Good news for people driving to Houston

[Tamie]

The city council listened to voters and there's a little less big brother in H-town starting at 10am today.

[redlin67]

I am not an advocate of red light cameras, but I hate when people blast through a red light like it wasn't even there. Knock on wood that I have never been involved in an accident, but I have been in many close calls by these morons.

[jordanmills]

Yeah, but some of the suburbs still have them. League City, for example. Don't forget to put pressure on your state reps to ban them statewide.

[Oldgringo]

Yeah, but some of the suburbs still have them. League City, for example. Don't forget to put pressure on your state reps to ban them statewide.

Why? Running a red light is not only dangerously illegal, it's also rude.

[Diesel42]

I was told by a Johnson County constable that the red light cameras in Johnson Co are operated by a 3rd Party business. This business sends a bill to the offender. I guess you can demand a court appearance. But between red light cameras and electronic tollways sending folks bills... I'm getting a mite annoyed.
My two cents.
Nick

[74novaman]

Yeah, but some of the suburbs still have them. League City, for example. Don't forget to put pressure on your state reps to ban them statewide.

Why? Running a red light is not only dangerously illegal, it's also rude.

So is not washing your hands before returning to work. Cameras in the bathrooms are clearly the answer!

[ELB]

Yeah, but some of the suburbs still have them. League City, for example. Don't forget to put pressure on your state reps to ban them statewide.

Why? Running a red light is not only dangerously illegal, it's also rude.

Because redlight cameras are about revenue, not running redlights.

[C-dub]

I must admit that I'm not sure what I think about red light cameras.

On one hand they do help people be more aware so that this will lead to a decrease in severe accidents from folks just blowing through them and hitting someone else. However, they seem to have increased the number of rear-end accidents. Which is better, high number of relatively minor rear end accidents or fewer accidents with more deaths. I know what my answer is.

However, the larger implication is the intrusion by big brother. The court(s) have recently said it is okay to place GPS tracking devices on cars. I don't see much difference here. If there were an officer watching an intersection and a person ran a red light they could get a ticket if the officer felt like it. How many times have we all seen someone run a red light and wished there were an officer there to catch them? So, where does it stop? That is the BIG question. I don't know. Both sides are fully aware that little steps are the easiest way to go about change.

I do see both sides of the argument, though, and that is why I really don't know what my opinion is. It is very easy to say, "Don't break the law and you have nothing to worry about." But, an intrusion of our privacy is still an intrusion. If I'm on some road and there is no one around why should I have to stop? As I understand it, lights and signs are traffic control devices, but if there is no "traffic" ...? I dont' even know how many times I've been driving on a road with no one around and the light I'm approaching turns yellow and then red to stop me for less than 10 seconds before returning to green. Does anyone know why? Some times I could see the green light for more than a quarter mile before turning red as I approached.

[Ameer]

Because redlight cameras are about revenue, not running redlights.

Especially revenue for American Traffic Solutions, the company that installed and operated the cameras, and staffed the center that was mailing out the tickets and collecting the money.

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/33/3310.asp

The documents are of particular interest because research in the nearby city of Baytown revealed that accidents increased 40 percent at red light camera locations. Baytown is also holding a citizen initiative to ban photo ticketing today.

[redlin67]

Here is an idea that I heard from someone else. Make the delay longer, in other words, lights from all directions remain red for a few more seconds. There will always be some that still run the red, but if the other side ain't moving yet, less likelyhood of a major accident. This is the way they had them set up in Germany when I was there, but they also have cameras everywhere. In the Philippines, at night, it is normal to go on red if it is clear on all sides. Don't know if it's legal, but everyone does it.

[Oldgringo]

Oh, I get it now. It's not about safety, it's free enterprise; i.e., traffic light monitoring, trash pickup, cemetery maintenance, etc. that is the objection.

Please honk if y'all plan on running red lights. You might also get your attorneys read into your scofflaw intentions also.

[Ameer]

How about left lane cameras to give tickets to people driving too slow?

[Purplehood]

So what exactly is the difference between a camera recording a violation and a police officer, other than the fact that the police officer probably isn't watching 24/7?
A traffic intersection is a public intersection, not my bedroom.
I have had exactly one of these "citations" show up in my mail. It had a nice pic of a car with a license plate one letter off from mine. Whoever manually keyed in the plate they saw on the pic put in my plate number instead. I wrote a nice little letter to them and they dismissed it.

[Teamless]

my mom was t-boned in a camera intersection.
yes, the camera was running, but having a camera doesn't make people not run red lights.
If people ran red lights, on purpose, t-boned people "on purpose", caused accidents "on purpose" then the red light camera may stop those who did those on purpose, but as they are called accidents, not "purposefol-idents" (sounded good right?LOL), those that would run a red light, on accident will still do it.

So what good is the red light camera? its a money grab for the cities and those companies that run the cameras.


tell me, what about cameras that issue speeding violations, they are already being used in UK, do we want them here? I think not, but i am just one person.. what say you all?
And if you are not for speed cameras, (that issue tickets, also check your registration, inspection, insurance - yes they do all of those, if used in full version), why would you be for red light cameras?

[McKnife]

I'll support a state-wide ban of Red-Light cameras.

Here is one example why:

My Buddy's Father sold his youngest son's car to an individual in Baytown back in early October. He filed all paperwork, taxes and registration. Two weeks ago, he received a citation in the mail for running a red light -- problem is, it was the new Buyer behind the wheel.

FIrst and foremost, the vehicle was legally sold and registered to the new buyer. This is solved easily, but it's still a hassle to be accused of a criminal action when you were not involved at all. Second, the system punishes the vehicle owner rather than the actual driver. Obviously, a majority of Houston voters didn't enjoy this either.

Again... B. Franklin said it best... "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."