012-11-27 02:04:05 PM

bostonbd: Kanemano: Gig103: I had to do an emergency stop from 50mph because the yellow at a particular intersection isn't long enough

Yellow light means S L O W D O W N.

Yes it does. Slowdown =/= stop though. Also, when most red light camera's are installed, the duration of the yellow light is reduced to increase revinue from the camera. People who have driven for a while are accustomed to a standard timing of a yellow light. When this is reduced, it leads to more 'red light running' and thus more tickets and more sudden stops. More sudden stops leads to more rear end collisions.


Most? Really? You're just pulling shiat out of your ass at this point.
 
2012-11-27 02:04:42 PM
Politicians just love their money. I mean they REALLY love their money.
Given sufficient money, you can make a politician do anything you want. Especially if it is for "safety" (and" campaign contributions")

Scum in suits. Living in the lap of luxury.
 
2012-11-27 02:05:49 PM

bostonbd: Kanemano: Gig103: I had to do an emergency stop from 50mph because the yellow at a particular intersection isn't long enough

Yellow light means S L O W D O W N.

Yes it does. Slowdown =/= stop though. Also, when most red light camera's are installed, the duration of the yellow light is reduced to increase revinue from the camera. People who have driven for a while are accustomed to a standard timing of a yellow light. When this is reduced, it leads to more 'red light running' and thus more tickets and more sudden stops. More sudden stops leads to more rear end collisions.


Actually, a yellow light means 'clear the intersection', one way or another.

gunther_bumpass: Again, you should be prepared for the car in front of you to come to a sudden stop at all times - that means maintaining a safe following distance AT ALL TIMES. Why is this so farking difficult to understand?


Because some people live in the real world where maintaining a huge gap between cars isn't always possible.
 
2012-11-27 02:07:21 PM
clyph: "I know (or at least hope) you're being sarcastic"

Quite. Any "stimulus" effect would be as illusionary as the revenue.
 
2012-11-27 02:07:44 PM

swaxhog: Around here they have been modifying pedestrian walk lights with a digital countdown timer which makes it very easy to see when the light is about to change and make a judgement call on whether you should begin stopping or make a run for it. Very handy and avoids the anxiety of knowing there's a red light camera and only seeing a flashing no walk light which could be anywhere from 1-10 secs before the light changes.


I love those so very very much.

Get rid if me having to guess when it's gonna turn
 
2012-11-27 02:08:32 PM

LiberalEastCoastElitist: Hrist: I've personally witnessed countless numbers of people lock their brakes up the instant the light turns yellow

Anybody who does that, I believe some would based on my mom's driving, is an idiot and should not be driving.

Maybe they should install a visible timer showing the number of seconds the yellow light will last. If they're truly interested in public safety that should be no problem. All revenue should go to driver education programs redesign the unsafe, camera-requiring intersections and not into general town/state coffers. Problem solved.

 

Actually, I find intersections with crosswalks that have signals that count down to be perfect for knowing if I will be able to cleanly make the intersection or if I should start slowing down knowing I won't make it.
 
2012-11-27 02:09:53 PM

bostonbd: Kanemano: Gig103: I had to do an emergency stop from 50mph because the yellow at a particular intersection isn't long enough

Yellow light means S L O W D O W N.

Yes it does. Slowdown =/= stop though. Also, when most red light camera's are installed, the duration of the yellow light is reduced to increase revinue from the camera. People who have driven for a while are accustomed to a standard timing of a yellow light. When this is reduced, it leads to more 'red light running' and thus more tickets and more sudden stops. More sudden stops leads to more rear end collisions.


Why would you be doing 50 MPH approaching an intersection, obviously this is not on the highway, this is city driving, he also had enough time to actually stop the vehicle from 50 MPH, so 100 feet if optimal more likely 150 feet.
 
2012-11-27 02:11:33 PM
I thought the problem with drivers in the northeast (based on my travels there) was that when the cross-traffic is driving at 35-40mph, dumbasses making a right on red dawdle through their turn at 12mph and accelerate to the speed limit after about 200 yards after rounding the corner.
 
2012-11-27 02:12:36 PM

Land Ark: Actually, I find intersections with crosswalks that have signals that count down to be perfect for knowing if I will be able to cleanly make the intersection or if I should start slowing down knowing I won't make it.


YOU HAVE FIFTEEN SECONDS TO CROSS! YOU HAVE TEN SECONDS TO CROSS! FIVE! ... FOUR! ...

i47.tinypic.com
 
2012-11-27 02:14:36 PM
Know how to fix rear end collisions? Stop tailgating and pay attention to where you're going.

If the car in front of you slams on his brakes and you hit him, it is 100% entirely your own fault.
 
2012-11-27 02:15:38 PM

ShamanGator: Sure doesn't say much for the over all level of driving skills in New jersey. If your to close for the car in front of you to stop at a red light then you my friend are driving like an idiot.

Of course we cant be honest about these things, like blaming the morons who run the lights in the first place. With out them we would not need the cameras. And any one who rear ends a car stopping for a light should not be driving in the first place.


Never been to New Jersey eh? It is often not possible to follow at a safe distance as another car will cut in between you and the car in front of you. The little gambit about not following too close doesn't help when the car behind you is too close and puts you in a sandwich.

/lived in NJ for 20 years
//traffic sucks worse here in NYC
 
2012-11-27 02:15:54 PM

Kanemano: Why would you be doing 50 MPH approaching an intersection, obviously this is not on the highway, this is city driving, he also had enough time to actually stop the vehicle from 50 MPH, so 100 feet if optimal more likely 150 feet.


The speed limit on this 4 lane road is 45mph, and the flow of traffic is 50mph. A yellow light means to use caution. It is more cautious to continue through a light at 50mph when I'm 100 feet from the intersection since a BMW's stopping distance from 60mph is about 170 feet. And the yellow light on this intersection is shorter than the traffic lights before and after it, intentionally to increase revenue.

Georgia did it right, and said that yellow lights need to be 4 seconds long if there's going to be a redlight camera, because that gives people ample time to safely stop. And so many people were able to safely stop that the cameras didn't generate enough revenue
 
2012-11-27 02:16:15 PM

gunther_bumpass: Again, you should be prepared for the car in front of you to come to a sudden stop at all times - that means maintaining a safe following distance AT ALL TIMES. Why is this so farking difficult to understand?


You can talk all day about how people should drive, but until you deal with how people actually do drive, you aren't dealing with reality.
 
2012-11-27 02:17:06 PM
But hey, keep voting in democrat...
 
2012-11-27 02:17:20 PM

Jument: Putting aside the issue of whether or not cameras are good, people who slam on their brakes and cause a collision because of red light cameras ARE FARKING IDIOTS.

Do you really think risking the destruction of your car and your health is worth it to avoid a petty ticket? Grow a brain, morans.


The guy slamming on his brakes isn't causing the collision; the asshole tailgating him is.
 
2012-11-27 02:18:54 PM

Pocket Ninja: No, the real question is how many countless lives have actually been saved by this. Consider this scenario:


Here's the pitch, and the swing... and it's outta here. Nicely done, as usual.
 
