 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Maintenance and Repair / June 2005red light cameras: products to avoid them??
Hi All, Anyone have experience with anti red light camera products?? Where can I buy some??? Thanks! -Mike The most effective anti-red light camera product I'm aware of is very low cost, easy to apply and 100% effective: . . . . . Just stop at the red light. > The most effective anti-red light camera product I'm aware of is very > low cost, easy to apply and 100% effective: [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > . > Just stop at the red light. I sometimes wonder- this really is a democracy, at a local level. If we did a survey on whether to repeal all traffic laws, what would the result be? If we don't want to have traffic laws, why don't we just tell our reps to get rid of them all? By far the majority of drivers exceed the speed limits. Why to we bother to have them? Or is the feeling that everyone but me should obey the rules, so we still need them. Of course, everyone else is also a me. > > The most effective anti-red light camera product I'm aware of is very > > low cost, easy to apply and 100% effective: [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Or is the feeling that everyone but me should obey the rules, so we > still need them. Of course, everyone else is also a me. The biggest flaw I can see here is that people assume, incorrectly I might add, that the yellow timing is set to a safe number when red light cameras are install. The fact is that there is a minimum and maximum timing allowed by most state laws and ordinance/codes. Most traffic engineers set the yellow time to around the middle of that range, sometimes a slight bit to the longer side of the middle. Why? It promotes safe driving. If the time is set to the bare minimum then people will be more likely to slam on their brakes on yellow and cause an accident. It also promotes yellow light running because people will feel, correctly, that there is likely to be much less time to stop before the light turns red and they're more likely to decide to try and beat the light instead. Now, most red light camera programs in this country are actually private affairs where the equipment maker offers to come set up the hundreds of thousands of dollars of cameras and recording equipment for free, for a cut of the ticket profits. To maximise their profits, the equipment maker has the city sign a legally binding contract that orders the city traffic engineers to turn the yellow light timing down to the minimum allowed by law/code/ordinance. This ensures that the most number of people will get caught in the intersection when the light turns red, by minimizing the time that drivers have to react and stop. Now, there's a clear conflict of interest here between safety and corporate profits. To me, it should seem that safety needs to always win out. Because cities that promote dangerous driving and increased accidents are not cities that I want to drive in, I specifically avoid driving in or through any cities that enact red light camera systems, and I send letters to retailers and the city explaining why I choose to no longer shop in or visit their city. JazzMan  Signature********************************************************** Please reply to jsavage"at"airmail.net. Curse those darned bulk e-mailers! ********************************************************** "Rats and roaches live by competition under the laws of supply and demand. It is the privilege of human beings to live under the laws of justice and mercy." - Wendell Berry ********************************************************** > To maximise their profits, the equipment >maker has the city sign a legally binding contract that orders >the city traffic engineers to turn the yellow light timing >down to the minimum allowed by law/code/ordinance. Do you have any proof of this? I can see this contract being used against the red light camera owners by someone who get rear ended at a red light. They can't be so stupid as to put something like that into a contract. ------------------- Alex > > To maximise their profits, the equipment > >maker has the city sign a legally binding contract that orders [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > ------------------- > Alex Read down to the yellow light time defects section: http://www.highwayrobbery.net/ JazzMan Signature********************************************************** Please reply to jsavage"at"airmail.net. Curse those darned bulk e-mailers! ********************************************************** "Rats and roaches live by competition under the laws of supply and demand. It is the privilege of human beings to live under the laws of justice and mercy." - Wendell Berry ********************************************************** The purported short yellow light problem is a red herring for the real problem, which is drivers exceeding the speed limit or otherwise driving unsafely. In my experience I've never encountered what appeared to be a purposely short timed yellow light. I've encountered misfunctioning ones, but they usually take the form of looong red lights for the cross traffic. Or so it seems