Houston's Red Light Camera controversy
- Thread starter Richard L
- Start date
Help Support Ford SportTrac Forum:
David Ponder
Well-Known Member
So, the company that runs the cameras has a legal contract to keep them on.. Here is what I suggest. Post a traffic officer or two at that intersection 24 hours a day to be sure no one runs the red lights. Yes, the city will have to pay for the officers, but at a cost far far below what they would be charged in breach of contract damages.
Thus, the cameras remain on, the company that sends out the notices gets NOTHING for violations, but only their equipment fees. The City can still collect for other violations at the intersection. This should fulfill he contract, and send a strong message to the camera company. And I am sure they can make more money moving the cameras to other areas or cities. Then the CITY can hold the contract over them and keep them from moving them if needed until they let the city out of the contract.
Just a thought...
Thus, the cameras remain on, the company that sends out the notices gets NOTHING for violations, but only their equipment fees. The City can still collect for other violations at the intersection. This should fulfill he contract, and send a strong message to the camera company. And I am sure they can make more money moving the cameras to other areas or cities. Then the CITY can hold the contract over them and keep them from moving them if needed until they let the city out of the contract.
Just a thought...
I think the real issue is why the city council and the Mayor would get into a contract for such an expensive system? I'm sure they are trying to justify the system based on safer intersections, but in reality, they have to make millions in fines to pay for this system. But their sole motivation was increased revenue, and it appears to have backfired on them. After they pay for all the legal fees to try to squeeze out of this mess, they will just add to the money they've wasted.
They got sold a pig in a poke, and putting lipstick on that pig is not going to make it look any better. :bwahaha:
....Rich
They got sold a pig in a poke, and putting lipstick on that pig is not going to make it look any better. :bwahaha:
....Rich
Last edited by a moderator:
Kevin Lang
Well-Known Member
This is the sort of bs that happens in corrupt blue states like Maryland, not in red states like Texas, which some far-right wingers consider to be the state exemplar of the union, the real life manifestation of Ayn Rand's Colorado (except for Austin).
Makes sense to me, with the cameras and the shorter yellow lights, the incentive to unsafely speed is great, as well as jumping the green light. Shoot, I know I'd do it. Speeding is by and large a bogus offense in my book; going 5 mph slower isn't going to make the car any less dangerous.
Makes sense to me, with the cameras and the shorter yellow lights, the incentive to unsafely speed is great, as well as jumping the green light. Shoot, I know I'd do it. Speeding is by and large a bogus offense in my book; going 5 mph slower isn't going to make the car any less dangerous.
EddieS'04
In Memoriam 1950-2022
I know this is not a new thought.
Yes the city was looking at revenue most of all.
I have a real problem with the camera companies. Talking cities into these long term contracts in the name of safety(Uhmm$$).
I see these camera companies as nonthing more than AMBULANCE chasers. Lining their pockets to overflowing.
Nonthing wrong with making a buck. Sometimes it is uncouth practice.
I hate red light runners. Got to be a better and cheaper way. With out being locked into a pig with lipstick contract...Borrowed from Richard...
Yes the city was looking at revenue most of all.
I have a real problem with the camera companies. Talking cities into these long term contracts in the name of safety(Uhmm$$).
I see these camera companies as nonthing more than AMBULANCE chasers. Lining their pockets to overflowing.
Nonthing wrong with making a buck. Sometimes it is uncouth practice.
I hate red light runners. Got to be a better and cheaper way. With out being locked into a pig with lipstick contract...Borrowed from Richard...
Eddie,
I'm sure the city of Houston has a number of lawyers on staff getting paid big money to advise the city. I also suspect that the decision was made by the Mayor/City Manager and City Council without the staff lawyers even looking at the contract.
Everything just smacks of them seeing Dollar $ign$...it's a driven by greed mixed with stupidity.
...Rich
I'm sure the city of Houston has a number of lawyers on staff getting paid big money to advise the city. I also suspect that the decision was made by the Mayor/City Manager and City Council without the staff lawyers even looking at the contract.