2012-11-27 02:24:03 PM

jjorsett: Land Ark: Actually, I find intersections with crosswalks that have signals that count down to be perfect for knowing if I will be able to cleanly make the intersection or if I should start slowing down knowing I won't make it.

YOU HAVE FIFTEEN SECONDS TO CROSS! YOU HAVE TEN SECONDS TO CROSS! FIVE! ... FOUR! ...

[i47.tinypic.com image 320x200]


"Ring ring!"
Hello?
Is it about my cube?
 
2012-11-27 02:25:30 PM

max_pooper: It should not even be a problem. If you travel at the legally allotted sleep limit and pay attention you should never be put in a position to have to choose from slamming on the breaks and having the person behind you ram into you or run a red light.


Except that yellow signal timing has been shortened. I'm not saying this applies in New Jersey's case, buuuut....New Jersey shut down 63 of the cameras because the towns failed to certify that the yellow signal timing was correct (according to New Jersey's new formula).
 
2012-11-27 02:27:38 PM
Anyone else live in a place that shortens yellows, so you're nearly guaranteed to be a violator, and $165 poorer? With no realistic way to "fight" it in court?
 
2012-11-27 02:27:38 PM

Kanemano: bostonbd: Kanemano: Gig103: I had to do an emergency stop from 50mph because the yellow at a particular intersection isn't long enough

Yellow light means S L O W D O W N.

Yes it does. Slowdown =/= stop though. Also, when most red light camera's are installed, the duration of the yellow light is reduced to increase revinue from the camera. People who have driven for a while are accustomed to a standard timing of a yellow light. When this is reduced, it leads to more 'red light running' and thus more tickets and more sudden stops. More sudden stops leads to more rear end collisions.

Why would you be doing 50 MPH approaching an intersection, obviously this is not on the highway, this is city driving, he also had enough time to actually stop the vehicle from 50 MPH, so 100 feet if optimal more likely 150 feet.


Route 70 & Springdale Road in Cherry Hill. NJ Route 70 has a 45 or 50 MPH approach speed at the intersection with a red light camera.
 
2012-11-27 02:29:15 PM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Most? Really? You're just pulling shiat out of your ass at this point.


Yes, most. 63 out of 85 traffic lights in NJ were shown to not be correctly calibrated to meet the state law. 74% seems like most to me.

Link
 
2012-11-27 02:29:58 PM

Some 'Splainin' To Do: gunther_bumpass: Again, you should be prepared for the car in front of you to come to a sudden stop at all times - that means maintaining a safe following distance AT ALL TIMES. Why is this so farking difficult to understand?

You can talk all day about how people should drive, but until you deal with how people actually do drive, you aren't dealing with reality.


So much this. There is a vast difference between driving defensively and driving like a jack-hole that causes wrecks to occur. You cannot drive like someone is always going to completely slam on their brakes. You know what happens when you do that? You leave just enough a gap and are going just slow enough that the guy behind or next to you decides to pass you real quick and cut in front of you causing a huge accident. Driving the speed limit? Lol now that too is funny. If the guy behind you is going faster than you and you can safely get over a lane, let them pass.
 
2012-11-27 02:30:21 PM

Snarfangel: But collisions are paid for by drivers and insurance companies, while government gets splits that sweet camera loot with the private camera contractor.


FTFY

/hates red-light cams
 
2012-11-27 02:38:33 PM

Skraeling: swaxhog: Around here they have been modifying pedestrian walk lights with a digital countdown timer which makes it very easy to see when the light is about to change and make a judgement call on whether you should begin stopping or make a run for it. Very handy and avoids the anxiety of knowing there's a red light camera and only seeing a flashing no walk light which could be anywhere from 1-10 secs before the light changes.

I love those so very very much.

Get rid if me having to guess when it's gonna turn


Here in Sweden, we had the lights go from green, green+yellow to yellow and then red. But we had to change that in the nineties because it didn't follow international standards...
 
2012-11-27 02:43:48 PM
You want to actually make intersections safer? Install those countdown timers so people can see from a block away whether they're going to make the light or not and adjust accordingly. Then set a nationwide standard for yellow light lengths per road speed (25 mph = 2.5 sec, 35 mph = 3 sec, etc, or at least something CONSISTENT) so people know what to expect. At that point you can put the cameras in if you want.
 
2012-11-27 02:48:19 PM

bostonbd: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Most? Really? You're just pulling shiat out of your ass at this point.

Yes, most. 63 out of 85 traffic lights in NJ were shown to not be correctly calibrated to meet the state law. 74% seems like most to me.

Link


Indeed. However, once the first one was discovered, they stopped issuing tickets from all of those 63 cameras, voided all the tickets that had been issued from them, and even gave refunds to people who had already paid for tickets from those cameras. They've all been recertified and are back in use.

So yeah, there are lots of reasons to hate red light cameras, but in the case of New Jersey, intentionally shortening yellow lights to increase revenue isn't one of them
 
2012-11-27 02:53:40 PM
Yea, see the corrupt red light cameras are a byproduct of the no-new-taxes-no-matter-what attitude in this country. We can't raise taxes to reflect increasing costs so instead it costs $100 to license your dog and you have red light cameras everywhere.

/$213 to register my car in NYC for 2 years
 
2012-11-27 02:54:11 PM
Is this the thread where I'm supposed to blame red light cameras for the fact that stupid people follow too closely and drive too fast?
 
2012-11-27 02:56:23 PM

ShamanGator: Sure doesn't say much for the over all level of driving skills in New jersey. If your to close for the car in front of you to stop at a red light then you my friend are driving like an idiot.


If you have the prescribed "safe" distance between you and the car in front of you (two seconds, plus 1 second for every 10 miles over 30) then in any heavy traffic area in NJ you will be continually cut off.
 
2012-11-27 02:58:01 PM

Fubegra: Snarfangel: But collisions are paid for by drivers and insurance companies, while government gets splits that sweet camera loot with the private camera contractor.

FTFY

/hates red-light cams


Contractors who lobby the ever loving hell across the states to have their for profit devices installed regardless of what the "safety" concerns are....hint, your local government does not care about anyone's safety as long as it's not cutting into their budget.

you have pee hands: You want to actually make intersections safer? Install those countdown timers so people can see from a block away whether they're going to make the light or not and adjust accordingly. Then set a nationwide standard for yellow light lengths per road speed (25 mph = 2.5 sec, 35 mph = 3 sec, etc, or at least something CONSISTENT) so people know what to expect. At that point you can put the cameras in if you want.


Yes those countdown timers make things a lot safer, now you have people gunning it to make the light. Seriously go stand by one on a busy street and listen to the engines rev when the timer gets short.
 
2012-11-27 03:09:49 PM
Rear-enders mentioned are probably quite a lot less lethal than the T-bones those cameras prevent.
 
2012-11-27 03:10:41 PM

Coming on a Bicycle: Rear-enders mentioned are probably quite a lot less lethal than the T-bones those cameras prevent.


They don't prevent T-Bones. No one running a light 10 seconds late is looking for cameras, and no one running a light 1 second late is T-Boning anyone.
 