anyway. You made this statement: To maximise their profits, the equipment maker has the city sign a legally binding contract that orders the city traffic engineers to turn the yellow light timing down to the minimum allowed by law/code/ordinance. In which contracts did you read that specific clause. For more info about red light cams look at the free of charge, non commercial site http://www.highwayrobbery.net >>>The most effective anti-red light camera product I'm aware of is very >>>low cost, easy to apply and 100% effective: [quoted text clipped - 51 lines] > > JazzMan > > The most effective anti-red light camera product I'm aware of is very > > low cost, easy to apply and 100% effective: [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Or is the feeling that everyone but me should obey the rules, so we > still need them. Of course, everyone else is also a me. I know what you mean. I've driven a lot of miles and what I've found is those who complain about speed traps, short timed lights and red light cameras are usually looking for an excuse to explain away the ticket(s) they've accumulated for violating laws that were set up to allow large numbers of people to drive safely in close proximity to one another. There's another related line of nonsense that seems to pop up on this forum every once in a while. Those who like to drive fast have convinced themselves that there is some sort of natural speed limit that we all will safely drive at and therefore we can do away with or substantally increase speed limits. An autobahn in every city. > Hi All, > Anyone have experience with anti red light camera products?? Where can > I buy some??? > > Thanks! > -Mike Have you tried the Malestrom G580 SignalMaster? You could also try.. 1. Anti red light camera lubricant 2. Anti red light camera air filters 3. Anti red light coolant 4. Anti red light spark plugs >Hi All, >Anyone have experience with anti red light camera products?? Where can >I buy some??? > >Thanks! >-Mike All that is needed to avoid getting dinged by red light cameras is to do something about the loose nut behind the wheel. Har har, you guys are real funny. Maybe when you guys get a $75 ticket for quote/unquote 'running' a red light by .2 seconds in the rain, I'll help you figure out how to prevent it. Or maybe you have tons of money to burn, and don't have to worry about incidents such as this. Whatever, thanks for your help. Theres a spray which makes your license plate super reflective whereas the camera will blind itself from its own flash thus making your plate appear washed out or overexposed. I would think you could get the same reult from hi-gloss clear finish but thats your decision. Another product is a lens which covers your plate so it is visible straight on but at angles parts of the numbers blacked out. I got a $50 ticket for having this on my car fro obscuring my plate!. In my city they have the yellow times set .1 second below federal guidelines and a lot of us got off. The guidelines are 3.0-6.0 seconds of yellow time. You wont get off the ticket even if you move out of the way of an ambulance. Seen it. You also should get used to the idea of making yellow your color of choice for stopping in addition to red. Sure you'll get a.s-ended one of these times, but you'll not be at fault for stopping. There are other products like a system that flashes back. The red light camera guys have made flashless cameras to defeat all that. You could program your GPS to remind you your approaching an intersection with one of those cameras or learn to get good with a paintball gun. :) good luck. I feel your pain! > Har har, you guys are real funny. Maybe when you guys get a $75 ticket > for quote/unquote 'running' a red light by .2 seconds in the rain, I'll > help you figure out how to prevent it. Or maybe you have tons of money > to burn, and don't have to worry about incidents such as this. > > Whatever, thanks for your help. >Theres a spray which makes your license plate super reflective whereas the >camera will blind itself from its own flash thus making your plate appear >washed out or overexposed. What about during the day when there is no flash? Has anyone actually tested this miracle spray or are they just repeating the manufacturers advertising hype? >Another product is a lens which covers your plate so it is visible straight >on but at angles parts of the numbers blacked out. I got a $50 ticket for >having this on my car fro obscuring my plate!. I know that in NY state any cover, even plain old clear plastic with no pretension of defeating red light cameras, is illegal. >In my city they have the yellow times set .1 second below federal guidelines >and a lot of us got off. The guidelines are 3.0-6.0 seconds of yellow time. How did you figuer that out? .1 second is an awfully short period of time to try to time by hand. >You wont get off the ticket even if you move out of the way of an ambulance. >Seen it. Here in NYC moving for an emergency vehicle is a valid excuse. You still have to waste a day of your time going to the 'court' to take care of this. >You also should get used to the idea of making yellow your color of choice >for stopping in addition to