Everything just smacks of them seeing Dollar $ign$...it's a driven by greed mixed with stupidity.
...Rich
Increase the duration of the yellow light and the problem will go away. People will not run the lights because it has been proven that increasing the yellow light duration all but eliminates red light running.
The camera company gets little to no money and they will consider breaking the contract. The city can then sue the camera company for breach of contract and the voters win.
Tom
The camera company gets little to no money and they will consider breaking the contract. The city can then sue the camera company for breach of contract and the voters win.
Tom
Kevin Palmer
Well-Known Member
How about this....
Don't speed through ANY red lights and do NOT run the red lights.
Problem solved.
I took a defensive driving course that was required for some security I was doing. One statistic that I will never forget is, that 78% of all accidents that happen at traffic lights happen with 1.7 seconds of a light change.
So basically, if you count to TWO you will dramatically increase your odds of not getting into an accident at traffic lights.
Don't speed through ANY red lights and do NOT run the red lights.
Problem solved.
I took a defensive driving course that was required for some security I was doing. One statistic that I will never forget is, that 78% of all accidents that happen at traffic lights happen with 1.7 seconds of a light change.
So basically, if you count to TWO you will dramatically increase your odds of not getting into an accident at traffic lights.
Coastiejoe,
Very good point. I was about to respond to Caymen's post about longer yellow lights, which would give speeders and red light runners more time to get throught the intersection before they might be caught by the camera.
One of the techniques I have seen that is much more related to safety is to put a 2 second delay afte the light turns red before the opposing traffic light turns green. That stops all traffic momentarily and allows those few seconds to clear the intersection. That does not prevent someone from intentionally running a red light, but I don't think most running of red lights is intentional.
That delay does prevent accidents at intersections just as your training class indicated. It vertually illiminates that 1.7 second accident window where people try to speed up through a yellow light, or think the green light is their right to rush into an intersection without any caution. They may be right....but dead-right is not much of a prize.
Your training class shows that various investigations have beed done on accidents on traffic lights, and those who have implemented the 2 second delay in the switching of traffic lights from red to green have found it to significantly reduce accidents at traffic lights.
It sounds like adding this delay to all traffic lights would be a much cheaper and more effective solution to improving the safety at intersections. Of course that does not provide any revenue for the cities who prefer to use cameras to produce revenue, as is the situation in Houston, and many other cities throughout the USA.
...Rich
Very good point. I was about to respond to Caymen's post about longer yellow lights, which would give speeders and red light runners more time to get throught the intersection before they might be caught by the camera.
One of the techniques I have seen that is much more related to safety is to put a 2 second delay afte the light turns red before the opposing traffic light turns green. That stops all traffic momentarily and allows those few seconds to clear the intersection. That does not prevent someone from intentionally running a red light, but I don't think most running of red lights is intentional.
That delay does prevent accidents at intersections just as your training class indicated. It vertually illiminates that 1.7 second accident window where people try to speed up through a yellow light, or think the green light is their right to rush into an intersection without any caution. They may be right....but dead-right is not much of a prize.
Your training class shows that various investigations have beed done on accidents on traffic lights, and those who have implemented the 2 second delay in the switching of traffic lights from red to green have found it to significantly reduce accidents at traffic lights.
It sounds like adding this delay to all traffic lights would be a much cheaper and more effective solution to improving the safety at intersections. Of course that does not provide any revenue for the cities who prefer to use cameras to produce revenue, as is the situation in Houston, and many other cities throughout the USA.
...Rich
Thomas Rogers
Well-Known Member
Waiting for at least two more cars to go through a congestion intersection while your light has turned green is a popular pastime here in PA.
TJR,
Yep, it happens here at times too.
I know a couple of congested intersections where the left turn light is too short. If you want to make a left turn, you may have to wait for 2 or 3 cylces of the traffic light before you can make your turn. It is very common for 1 or 2 (even more) impatient drivers go through the intersection and make left turns after the light has turned red. A number of years ago, they used to post a police officer at one location just to watch for people turning after the light turned red, and that seemed to reduce the people running the red light but seemed to increase the congestion???