2012-11-27 03:12:09 PM

IRQ12: Yes those countdown timers make things a lot safer, now you have people gunning it to make the light. Seriously go stand by one on a busy street and listen to the engines rev when the timer gets short.


I don't see any more people gunning through them than there already were already through yellows.
 
2012-11-27 03:20:15 PM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: bostonbd: Kanemano: Gig103: I had to do an emergency stop from 50mph because the yellow at a particular intersection isn't long enough

Yellow light means S L O W D O W N.

Yes it does. Slowdown =/= stop though. Also, when most red light camera's are installed, the duration of the yellow light is reduced to increase revinue from the camera. People who have driven for a while are accustomed to a standard timing of a yellow light. When this is reduced, it leads to more 'red light running' and thus more tickets and more sudden stops. More sudden stops leads to more rear end collisions.

Most? Really? You're just pulling shiat out of your ass at this point.


Actually, he's totally correct. Red light systems are typically owned and operated by private companies like Lockheed-Martin. There's a profit-sharing scheme in place and the yellow lights are definitely shortened to increase the chances of a red light violation. They also expand the zone that counts as "intersection" so there are times when stopping completely, but still being within this zone will trigger the camera and generate a ticket. In Lockheed-Martin's case, if the city reduces the yellow light to 1.5 seconds, then the city's share of the ticket revenue is 50%. If they do not reduce it and keep it at a much safer (and recommended) 4 seconds, then the city's share plummets to 10%. Obviously, this is a money making scheme in every way, and shortened yellow lights are designed to increase the number of red light violations even in circumstances where ordinarily there would be no safety issues.

What's worse, in many contracts the city has to PAY Lockheed for intersections where the cameras are installed that are UNDER PERFORMING. That is, if they don't write a certain number of tickets each month, then the city pays a fine to Lockheed. How to ensure you write the requisite number of tickets? Change the rules of course.

How do I know? I have a family member who works at Lockheed on the marketing team that sells the systems to municipalities. Everyone at Lockheed Martin knows it's a scam, and his marketing materials designed for Lockheed to use when selling the system to cities use the words "profit" and "revenue" more than the word "safety" by about a 6:1 ratio. But in brochures designed and distributed (by Lockheed, of course) for the police to hand out to citizens, the word "safety" is used exclusively and the word "profit" doesn't appear at all.

Rigged? You be the judge.
 
2012-11-27 03:23:44 PM

you have pee hands: You want to actually make intersections safer? Install those countdown timers so people can see from a block away whether they're going to make the light or not and adjust accordingly. Then set a nationwide standard for yellow light lengths per road speed (25 mph = 2.5 sec, 35 mph = 3 sec, etc, or at least something CONSISTENT) so people know what to expect. At that point you can put the cameras in if you want.


There's two competing standards for yellow signal timing. MUTCD and IETF. Although both have been weakened in recent years, there are other factors than speed limit that need to be taken into account (and I argue that approach speed, not speed limit, should be used as previous versions of the standard have used). You have to have human reaction time, you have to account for the width of the intersection, you have to account for special features at intersections. There is no single correct number.

I think Georgia's approach was a good one. You can use the traffic cameras, but you have to time the yellow signal to one full second more than the formula in the MUTCD. When Georgia did this, red light running at those intersections dropped 80%. The cameras became unprofitable, the intersections became safer, and the cameras were removed.
 
2012-11-27 03:26:26 PM
 
2012-11-27 03:28:06 PM

you have pee hands: IRQ12: Yes those countdown timers make things a lot safer, now you have people gunning it to make the light. Seriously go stand by one on a busy street and listen to the engines rev when the timer gets short.

I don't see any more people gunning through them than there already were already through yellows.


Well I guess we both only have anecdotes but if you think about the chance for excessive speed is a lot more possible when you see a counter at 15 1000feet ahead than when you have 1-2 seconds for a yellow. For a yellow in most scenarios you will be just within stopping distance or free to go when you see it.
 
2012-11-27 03:31:14 PM

JerkStore: Sadly, red light cameras are a solution to a problem that doesn't really exist. Sure, we can all agree that running red lights is bad, but it's nowhere near an epidemic and a vast, vast majority of drivers stop for red lights.


One of the unwritten rules of driving in Jacksonville FL is to wait two to three seconds after you light turns green for the drivers to finish running their red light.
 
2012-11-27 03:31:25 PM

bostonbd: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Most? Really? You're just pulling shiat out of your ass at this point.

Yes, most. 63 out of 85 traffic lights in NJ were shown to not be correctly calibrated to meet the state law. 74% seems like most to me.

Link


Sorry, I didn't know you were only referring to one state.
 
2012-11-27 03:33:02 PM

Pocket Ninja: No, the real question is how many countless lives have actually been saved by this. Consider this scenario:

Bobby Ericson, 9, is playing in his yard. He kicks the softball and runs out into the street to retrieve it. What he doesn't know is that Douglas Macavoy, 34, is speeding up the residential street, which has a 25-mile-per-hour limit, at 43 miles per hour. Mr. Macavoy is going that fast because he just finished running the red light at the previous intersection, which had started turning yellow even as he approached it. However, seeing no camera on the pole, he floored the accelerator and ran the light. Now, as he rounds the Pete's Plumbing van parked on the curve, he's shocked to find little sandy-haired Bobby crouching in the street right in front of him. And, splat, just like that, two lives are irreparably destroyed -- Bobby is paralyzed from the neck down for the rest of his life. Mr. Macavoy is in jail. His wife leaves him after a few months after starting an affair with his probation officer. She takes his children. Despondent, alone, he attempts to take his own life by jumping out a window in a ramshackle motel, but he lands on a pedestrian and breaks her neck. Now he's in jail again, only for murder this time. And all he can think on those long nights as he's gripped in Bubba's sweaty embrace is: If only I had stopped for that light. If only there had been a camera, I would have stopped for that life.

Would you seriously, subby, weigh a little bit of property damage, a bent fender, against these two shattered lives. What's one million dollars when compared to infinite suffering and shattered lives? Next time, remember Mr. Macavoy's sad tale before you post.


So wait, you get a probation officer while you're still in jail?
 
2012-11-27 03:46:06 PM

ShamanGator: Of course we cant be honest about these things, like blaming the morons who run the lights in the first place. With out them we would not need the cameras.


You're mistaken. We don't need the cameras for any reason.
 
2012-11-27 03:48:24 PM

JerkStore: Sadly, red light cameras are a solution to a problem that doesn't really exist. Sure, we can all agree that running red lights is bad, but it's nowhere near an epidemic and a vast, vast majority of drivers stop for red lights. When it happens, something awful may result, but it's also like saying that sometimes airplanes crash, so we should outlaw airplanes. Statistically, red-light running is a non-event.

However, it is BIG money and a cause the public will blindly get behind. Never mind that it changes the dynamics of accidents around the light and that they are specifically designed to cause MORE people to run red lights (and thus drive up revenue).

It's a money grab, pure and simple. There are no statistics in favor of red light cameras except those the companies supply to municipalities telling them about the money they can collect from them.