red. This is often impractical. >Sure you'll get a.s-ended one of these >times, but you'll not be at fault for stopping. I rather be wrong and not in accident than being right and getting rear ended. >There are other products like a system that flashes back. The red light >camera guys have made flashless cameras to defeat all that. Again, I don't see this working during daytime hours. >You could program your GPS to remind you your approaching an intersection >with one of those cameras or learn to get good with a paintball gun. :) Interesting idea. ---------------- Alex When one receives a 'red light camera' ticket it is imprinted on the ticket as to what the yellow time was and how long the light was red while it was snapping off pics down to the tenth of a second (with pics of your car). I also have used high end video equipment to record in the 30'ths of a second and actually can tell how long the yellow bulb takes to go from yellow to dark while the red comes on. I dont need to but I can tell how long the light glows yellow after turning over to red. Now if anyone wants to play, drive up to the stop line running over both sensors at about 5-7 MPH or so and stop abruptly. You'll get all sorts of flashes (two) and the camera will use its film but you wont be guilty of running the light. They have to hand sort those and the film gets used. Whatever you do dont go over that line more than a few inches or you will go in the KEEP pile. :) The cameras here (Maryland) flash during the day as well as at night. I guess they want to be darn sure they light your plate well and avoid any shadows etc. They supposedly are making digital versions which will not flash and will take a picture of the driver also. The spray will of course be rendered useless then. Now, I dont know why they need to photo the driver since the tag owner if the one who gets the ticket. More invasion of privacy I guess, like night vision to see if you have your seatbelt on. (yes Delaware its in your state) It is also possible to run over the first sensor as the light is about to turn green then as you run over the second sesor, and the light turns green by then, you'll get your picture taken running a GREEN light. I'd only attempt this on a intersection that you know is generating illegal ticket pictures under 3.0 seconds or your again in teh "KEEP" pile. sorry for the type-os on that, I'm shutting up now. > Har har, you guys are real funny. Maybe when you guys get a $75 ticket > for quote/unquote 'running' a red light by .2 seconds in the rain, I'll > help you figure out how to prevent it. Or maybe you have tons of money > to burn, and don't have to worry about incidents such as this. > > Whatever, thanks for your help. Just stop, you wont find anything fool proof. > Har har, you guys are real funny. Maybe when you guys get a $75 ticket > for quote/unquote 'running' a red light by .2 seconds in the rain, I'll > help you figure out how to prevent it. Or maybe you have tons of money > to burn, and don't have to worry about incidents such as this. > > Whatever, thanks for your help. Well, I've been driving for 49 years without a red light ticket. So I'd say the odds of anyone getting one because of an unintentional slip up are low. If the odds are one or two per lifetime, then 75 or 150 bucks, compared to other costs of a lifetime of driving are minor, and I can sure live with it. If you get LOTS of these tickets, I'd guess that there is a message there. > > Har har, you guys are real funny. Maybe when you guys get a $75 ticket > > for quote/unquote 'running' a red light by .2 seconds in the rain, I'll [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > If you get LOTS of these tickets, I'd guess that there is a message there. I bet you'd get some tickets if the yellow timing was set so short that you would only have 2/3 of a second to decide to apply the brakes and make a maximum force stop in order to avoid running a red light. JazzMan Signature********************************************************** Please reply to jsavage"at"airmail.net. Curse those darned bulk e-mailers! ********************************************************** "Rats and roaches live by competition under the laws of supply and demand. It is the privilege of human beings to live under the laws of justice and mercy." - Wendell Berry ********************************************************** >>>Har har, you guys are real funny. Maybe when you guys get a $75 ticket >>>for quote/unquote 'running' a red light by .2 seconds in the rain, I'll [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > JazzMan Well, then there must not be many lights set like that in midwestern US. > >>Well, I've been driving for 49 years without a red light ticket. > > I bet you'd get some tickets if the yellow timing was set so short > > that you would only have 2/3 of a second to decide to apply > > the brakes and make a maximum force stop in order to avoid > > running a red light. > Well, then there must not be many lights set like that in midwestern US. Not yet, there aren't. Wait til red light cameras spread in earnest in your location and you'll get a quick firsthand lesson in the primacy of yellow-light duration