I avoid those intersections, but I know Waco has purchased some Traffic light camera's and I suspect that they would be two prime locations for cameras.
I think it would have been much cheaper and safer to just adjust the timing of the lights
...Rich
Yep, it happens here at times too.
I know a couple of congested intersections where the left turn light is too short. If you want to make a left turn, you may have to wait for 2 or 3 cylces of the traffic light before you can make your turn. It is very common for 1 or 2 (even more) impatient drivers go through the intersection and make left turns after the light has turned red. A number of years ago, they used to post a police officer at one location just to watch for people turning after the light turned red, and that seemed to reduce the people running the red light but seemed to increase the congestion???
I avoid those intersections, but I know Waco has purchased some Traffic light camera's and I suspect that they would be two prime locations for cameras.
I think it would have been much cheaper and safer to just adjust the timing of the lights
...Rich
It would be cheaper, but not as profitable.
Tom
Caymen,
I agree. IMO, the sole motive of red light camera's are to generate revenue for the city... If this is truely a safety issue, simply changing the timing of the lights should remove the hazard that leads to accidents, not to ticket people after someone gets killed. It's obvious that safety always takes a back seat to money and politics.
...Rich
I agree. IMO, the sole motive of red light camera's are to generate revenue for the city... If this is truely a safety issue, simply changing the timing of the lights should remove the hazard that leads to accidents, not to ticket people after someone gets killed. It's obvious that safety always takes a back seat to money and politics.
...Rich
Kevin Lang
Well-Known Member
DC area Maryland is getting rather infamous for doing this exact same thing. When the government posts speed traps & cameras on congested roads, they increase the congestion and make money. Actually fixing the congestion would cost them money, and they can't have that. :fire:
Even locally, there are 3 counties near Fort George G. Meade, which has grown immensely due to BRAC. The roads nearby can't handle the new traffic--they couldn't even handle the old--and the government of these counties sat on their hands when it came time to build/expand roads until now, when the slow construction actually creates more congestion. Just to spite us, they're speed trapping it up the wazoo.
Someday the MD/DC governments will pull their heads out of their behinds and expand light rail/metro lines and build at least one more limited-access north-south major road. Until then, they'll just slap red light cameras and speed traps onto the busted-up, under construction & inadequate roads that we have. :banghead:
If you go to NOVA, you're stuck there during Rush Hour. If you're in MD and you want to go north during rush hour, you're stuck. It sucks.
KL,
Many years ago when I was in the military I was stationed in Washington, DC twice about 10 years apart. The first time I lived in Tacoma Park, MD and the second time I lived in Woodbridge, VA
The first time I was stationed there, I used to drive on the Baltimore-Washington Parkway on a regular basis and it was a fairly pleasant drive (except during rush hour) The odd thing was that they used to park old gutted car shells painted to look like police cars in the grassy median. As you approached, you could see the car ahead and slow down because it might be a speed trap. Every month or so they would move the cars to a different location...and of course they occasionally would put a real cop car and speed trap where the old car shell was parked...:angry:
The lady I am currently dating is from the Washington, DC area and she has told me how much it has built up along the 50 mile stretch of the Balt-Wash parkway as well as the 25 mile stretch down I-95 to Woodbridge, VA.
...Rich
Many years ago when I was in the military I was stationed in Washington, DC twice about 10 years apart. The first time I lived in Tacoma Park, MD and the second time I lived in Woodbridge, VA
The first time I was stationed there, I used to drive on the Baltimore-Washington Parkway on a regular basis and it was a fairly pleasant drive (except during rush hour) The odd thing was that they used to park old gutted car shells painted to look like police cars in the grassy median. As you approached, you could see the car ahead and slow down because it might be a speed trap. Every month or so they would move the cars to a different location...and of course they occasionally would put a real cop car and speed trap where the old car shell was parked...:angry:
The lady I am currently dating is from the Washington, DC area and she has told me how much it has built up along the 50 mile stretch of the Balt-Wash parkway as well as the 25 mile stretch down I-95 to Woodbridge, VA.
...Rich