The lights are sometimes retimed when those are installed and small "No turn on red"signs are known to appear in an area where right on red has always been legal. Now? Nope! Disputing the ticket is pointless.Pay us now citizen!.
They are a goddamn scam and the insurance companies and politicans are in bed with each other.
Why yes, I got one of those.
 
2012-11-27 03:57:34 PM

Pocket Ninja: No, the real question is how many countless lives have actually been saved by this. Consider this scenario:

Bobby Ericson, 9, is playing in his yard. He kicks the softball and runs out into the street to retrieve it. What he doesn't know is that Douglas Macavoy, 34, is speeding up the residential street, which has a 25-mile-per-hour limit, at 43 miles per hour. Mr. Macavoy is going that fast because he just finished running the red light at the previous intersection, which had started turning yellow even as he approached it. However, seeing no camera on the pole, he floored the accelerator and ran the light. Now, as he rounds the Pete's Plumbing van parked on the curve, he's shocked to find little sandy-haired Bobby crouching in the street right in front of him. And, splat, just like that, two lives are irreparably destroyed -- Bobby is paralyzed from the neck down for the rest of his life. Mr. Macavoy is in jail. His wife leaves him after a few months after starting an affair with his probation officer. She takes his children. Despondent, alone, he attempts to take his own life by jumping out a window in a ramshackle motel, but he lands on a pedestrian and breaks her neck. Now he's in jail again, only for murder this time. And all he can think on those long nights as he's gripped in Bubba's sweaty embrace is: If only I had stopped for that light. If only there had been a camera, I would have stopped for that life.

Would you seriously, subby, weigh a little bit of property damage, a bent fender, against these two shattered lives. What's one million dollars when compared to infinite suffering and shattered lives? Next time, remember Mr. Macavoy's sad tale before you post.


I'm pretty sure there are four shattered lives in your story.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2012-11-27 03:57:53 PM
gwowen

Suppose on average 40% of non rear-end accidents cause injuries and 20% of rear-end accidents do.

Before: 100 accidents, 50% rear-enders, 30 injury accidents.

After: 140 accidents, 70% rear-enders, 30 injury accidents.

You know how many injury accidents you have, the same before and after. If the goal of the cameras was to reduce injuries, they failed. Some ticket camera analyses (e.g. Virginia) will call this a success because rear end accidents are less serious.  But the non-serious accidents were already removed from the counting. What's left are the serious accidents.
 
2012-11-27 03:59:48 PM

Some 'Splainin' To Do: gunther_bumpass: Again, you should be prepared for the car in front of you to come to a sudden stop at all times - that means maintaining a safe following distance AT ALL TIMES. Why is this so farking difficult to understand?

You can talk all day about how people should drive, but until you deal with how people actually do drive, you aren't dealing with reality.


Get bent, buttplug. I've been driving for 25 years - most of that in heavy city commute conditions. You know how many times
I've rear-ended someone? Once. When I was 16, and I learned my lesson with a steering wheel jammed into my larynx. It's really very simple - get your head out of your ass and you'll hit fewer things.
 
2012-11-27 04:00:37 PM

Slaxl: tallguywithglasseson: Replace them all with roundabouts!

//runs

I love roundabouts.

That is all.


You want to see people freak for no reason? Just watch your city, county or state transportation department propose a roundabout. You'd think they were going to build a child molester halfway house in the neighborhood with how angry people get.

Get over it folks: roundabouts are more efficient and safer than intersections.
 
2012-11-27 04:06:59 PM

Jument: Putting aside the issue of whether or not cameras are good, people who slam on their brakes and cause a collision because of red light cameras ARE FARKING IDIOTS.

Do you really think risking the destruction of your car and your health is worth it to avoid a petty ticket? Grow a brain, morans.


Do you really think that putting a camera that issues false tickets, and doesn't improve safety at an intersection is worth your constituencies health? Just so the local government can get a bit more money from the people while filling the pockets of some corporation, at the expense of our health?
 
2012-11-27 04:09:01 PM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: bostonbd: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Most? Really? You're just pulling shiat out of your ass at this point.

Yes, most. 63 out of 85 traffic lights in NJ were shown to not be correctly calibrated to meet the state law. 74% seems like most to me.

Link

Sorry, I didn't know you were only referring to one state.


OK, this article lists cities in other states that were caught reducing the length of the yellow light. It seems fairly prevalent if multiple states have had to discharge tickets and write laws requiring a minimum length of time the lights shall be yellow.

The cameras are not safety devices but purely revenue generators.
 
2012-11-27 04:13:03 PM

Jument: petty ticket


Petty ticket? In CA they're close to $500!

What happened to, "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted." ?

I've said it in every red camera thread I run across on FARK, and I'll say it again:

The real solution to the mostly benign "red light running" that the cameras are timed to catch? Something that gives motorists knowledge of how much time is remaining on a green light. Such as:

i01.i.aliimg.com 

Too bad that cities take the short sighted approach and choose SCAMeras over improvements that would actually make for a far less stressful driving experience.
 
2012-11-27 04:13:31 PM
A New Jersey girl is the LAST thing you want on camera.
spotadouche.com
 
2012-11-27 04:20:48 PM

Slaxl: tallguywithglasseson: Replace them all with roundabouts!

//runs

I love roundabouts.

That is all.


Medford, WI just installed two roundabouts on State Hwy 13. They are only about a half-mile apart and the second one intersects only with the farking Wallmart parking lot entrance.

Really.
Was that necessary? 
I'll bet the semi drivers don't love them.
 
2012-11-27 04:23:19 PM
Go the speed limit, keep safe distance and pay attention to what's going on on the road, and you won't rear end anyone.
Run a red light, pay $1000 fine, do 100 hours community service and lose your license for 6 months...for the first offense.
Problem solved.
 
2012-11-27 04:24:38 PM

mjohnson71: Slaxl: tallguywithglasseson: Replace them all with roundabouts!

//runs

I love roundabouts.

That is all.

You want to see people freak for no reason? Just watch your city, county or state transportation department propose a roundabout. You'd think they were going to build a child molester halfway house in the neighborhood with how angry people get.

Get over it folks: roundabouts are more efficient and safer than intersections.


Jughandles are better.

But circles and jughandles are each far better than the crap they put in PA.

NJ has some of the best laid out roads in the East Coast.
 
2012-11-27 04:33:51 PM
I am glad to see so many people aware that the local governments are retarding yellow lights/changing intersection boundaries to profit more from tickets. I have been saying these things are nothing more than a scam for years now.
Since when is the onus on the accused to prove innocence? Why isn't this a violation of due processes?
The Communistwealth of VA tried this crap years back, a report was generated that showed they did nothing but increase rear-end collisions and "serious accidents" showed little to no improvement, but then they changed their minds and put it back in place. The red light cameras are supposedly only provisional and pending analysis on if they are to become a permanent nuisance.
The cameras don't do a damn thing other than make people slam on their brakes suddenly. Someone that is determined to run a red light doesn't give a rat's ass if there is a camera there or not.

