The Rise Of The Ticket Camera “Front Group”
By Jim Baxter, NMA President
Recently, groups opposed to the use of ticket cameras have discovered that companies that promote and profit from the installation of ticket camera systems have been setting up fake organizations, or “front groups” to convey the illusion that there are local citizen groups who favor automated ticketing of motorists.
There is also the attempt to imply that these citizen based organizations are solely concerned about improving traffic safety.
Despite a seemingly blind mainstream media, it has been obvious to even casual observers that organizations like “Stop Red Light Running” were just shills for the ticket camera industry.
Until recently, the formation of local pro-camera ticket groups, was not recognized as a centrally orchestrated campaign to sell or protect ticket camera installations. However, recent discoveries and comparisons show that 15 or more websites for a like number of different communities are the creation of one company with ties to Automated Traffic Solutions (ATS), a leading purveyor of ticket camera systems.
Of late these front groups have been used to oppose local referendums where residents are given the opportunity to vote for the removal of ticket cameras. This opposition includes the funding of legal challenges and P.R. campaigns.
It is not illegal or unethical for a private company to attempt to protect its financial interest.
Where the line is crossed, in this instance, is the creation of the pretense that there is organized community support for ticket cameras and that support is based on safety concerns.
There’s no doubt that there are individuals who have been duped into believing that ticket cameras can reduce accidents.
After all, hasn’t that been what elected officials, police chiefs and government “experts” have told them. ”It’s just the ‘rabble rousers’ who are mad because they got a ticket that are objecting to the cameras.”
But, whenever community organizations have evolved, they have consisted of local people who know a “public-private” snow job when they hear it and also know ticket cameras are about raising revenue and safety be damned.
These real community organizations are the ones that speak the truth and they want ticket cameras gone.
Image Credit (Snake Oil Bottle)
3 dirty tricks that the ticket camera industry uses to steal money from safe drivers. Discover what you don't know.
Despite years of evidence showing that ticket camera companies don't care about safety and will do anything for a buck, there are few tricks that the average driver often fails to notice. You can help expose them.
What would happen if the local money from a red light camera was mandated by law to go to Education or some other use (i.e. not for the local municipality where the light resides)?
I know that one argument that I hear by some in favor of RLCs is that RLC promote safety.
I suspect that if there was no money incentive for the local community, then the RLC would not be in operation for long.
Would you say that there is no incentive for government to make our roads safer? It comes back to would you think it is a smart and safe thing for everyone to drive or do whatever they dang will care to do. If you had pilots that would do that and thus increase plane crashes how many people would fly or back the pilots? I would say nobody. At the same time you are willing to have people make decisions that can and do kill people around them and you say go for it. We would not need RLCs if people would stop when they are supposed to. As a matter of fact if there are RLC.s no one would get ticketed if they stopped when they are supposed to. I do not live in an area that uses them but I do have friends that do. They say they never get tickets. If you say that people do not pay attention and they get the tickets, then maybe that is a good thing. Maybe they will start to pay attention when they are at an intersection.
@JimSamsung,
I think that RLCs are used primarily as a means to get money. Any safety benefits are secondary to revenue.
Your pilot analogy is not quite accurate in my opinion.
IMO, pilots that do stupid and/or careless acts are not pilots for long.
I think that better engineering can do more to improve safety than a RLC.
Look at this youtube video and count how much time passes till the driver runs the light and runs into the scooter. I think it is at least 6-7 seconds after the light is red.
[youtube 0SFmrRo8H_0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0SFmrRo8H_0 youtube]
RLCs can not prevent stupid driving.
=========================================================
Redlight cameras can also make mistakes since they are designed and operated by people.
[youtube 6d6lt1x5xnw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6d6lt1x5xnw youtube]
I do not like people running red lights. It is not safe for them or others.
However, I do not think RLCs are the best way to minimize the number of people running red lights. I also do not think that RLCs are cost effective for reducing RL running.
Errors can be made with RLCs
[youtube 6d6lt1x5xnw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6d6lt1x5xnw youtube]
============================================================
RLCs can not stop innatentive and/or stupid driving.
[youtube 9tqTUfApB3s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tqTUfApB3s youtube]
Errors can be made with RLCs
[youtube 6d6lt1x5xnw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6d6lt1x5xnw youtube]
RLCs can not stop innatentive and/or stupid driving.
[youtube 9tqTUfApB3s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tqTUfApB3s youtube]
you are right there. Maybe if we increase speed limits and allowed people to run red lights and allowed more drunks on the road then it would get rid of some of the stupid driving.
@JimSamsung
Flying is a risky activity. Yet people (and businesses) are willing to take the risk. Many people see the benefits of flying outweighing the risks of flying.