in determining red-light crashes. >Har har, you guys are real funny. Maybe when you guys get a $75 ticket >for quote/unquote 'running' a red light by .2 seconds in the rain, Um, it'd probably be a bit wiser to SLOW DOWN in the rain, so running a red light would be impossible (or nearly so, ) > I'll >help you figure out how to prevent it. Or maybe you have tons of money >to burn, and don't have to worry about incidents such as this. > >Whatever, thanks for your help. Naw, I jjust don't drive so fast in the rain that I can't stop. -LMB I can take anyone right now to an intersection where the speed limit is 25, the light is dead on 3.0 seconds and the intersection is 100 feet from the stop line to the other side crossing an opposing three lanes of high-speed traffic . Doing the math it gives a person 0.22 seconds when yellow starts (if your right at the line when it changes) to decide whether to stop or not. Making it worse, is an obstructed view of oncoming 'one way' traffic from the right side. So even if you keep going, before you can get all the way across, anyone blowing through a green light the instant it changes (its instant) will hit the person who decided not to stop for a sudden yellow. Dont ask me how I know.... > >Har har, you guys are real funny. Maybe when you guys get a $75 ticket > >for quote/unquote 'running' a red light by .2 seconds in the rain, [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > -LMB Never heard of the concept of a "stale green" light have you? FYI that is a light that is green when you first see it. If you talk to a driving instructor one of the things they will tell you is to watch for a stale green light AND BE PREPARED TO STOP. Another item that is also covered is the fact that IF your vehicle is already in an intersection and the light turns Yellow or Red YOU have control of that intersection. So if your at your stated intersection, you entered it BEFORE the yellow light and the light turns red while you are going through that intersection, IF someone hits you THEY are at fault, not you, also if you were given a ticket and go to court over it any lawyer could get it dropped. As for getting hit because someone else jumped the green, It does happen, they are still at fault though if the vehicle they hit was in the intersection prior to them receiving the green light. NYS V&T Law. A driver approaching an intersection must yield the right-of-way to traffic already lawfully using the intersection. Example: You are nearing an intersection. The traffic light is green, and you want to drive straight through. Another vehicle is already in the intersection, turning left. You must let that vehicle complete its turn before you enter the intersection. SignatureSteve Williams > I can take anyone right now to an intersection where the speed limit is 25, > the light is dead on 3.0 seconds and the intersection is 100 feet from the [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > > > -LMB > NYS V&T Law. > A driver approaching an intersection must yield the right-of-way to [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > the intersection, turning left. You must let that vehicle complete its > turn before you enter the intersection. In Oregon they go by the stop line, if your front tires are over the stop line before the light changes red, your OK. I've only got 1 photo red light ticket, I was approaching an intersection and the light changed to yellow, I started slowing down then at the last minute decided I had enough time to make it though and didn't stop. Bad choice. I would have been OK if I had hit the gas instead of slowing. But there is a very simple way to defeat a red light ticket, at least in this state. You have to be married, though. What you do is for the car that you usually drive, you change the title to read only your wife's name, and for the car that she normally drives, you change the title to read only your name. This of course is meaningless from a legal property standpoint in most states, but it does work for photo tickets. When they capture the image, they will of course address the ticket to the wrong person - which is obvious as the sex of the person will be wrong, then you can just claim that you wern't the driver and the ticket is dismissed. In Oregon, they do ask you to rat on the person that was driving, my wife did on me when she got ticketed for me going through the red light, but they don't do anything to the actual lawbreaker as a result. This trick probably won't work that well for the gay couples, though. ;-) Oregon actually does the photo cameras the right way, in my opinion. What they do is they post warning signs that the intersection is photo ticketed, and the cameras are prominently visible. But, many of the intersections that are posted this way are, in fact, dummies, there's no actual camera there. As a result, you never know when your approaching one of these whether they have swapped the dummy head that week with a camera head (which happens every once in a while) so the deterrence effect is just as useful, and the county doesen't have to spend much money on a lot of cameras. The best advice is to just stop on a yellow on those photo ticketed