I don't know what this jackass upthread is going on about with "Don't follow to closely" bullshiat. I tell you what, have someone cut in front of you and slam on their damn brakes for a red light camera and lets roll the dice to see if your brakes and tires stop as they are supposed to. Better hope the roads are dry and free of debris, your brakes are warmed up, the tires are warm and free of any sand, dirt, gravel that could impede traction, your ABS is working properly, you have proper air pressure in your tires...you really wanna play this game? There is more than just "time to stop" that affects braking distance. Suffice it to say, there is just shiat that is out of your control ESPECIALLY on city streets. The red light cameras cause undue harm and serve only to punish the innocent while the contractor and local government laugh all the way to the bank.

Great thing about VA though is you don't have to pay those dumbass tickets by law until you are delivered the summons by hand. I mean...you COULD pay it early, but make em work for that money. The more people that do that, the less effective this charade becomes.
 
2012-11-27 04:34:01 PM

Leeds: NJ has some of the best laid out roads in the East Coast.


New Jersey has an irrational love of shared on/off ramps with crossing traffic. I guess it's really that they're just old roads and it's impossible to fix the interchanges without using a whole lot more space than there is available, but there are certainly some very bad roads in Jersey. The "stop every 15 miles for another toll" system on the GS Parkway is terrible, too.
 
2012-11-27 04:37:41 PM
StrandedInAZ: There is a major road that I have to take. It leads to my development. The speed limit on that road is 45 mph. Since they put a speed camera there, everyone slows down to well below 40 mph when they hit that stretch of road. Of course, it's also right after you come down a hill.

I'm thinking... west Valencia? Is that in a 45 zone? Otherwise it sounds like La Cholla (the one just north of River, not the one just south of River), but that one and Swan don't get a whole lot of serious slowing like that IME.

(Now having typed that, it'll be some completely different part of town.)

I'm sure they got lots of tickets generated when the cameras first went up, but we have them all over town now, and I can't remember the last time I saw someone get flashed by one.

I see it fairly regularly at Speedway/Kolb and Grant/Swan, both runners and speeders. Not so much at Tanque Verde/Grolb, which is why there's occasionally cops running radar just south of there on Kolb. Getting flashed for speeding is dumb on the driver's part anyway, since they have a 10 mph leeway. (Empirically tested.)

We vote on every other thing in this silly state. I don't understand why we can't get a referendum on the ballot to get rid of the cameras.

Because government isn't bad when it's fueling your authoritarian fetish.

Less snarkily, I don't remember, did that happen to the expressway ones in Phoenix, or was it a simple DPS budget decision?
 
2012-11-27 04:40:34 PM

mjohnson71: Slaxl: tallguywithglasseson: Replace them all with roundabouts!

//runs

I love roundabouts.

That is all.

You want to see people freak for no reason? Just watch your city, county or state transportation department propose a roundabout. You'd think they were going to build a child molester halfway house in the neighborhood with how angry people get.

Get over it folks: roundabouts are more efficient and safer than intersections.


It isn't the roundabouts I hate, it's those mountains that come out of the sky and just stand there.
 
2012-11-27 04:50:06 PM

Krieghund: moothemagiccow: DubyaHater: Perhaps you shouldn't speed and tailgate people. Typically, if one follows traffic laws, the risk of an accident is minimal.

The yellow light duration is reduced and people are either terrified of running the red or anxious to make the light on green and yellow. The combination is not good. They're also inexplicably slow in moving forward on the green, but that's normal.

I don't think you understood what he was saying so I'll repeat it: "you shouldn't speed and tailgate people. Typically, if one follows traffic laws, the risk of an accident is minimal."


Well maybe if you smell marshmallows sticks aren't your bag
 
2012-11-27 05:13:34 PM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: Only problem is the rear ends and the property damage is all private while the revenue generated is all going to the guberment. There is no incentive for the guberment to change.


Generally at least 60% of the income is going to the red light company.

gwowen: Except rear-end collisions (which tend to be low speed) are up massively and total collisions (including T-bone crashes, the ones that tend to be high speed) are down so there is only a very slight climb in total collisions.


Source? Preferably one for New Jersey? I say this because I've seen studies that show no decreases in side impact/injuries, and some that show modest improvements. In many cases the worst accidents happen when an impaired driver totally blows through an intersection, and I don't see red light cameras fixing that.
 
2012-11-27 05:16:52 PM

Job Creator: Yea, see the corrupt red light cameras are a byproduct of the no-new-taxes-no-matter-what attitude in this country. We can't raise taxes to reflect increasing costs so instead it costs $100 to license your dog and you have red light cameras everywhere.

/$213 to register my car in NYC for 2 years


Down here in Mississippi, it cost over $500 to register a Mitsubishi Outlander for one year...registration costs are based on the value of the vehicle. Unique way to do it I guess.
 
2012-11-27 05:31:03 PM

gunther_bumpass: Some 'Splainin' To Do: gunther_bumpass: Again, you should be prepared for the car in front of you to come to a sudden stop at all times - that means maintaining a safe following distance AT ALL TIMES. Why is this so farking difficult to understand?

You can talk all day about how people should drive, but until you deal with how people actually do drive, you aren't dealing with reality.

Get bent, buttplug.


Wow! Well that escalated quickly.

Best of luck working on that temper, buddy.
 
2012-11-27 05:48:41 PM
It figures....

but its still easier to install a bunch of cameras and some crummy, probably-buggy software than to actually pay humans to watch for these kinds of traffic violations.

Replace people with cameras and machines and you get what you ask for
 
2012-11-27 05:52:38 PM

SurelyShirley: Live in the boondocks, go the speed limit, keep safe distance and pay attention to what's going on on the road, and you won't rear end anyone.


FTFY

It is impossible to "keep safe distance" when other cars keep merging into it. It is called "bumper to bumper traffic" for a reason.
 
2012-11-27 05:52:46 PM
Bobby Ericson, 9, is playing in his yard. He kicks the softball and runs out into the street to retrieve it.

I've identified the problem already... what do I win?
 
2012-11-27 06:10:40 PM
See the Safety.
Worship the Safety.
All believe in the safety.
That there is Safety, I tell you.

/what profit?
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2012-11-27 06:19:57 PM
Down here in Mississippi, it cost over $500 to register a Mitsubishi Outlander for one year...registration costs are based on the value of the vehicle.

Here the registration is flat rate but the RMV sends registration info to cities who send you tax bills. The municipal tax rate is fixed by state law, or at least the maximum rate is and everybody charges the maximum rate. It would be much simpler to collect taxes at registration time.
 
2012-11-27 06:30:44 PM

Job Creator: Yea, see the corrupt red light cameras are a byproduct of the no-new-taxes-no-matter-what attitude in this country. We can't raise taxes to reflect increasing costs so instead it costs $100 to license your dog and you have red light cameras everywhere.

/$213 to register my car in NYC for 2 years


Mine is about $500 a year in AZ. My car insurance may be cheaper than yours, though. The first time I registered a car here, I'd moved from PA, where it was $36 a year. Here they base it on the value of your car, so if you have an expensive ride, you're going to pay through the nose for registration.
 