There are some people that will never fly. For them the benefits do not outweigh the risks.
I do not see people trying to stop people from flying just because they are against it and think it is too risky.
Some people think traveling 75-80 mph on an interstate is too risky and they want to stop others from traveling at that speed or faster. It would be better if they stayed in the right lane or did not drive on the Interstate at all.
=======================================================================
IMO RL cameras do not address the problems of a particular intersection or stretch of road.
Rt 9 in NJ was a miserable road due to the relatively high number of traffic lights on this highly traveled road. It would not be practical to travel on this road if you needed to make haste. Through much work and engineering the road is now much better.
Some lights were removed and bridges were built in their place. In some cases the lights were re-timed. In other cases extra lanes were added to accommodate the volume of traffic.
Although I still would not want to travel on this road during rush hour, it is now a much better to road for travel. A RLC would not have solved the problems of US-9.
=======================================================================
Is RPG a Role Playing Game? I know some people do not like D&D. ;-)
=======================================================================
M1THRAND1R the RPG thing was not something that I came up with. It was a comment in a link that this site takes you to. You can find if if you look. I just thought it was amusing with a little bit of fact thrown in.
You did not say why you would not travel that road during rush hour? Would it be that everyone has to be traveling their own speed like you say rather than one speed like the speed limit that would make driving 10 times better. During periods of road congestion it is best if everyone is traveling the same speed. I have read different opinions of that on this site. If everyone would drive slower and at the same speed everyone would get there faster.
@JimSamsung
"You did not say why you would not travel that road during rush hour?"
I would prefer to travel about 50-60 mph with a minimum amount of stopping instead of driving in slow bumper to bumper traffic with occasional opportunities to travel something close to 40-45 mph.
During non-rush hour times it is often possible to travel with most of the lights in your favor while traveling a reasonable traveling speed of about 50-60 mph.
========================================================
"If everyone would drive slower and at the same speed everyone would get there faster. "
I think that would depend on the road, volume of traffic, and the type of traffic conditions.
M1THRAND1R I know of no lights in town that are timed to allow 60 mph speeds. It is pretty much worthless talking about it to you because when someone like you thinks that speed makes no difference in the number of accidents or if there is an accident speed only causes a slightly larger bump of vehicles, it makes no sense trying to explain it to someone like you. You either lack the facts or ignore them or have never seen a car with people in it die at higher speeds.
@JimSamsung
I did not say anything about how the timing of the lights was done. You should improve your reading comprehension and actually read what I wrote.
Your response makes it appear to me that you think if someone drives at times over the PSL then people will automatically die and/or burst into flames.
I think that it is possible for people to drive safely, even at speeds that may be above the PSL, provided that people are driving attentively to their surroundings.
Regardless of safety issues, if one is traveling above the PSL, then one risks receiving a ticket from the police.
If you truly consider it worthless to speak to me, then please remain silent in your ignorance.
Hey Randy/JimSamsung, you moved and got a new IP address? How soon do you think you will be banned again on this blog?
speeding is almost never the cause of an accident. Accidents occur because people are not paying attention and therefore run a red light, run a stop sign, pull out in front of someone. Swerving into another lane, rear ending someone. These are most accident. Most people who speed are paying attention because you have to because your "breaking the law." There's a 40mph road near me that people always go at least 50mph on and the police dont do anything, even doing 55 or 60mph. It's not dangerous. If it were, most people wouldn't do it. But most accidents are not caused by speeding. Just because you are speeding dosen't mean you are doing something unsafe it just means your breaking an arbitrary number that purposefully posted low so the police can pull over anyone they want and terrorize them.
It's the American Thought of not trusting the gov't and standing up to say this isn't right and i don't like this gov't intrusion. I can look out for myself, i don't need the Gov't to "protect" me. I wish more Americans would think that.
Randall speeding is the cause for a good percentage of accidents. I see dozens of these each year. I guess you would not say speed to be the cause but the curve in the road that got in the way or a slower car in front caused it or the weather. It is fine of you to blame other things all the time but speed is often a major contributor in such cases.
Of the other percentage that you say were caused by something else, if they had been driving slower the accident either could have been avoided totally or could have been much less severe. Accidents can be caused by other factors but speed will lead to more severe accidents and deaths.
You are probably one to say that you should set the speed limit to the 85% speed but you are also probably one of those that go well over the 85% speed and in all reports ever written it says that you are at an increased risk of being in an accident and a severe one at that.
@JimSamsung
I would disagree with your assessment.
"Fact of the matter is, none of this would be an issue at all, if people could just obey the laws."
If the PSL is 40mph and someone runs a red light at 35mph they have created a very unsafe situation. It could result in an accident. Speed was not the cause of an accident in this case.