intersections. Ted > What they do is they post warning signs that the intersection is photo > ticketed, and the cameras are prominently visible. But, many of the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > deterrence effect is just as useful, and the county doesen't have to spend > much money on a lot of cameras. Oh, I don't know. Given typical government waste on 'clever' ideas like this, I bet the savings aren't that great. Just guessing here, but: Typical intersection installation cost, working system -- $275,000 Typical intersection installation cost, dummy system -- $269,999 Toyota MDT in MO > > What they do is they post warning signs that the intersection is photo > > ticketed, and the cameras are prominently visible. But, many of the [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Typical intersection installation cost, dummy system -- $269,999 :-) Actually the local daily paper did a report on just that. The dummy installations are not that much cheaper since they all use the same poles, camera housings, etc. After all they are used to periodically house a camera. Where the savings comes in is that the camera locations have to be screwed with all the time, they have to be calibrated/checked weekly. Also the cameras are fragging expensive, break down periodically and have to be fixed. The dummy locations by contrast can be ignored for months at a time since there's no active components in them. The other thing is support on the political side of things. Don't forget Oregon is an Initative state. The biggest argument they used to go to red light cameras is to save lives, as there's many intersections in the state (a combination of not enough dollars spent on road building - this state has a lot of tree-huggers that hate cars - and piss-poor road planning) that used to regularly kill pedestrians in the crosswalk, as well as regularly create massive traffic snarls as a result of collisions. So the public safety effect was way overblown. As a result the officials know they can't go on a ticket-writing craze with the things because if they do it will ignite an Initative that will ban them. Ted Interesting... I'll have to look into "initiative state" in more detail some time. If I sounded a bit negative regarding my take on the government finding more expensive ways to do something, well yeah. If the real cameras work properly, let them do their thing. I am all for hugely stiff fines and points to those who blow red lights. (specifically, enter the intersection once the light has turned red) AFAIC, these people are just waiting to be murderers. I was recently stuck on an always over-congested street with many intersections, some of them highway, in a very short distance. The cops for that burb were on foot, puling over aprox. three cars per light cycle for sitting in the intersection during a red light. That was one of the best traffic jams I've ever been in. Toyota MDT in MO > > > What they do is they post warning signs that the intersection is photo > > > ticketed, and the cameras are prominently visible. But, many of the [quoted text clipped - 49 lines] > > Ted If they would use them for what they are supposed to be for in my city, it would good. It is a revenue getter here. They have the ability to make the interesections safer by adjusting the yellows for longer, safer times and even a delay before it turns green on the other side, but they don't. Here, they put in a camera, didnt change the switch time over to the other side, and instead set the yellows 0.1 second quicker and actually to an illegal value of under 3 seconds. Not very safe at all. > If they would use them for what they are supposed to be for in my city, > it would good. It is a revenue getter here. They have the ability to [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > the other side, and instead set the yellows 0.1 second quicker and > actually to an illegal value of under 3 seconds. Not very safe at all. It amazes me that clearance time (during which all traffic has a red light) is an optional and variable traffic light mode. Colorado has had clearance time built into all intersections for at least two and a half decades. I learned to drive there and did so for many years. When I moved to Oregon, it was a real shock to discover that there's no such clearance time there. Ditto many intersections in Michigan, and many in Ontario. Relatively long yellows and a few seconds' clearance time are known and robustly shown to cut red-light running and related injury, death and property damage dramatically, usually down to negligible levels. That we mess around with any other "countermeasure" is telling and sad. DS >>If they would use them for what they are supposed to be for in my city, >>it would good. It is a revenue getter here. They have the ability to [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > DS There's always got to be someone to blame, and someone to crack down on. Just letting the engineers do their thing has never been a popular solution, unfortunately. nate Signaturereplace "fly" with "com" to reply. http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel
|
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.