2012-11-27 06:30:55 PM

JacksonBryan: Job Creator: Yea, see the corrupt red light cameras are a byproduct of the no-new-taxes-no-matter-what attitude in this country. We can't raise taxes to reflect increasing costs so instead it costs $100 to license your dog and you have red light cameras everywhere.

/$213 to register my car in NYC for 2 years

Down here in Mississippi, it cost over $500 to register a Mitsubishi Outlander for one year...registration costs are based on the value of the vehicle. Unique way to do it I guess.


ZAZ: Down here in Mississippi, it cost over $500 to register a Mitsubishi Outlander for one year...registration costs are based on the value of the vehicle.

Here the registration is flat rate but the RMV sends registration info to cities who send you tax bills. The municipal tax rate is fixed by state law, or at least the maximum rate is and everybody charges the maximum rate. It would be much simpler to collect taxes at registration time.


I have to say, your states suck. $100, 2 year registration, no taxes or inspections required.
 
2012-11-27 06:32:07 PM

StrandedInAZ: Job Creator: Yea, see the corrupt red light cameras are a byproduct of the no-new-taxes-no-matter-what attitude in this country. We can't raise taxes to reflect increasing costs so instead it costs $100 to license your dog and you have red light cameras everywhere.

/$213 to register my car in NYC for 2 years

Mine is about $500 a year in AZ. My car insurance may be cheaper than yours, though. The first time I registered a car here, I'd moved from PA, where it was $36 a year. Here they base it on the value of your car, so if you have an expensive ride, you're going to pay through the nose for registration.


Yeah, but PA has inspections, and I know very few people who seem to be able to just get the inspection done without something magically being wrong with their vehicle.
 
2012-11-27 06:41:30 PM

devildog123: Yeah, but PA has inspections


So do we.

(Which reminds me.)
 
2012-11-27 06:50:10 PM
Sounds like New Jersey has a problem with drivers not using appropriate following distances.
 
2012-11-27 06:50:12 PM

Leeds: NJ has some of the best laid out roads in the East Coast.


2/10
 
2012-11-27 06:51:31 PM

you have pee hands: I guess it's really that they're just old roads and it's impossible to fix the interchanges without using a whole lot more space than there is available


Yet they've got the room for a million goddamn jughandles and roundabouts.
 
2012-11-27 06:53:13 PM

ZAZ: The next question is, are the new statistics accurate or trimmed to make the cameras look better?


Given the source, I'm more inclined to believe it's inflated by some reporter who doesn't know how to use a traffic signal and got popped.
 
2012-11-27 06:58:11 PM

Jument: Putting aside the issue of whether or not cameras are good, people who slam on their brakes follow too closely and cause a collision because of red light cameras ARE FARKING IDIOTS.

Do you really think risking the destruction of your car and your health is worth it to avoid a petty ticket just to pretend you are drafting? Grow a brain, morans.


What you meant to say.
 
2012-11-27 07:05:28 PM

Gig103: Snarfangel: But collisions are paid for by drivers and insurance companies, while government gets that sweet camera loot.

Yup. Around here (AZ) I watch idiots tap their brakes on green lights "just in case" it's about to turn yellow. I had to do an emergency stop from 50mph because the yellow at a particular intersection isn't long enough (no surprise there either).


Let AZDOT know if that yellow phase is less than 6.5 seconds. (speed in mph divided by 10 plus 1.5 is the minimum time allowed in seconds for yellow lights). Otherwise, try increasing your following distance and travel at or below the speed limit.
 
2012-11-27 07:05:58 PM

Baloo Uriza: Sounds like New Jersey has a problem with drivers not using appropriate following distances.


Sounds like you have never driven in an area where using the "proper" following distances makes it impossible to merge, nor can you maintain it without being cut off.
 
2012-11-27 07:14:31 PM
The law of unintended consequences...

How duz it werk?
 
2012-11-27 07:16:07 PM

This text is now purple: Leeds: NJ has some of the best laid out roads in the East Coast.

2/10


Obviously someone missed the words "East Coast."
 
2012-11-27 07:17:02 PM

Contribution Corsair: And is it bad that I took his tale as a reason why we should allow more speeding to teach kids to stay out of the street?


Yes, probably. While the scenario is a good example of a time to stay out of the street, the street is how we all get where we're going. Eventually, they need to get someplace, too.
 
2012-11-27 07:19:57 PM

Chevello: Jument: Putting aside the issue of whether or not cameras are good, people who slam on their brakes follow too closely and cause a collision because of red light cameras ARE FARKING IDIOTS.

Do you really think risking the destruction of your car and your health is worth it to avoid a petty ticket just to pretend you are drafting? Grow a brain, morans.

What you meant to say.


Oh look, I think we found the farkstick that pulls into the left lane of an expressway at 50mph because he is a frustrated traffic cop.

/What I meant to say
 
2012-11-27 07:28:36 PM

StrandedInAZ: Job Creator: Yea, see the corrupt red light cameras are a byproduct of the no-new-taxes-no-matter-what attitude in this country. We can't raise taxes to reflect increasing costs so instead it costs $100 to license your dog and you have red light cameras everywhere.

/$213 to register my car in NYC for 2 years

Mine is about $500 a year in AZ. My car insurance may be cheaper than yours, though. The first time I registered a car here, I'd moved from PA, where it was $36 a year. Here they base it on the value of your car, so if you have an expensive ride, you're going to pay through the nose for registration.


I pay $825/year for comprehensive coverage on a luxury car in Manhattan. Figure that's pretty cheap but then again we don't drive our cars much, I put about 4-5k miles on the car per year so maybe that figures into it. Paid $1300/yr in NJ on the same car.
 
2012-11-27 07:32:51 PM

JerkStore: Sadly, red light cameras are a solution to a problem that doesn't really exist. Sure, we can all agree that running red lights is bad, but it's nowhere near an epidemic and a vast, vast majority of drivers stop for red lights. When it happens, something awful may result, but it's also like saying that sometimes airplanes crash, so we should outlaw airplanes. Statistically, red-light running is a non-event.


No, statistically, plane crashes in the US are a non-event. Terrorism in the US is a non-event. 30,000 traffic fatalities and six figures of serious injuries per year in the US is, by comparison, substantial, especially since you can bet all of the serious injuries and a significant chunk of the fatalities blew vast wads of cash on the least effective health care system per dollar spent going (sure, we have fantastic healthcare, but it's inaccessibly expensive for most people, meaning now they're in debt for life or passing that care plus profit margin onto the taxpayer). Most incorporated cities and towns in the US have way fewer than 30,000 people in them. Sadly, this country doesn't have the balls to do the right thing, and that would be to make it harder to get a license, require regular (every other year at least) skills testing, make it easier to lose your license, and make the penalties for driving without a valid license severe. We're not talking people riding around on bicycles, weight combined with the rider, 300 pounds, that will bounce off damn near anything that isn't brittle or squishy and consequences for misuse tend to be immediate and painful almost exclusively for the operator. We're talking about two ton weapons capable of killing off entire farmer's markets at once while protecting the operator in a cushy, soundproofed box.
 