A red light camera would not have prevented this potential accident either. A red light camera could cause people to react differently than they normally would at an intersection.
If I am on the borderline (where you would have to press the breaks hard to stop in time) when the light changes but I know that there is a RLC at the intersection, I am more inclined to stop even if I could have made the light safely just to avoid a potential ticket.
This action could get me rear ended if the driver behind me is not paying enough attention to me and the light.
I think that traveling faster only makes the consequences of inattentive driving worse.
If one runs a red light, they run the risk of an accident. The speed would affect the force of the accident, but it would not be the cause of the accident in my opinion.
==============================================================
Driving slower is not a guarantee of avoiding all accidents. There is risk with just about any activity.
M1THRAND1R I pretty much agree with you. One of the main reasons red light cameras came into being is that Instead of a person driving 35 mph or slightly faster in a 30 mph zone they see that the light turned yellow in front of them and speed up to 50 mph so they come close to making it and that is when if you hit someone it is very dangerous. I think we have all seen such a thing. That is the reason for red light cameras and the easy sell of them because we have all seen it.
Also, on your feeling that people will not stop behind you if they are not paying attention. would that not be the case also if the light turned yellow a second or two earlier. They still would hit you. You may be right though that tailgating is also a very serious problem when as you say people are not paying attention. The main thing to remeber is that if you are getting close to an intersection you should always be paying attention and be ready stop.
I was just thinking about your guarantee of avoiding accidents statement. It is kind of like the difference between stepping off a 3 step ladder and jumping off a 2 story building. Yes you would call it an accident or a step off either way but I would much rather step off a 3 step ladder. I would much rather be hit 30 mph rather than 50 mph. Either way you can get hurt but your chances are 10 times or more better at the faster speed. Yes we can not drive across the country at 30 mph but do you really need to drive 80 mph across town? I think not. Reading through some of these blogs I always see the excuse that it saves a lot of time driivng across the country but that is only an excuse for most here to do it all the time even if it is only a few miles.
@JimSamsung
"Yes we can not drive across the country at 30 mph but do you really need to drive 80 mph across town?"
I did not make a reference to the PSL of any local roads.
Except for interstates or other similar limited access highways, I would think that 80mph would not be practical or safe. Although I do not have any data for support, I doubt that many if any people travel above 70mph on local (non highway/limited access) roads.
===========================================================
The PSL should be set with sound engineering practices and should not be set arbitrarily.
Regardless of the PSL, I would drive what I would consider a safe speed for the road conditions. If I found myself travelings at speeds slower than most of the traffic around me, I would move to the right most lane to make it easier for traffic to drive around me.
If I could not travel on a highway within 5-10 mph of PSL then I would look for other roads to travel as an alternate. (I have done this at times, although rarely)
When I said 80 mph across town what I was talking about was interstate type roads across town of which are usually 55 mph speed limits because of the large amount of traffic of which most on this site would drive 80 mph because they felt it very important to save a few seconds getting across town. You could say the same for the 45 mph limited access roads of which many here feel like driving 55 mph or more. The excuse is to save the huge amount of time of maybe a minute or less. The actual fact is that they may instead spend hours waiting for the accident to be removed from the road. I have been there. You said yourself it does not matter what the speed limit is set even if it is set under sound engineering principals. You or others are problably going to "not" follow it. That brings you back to airlines. What if the airline pilot decided not to follow any rules. He decides to fly as close to any other planes he feels like becaue he is such a good pilot or land as close behind another pilot as he feels like or to not follow any recommended elevation. You would start to have the same amount of accidents as we do on our roads. I even left out the pilot should be able to fly drunk.
I just read the article "Seattle Red Light Camera Issuing Illegal Tickets" They said in the article that red light cameras are only legal where two streets cross and they said that at the Seattle intersection it was illegal because there was an extra street. That is very good that NMA makes us aware of injustices of the legal system. That sounds more like an excuse to get off rather than true law. Two streets did cross. That is a fact so it is legal. There are judges that should not be there.
Hey the law is the law and I believe there were more than two streets were crossing at that intersection therefore the cameras are illegal.
Just like in MD speed cameras can be placed a half of a mile from a school zone or inside a work zone so what did municipalities do, MAKE MORE SCHOOL ZONES! So they could place the cameras in locations that they couldnt be placed at originally. Also they have to post signs saying that Photo enforcement was in there area which in Baltimore City they are not doing and therefore those tickets are illegal until they place the photo enforcement ahead signs.
Randall that ruling was not on the law but a judgment of the law. 99% of other judges probably would have ruled differently. From reading about this the judge just felt like giving the guy a break and let him off.