2012-11-27 08:02:59 PM

Kanemano: Gig103: I had to do an emergency stop from 50mph because the yellow at a particular intersection isn't long enough

Yellow light means S L O W D O W N.


Actually, it means "Clear the intersection: Stop if you can, finish crossing if you can't." Same as a flashing hand on pedestrian signals, or a yellow light on bicycle signals.
 
2012-11-27 08:07:57 PM

JacksonBryan: Job Creator: Yea, see the corrupt red light cameras are a byproduct of the no-new-taxes-no-matter-what attitude in this country. We can't raise taxes to reflect increasing costs so instead it costs $100 to license your dog and you have red light cameras everywhere.

/$213 to register my car in NYC for 2 years

Down here in Mississippi, it cost over $500 to register a Mitsubishi Outlander for one year...registration costs are based on the value of the vehicle. Unique way to do it I guess.


California also goes by vehicle value.
In beautiful Oregon, on the other hand, registration fees are $86 for two years for any passenger vehicle.
Then again, you get to live in Mississippi, at least you got that goin' for you.
 
2012-11-27 08:09:54 PM

Baloo Uriza: Let AZDOT know if that yellow phase is less than 6.5 seconds. (speed in mph divided by 10 plus 1.5 is the minimum time allowed in seconds for yellow lights). Otherwise, try increasing your following distance and travel at or below the speed limit.


Awesome, I will actually time it and do that, thank you.
 
2012-11-27 08:44:45 PM
Again, by paying attention to signals and the traffic around you, you can avoid nearly every situation mentioned in this thread.

I love the boogeyman story about someone cutting you off to slam on their brakes for a yellow light bit. Honestly now - how often does that happen to you? If it's yellow and there's enough room in front of you for a car to squeeze in, then have enough room to slam on his brakes to stop, there was enough room and time for you to start slowing down for the yellow in the first place.

At least have the balls to own your lousy driving habits - don't blame them on other people.
 
2012-11-27 09:08:16 PM

Gig103: Baloo Uriza: Let AZDOT know if that yellow phase is less than 6.5 seconds. (speed in mph divided by 10 plus 1.5 is the minimum time allowed in seconds for yellow lights). Otherwise, try increasing your following distance and travel at or below the speed limit.

Awesome, I will actually time it and do that, thank you.


No problem! I'd link you directly to the US Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, and the Arizona Addendum to the same, but I'm just far enough away from Tulsa that Ma Bell has only been talking about stringing us line for the last 80 years, they haven't actually done it yet. So T-Mobile is both my wireless carrier and my home internet provider. EDGE is slow...
 
2012-11-27 09:14:52 PM
I recently got a ticket from a red light camera. I actually don't mind...they sent pictures and a video that showed I clearly ran the light even though at the time I thought it was still yellow. If a cop had pulled me over I'd have been pissed. I have no complaint that I was ticketed for running the light and I'm glad it doesn't go on my record.
 
2012-11-27 09:47:25 PM
If you guys go to thenewspaper.com, often linked on the main page, they have a lot of studies that show that just adding an extra second or two to a yellow light drastically reduces accidents. There is even a move to make a minimal yellow duration an official federal traffic rule.

Some cities have been found to reduce the yellow duration at intersections with red-light cameras, then had to reimburse every ticket issued because it most often didn't follow states rules.
And let's not mention the cameras that became unprofitable once the yellow got an extra second or two...
 
2012-11-27 09:56:41 PM

SurelyShirley:
Then again, you get to live in Mississippi, at least you got that goin' for you.


Hmm...I see sarcasm in that statement. Moved here for work, hopefully moving back to PA early in 2013.
 
2012-11-27 09:56:59 PM

dustygrimp: The law of unintended consequences...

How duz it werk?


Well, first you start by asking how it works.
 
2012-11-27 09:58:44 PM

Job Creator: Chevello: Jument: Putting aside the issue of whether or not cameras are good, people who slam on their brakes follow too closely and cause a collision because of red light cameras ARE FARKING IDIOTS.

Do you really think risking the destruction of your car and your health is worth it to avoid a petty ticket just to pretend you are drafting? Grow a brain, morans.

What you meant to say.

Oh look, I think we found the farkstick that pulls into the left lane of an expressway at 50mph because he is a frustrated traffic cop.

/What I meant to say


Um, nope but thanks for playing. I think we have a few lovely parting gifts for you. How about a nice aggressive driving ticket and a personal injury lawsuit? Ohh, and let's not forget the wonderful increase in insurance rates because everyone knows that in almost all circumstances, a rearend accident is the fault of the rear car. Have fun out there but remember, not everyone knows the length of every yellow they are approaching.

\new to this "trolling" thing. How'm I doing?
 
2012-11-27 10:02:41 PM
Getting rear ended at low speed is safer then being T-boned at high speed.

/keep farking that chicken
//while drinking a coffee, eating and texting.
 
2012-11-27 10:08:20 PM

Mokmo: There is even a move to make a minimal yellow duration an official federal traffic rule.


The fed beat you to it. Take a look at the manual on uniform traffic control devices, and keep in mind the yellow light guidelines are nowhere near new.
 
2012-11-28 12:43:02 AM
The headline seems to falsely accuse the red light cameras for the increase in rear-end collisions when the fault clearly is with people following too closely.
 
2012-11-28 12:46:52 AM

Kanemano:

Why would you be doing 50 MPH approaching an intersection, obviously this is not on the highway, this is city driving, he also had enough time to actually stop the vehicle from 50 MPH, so 100 feet if optimal more likely 150 feet.


I live a quarter mile from a camera-equipped intersection on a state highway that has a 50 mph limit, so I'm getting a kick out of your reply...
 
2012-11-28 01:58:57 AM
I don't like redlight cameras any more than anyone else here, but the fact is that rear end collisions caused by them would be reduces if drivers would simply not too close and pay attention. Following too close is pointless anyway. You follow too close you save what, two seconds?
 
2012-11-28 02:48:07 AM

tallguywithglasseson: Replace them all with roundabouts!

//runs


Look kids! There's Big Ben and there's Parliament!
 
2012-11-28 03:19:07 AM
NJ has the worst drivers in the country. hands down.
 
2012-11-28 03:20:26 AM

SurelyShirley: In beautiful Oregon, on the other hand, registration fees are $86 for two years for any passenger vehicle.


Why why do you say things like that! Oh wait... yes everyone, the man is wrong he meant $860 every six months. Serious, what ever you do, do not move to Oregon, taxes are insane, the place is overrun with expat Californians driving their prius's at 45 in the left lane, and it rains 342 days a year.
 
2012-11-28 09:54:18 AM

gibbon1: SurelyShirley: In beautiful Oregon, on the other hand, registration fees are $86 for two years for any passenger vehicle.

Why why do you say things like that! Oh wait... yes everyone, the man is wrong he meant $860 every six months. Serious, what ever you do, do not move to Oregon, taxes are insane, the place is overrun with expat Californians driving their prius's at 45 in the left lane, and it rains 342 days a year.


Yes, on the wet side.
 
2012-11-28 10:07:30 AM

Cloudchaser Sakonige the Red Wolf: I don't like redlight cameras any more than anyone else here, but the fact is that rear end collisions caused by them would be reduces if drivers would simply not too close and pay attention. Following too close is pointless anyway. You follow too close you save what, two seconds?


Zero seconds, since either way, you still can't go faster than the vehicle ahead.
 
2012-11-28 10:13:29 AM

gibbon1: SurelyShirley: In beautiful Oregon, on the other hand, registration fees are $86 for two years for any passenger vehicle.

Why why do you say things like that! Oh wait... yes everyone, the man is wrong he meant $860 every six months. Serious, what ever you do, do not move to Oregon, taxes are insane, the place is overrun with expat Californians driving their prius's at 45 in the left lane, and it rains 342 days a year.


More like 75 in the left lane, equally stupid on wet, rutted pavement. The low gas and car taxes combined with the biggest fish like Intel and Nike paying the corporate minimum income tax of $10/year means the highways and transit systems have been neglected to the point where the typical 50 MPH urban, 55 suburban, 65 rural interstate speed limits are generally unattainable due to shiat roads and overcrowding from lack of alternative modes.
 
2012-11-28 11:05:36 AM

Baloo Uriza:
More like 75 in the left lane, equally stupid on wet, rutted pavement. The low gas and car taxes combined with the biggest fish like Intel and Nike paying the corporate minimum income tax of $10/year means the highways and transit systems have been neglected to the point where the typical 50 MPH urban, 55 suburban, 65 rural interstate speed limits are generally unattainable due to shiat roads and overcrowding from lack of alternative modes.


Whereas California, with its high income, sales, gas, corporate and vehicle taxes must have the best roads in the country, or even the world, right?
Or not
 
2012-11-28 01:19:29 PM
A government-funded study group (National Cooperative Highway Research Program ("NCHRP") of the Transportation Research Board of the National Academy of Sciences) just published a study recommending longer minimum yellows. The minimums recommended in the study were 0.4 to 0.6 sec. greater than the present minimums in states such as California and Florida. For example, the present minimum in a 35 zone is 3.6 secs. while the study recommends 4.1 seconds.
Right now the average red light violator is about 0.4 sec. late, so the extra time will cut violations by at least half.
The NCHRP study also recommended longer yellows for left turns. Instead of the current 3.0 yellow no matter what the posted speed, it recommended longer yellows on streets having higher posted speeds. In a 35 zone the min. yellow for a left turn would be 3.7.
An article about the study is at http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/39/3941.asp and the full study is at http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_731.pdf .
I submit that any city contemplating cameras may want to put things on hold until City staff has an opportunity to report about the effect the reduced quantity of violations will have on the financial viability of the camera system.
 
2012-11-28 02:54:06 PM

cartmans_evil_twin: Kanemano:

Why would you be doing 50 MPH approaching an intersection, obviously this is not on the highway, this is city driving, he also had enough time to actually stop the vehicle from 50 MPH, so 100 feet if optimal more likely 150 feet.

I live a quarter mile from a camera-equipped intersection on a state highway that has a 50 mph limit, so I'm getting a kick out of your reply...


I stand corrected, actually sit corrected, but that neither here nor there, in my neck of the woods all city streets are 35 max.
 
2012-11-28 04:47:09 PM

Cloudchaser Sakonige the Red Wolf: You follow too close you save what, two seconds?


Well when there isn't a camera, you can drift through the yellow with the driver in front of you, which could save 3 or 4 minutes at a busy intersection. Following closely in the left lane is also a way of saying "Get out of the passing lane and let me pass"
 
2012-11-28 09:34:55 PM

SurelyShirley: Baloo Uriza:
More like 75 in the left lane, equally stupid on wet, rutted pavement. The low gas and car taxes combined with the biggest fish like Intel and Nike paying the corporate minimum income tax of $10/year means the highways and transit systems have been neglected to the point where the typical 50 MPH urban, 55 suburban, 65 rural interstate speed limits are generally unattainable due to shiat roads and overcrowding from lack of alternative modes.

Whereas California, with its high income, sales, gas, corporate and vehicle taxes must have the best roads in the country, or even the world, right?
Or not


Well, California's Mississippi with a better beach.
 
2012-11-28 09:36:20 PM

Gig103: Well when there isn't a camera, you can drift through the yellow with the driver in front of you, which could save 3 or 4 minutes at a busy intersection.


I challenge you to use a stopwatch and test that theory. Probably closer to half that.

Following closely in the left lane is also a way of saying "Get out of the passing lane and let me pass"

Most people interpret it as "I'm an impatient douche."
 
2012-11-28 10:05:40 PM

Baloo Uriza: Most people interpret it as "I'm an impatient douche."


Says the one holding up everyone behind them because they are a self-important douche.
 
2012-11-28 11:40:33 PM

Baloo Uriza: Kanemano: Gig103: I had to do an emergency stop from 50mph because the yellow at a particular intersection isn't long enough

Yellow light means S L O W D O W N.

Actually, it means "Clear the intersection: Stop if you can, finish crossing if you can't." Same as a flashing hand on pedestrian signals, or a yellow light on bicycle signals.


www.wearysloth.com

Red light stop, green light go, yellow light go very fast.
 
2012-11-29 01:41:59 AM

Kanemano: Yellow light means S L O W D O W N.


As Victoly said, no it doesn't. If you merely slow down, you're going to be in the intersection LONGER. Yellow means clear the intersection like lewismarktwo said.

If you see the light go yellow and you're in the intersection, you don't slow down one bit. You keep going and get out of the way. If you're outside of the intersection and have enough room for a non-panic stop, you do that. Built into the equation is some time for that decision.
 
2012-11-29 04:31:20 AM

Baloo Uriza: Cloudchaser Sakonige the Red Wolf: I don't like redlight cameras any more than anyone else here, but the fact is that rear end collisions caused by them would be reduces if drivers would simply not too close and pay attention. Following too close is pointless anyway. You follow too close you save what, two seconds?

Zero seconds, since either way, you still can't go faster than the vehicle ahead.


Good point, I hadn't thought of it that way.


Gig103: Cloudchaser Sakonige the Red Wolf: You follow too close you save what, two seconds?

Well when there isn't a camera, you can drift through the yellow with the driver in front of you, which could save 3 or 4 minutes at a busy intersection. Following closely in the left lane is also a way of saying "Get out of the passing lane and let me pass"


That could work, but I don't think it's worth the risk of having to replace front end parts.

/hates it when people block the passing lane
 
2012-11-29 09:15:13 PM

Gig103: Baloo Uriza: Most people interpret it as "I'm an impatient douche."

Says the one holding up everyone behind them because they are a self-important douche.


Patience is a virtue. If the guy in the passing lane is actually overtaking traffic doing the posted maximum speed, well, deal with it. Not everyone wants to second guess the engineers or invite unnecessary attention from police. They'll move over as soon as they're done overtaking. Exception: Asians, and the Rolling Stones tourbus; both will be doing five below the posted minimum with the blinker on.
 
Displayed 170 of 170 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report