HELP! Redlight Cameras - wife got a ticket

[dave_in_austin]

When the first traffic control cameras were activated here in Austin, one of the local news channels had a representative from the ACLU on encouraging everyone who got a fine notice to fight it and briefly outlined how to do it on the basis of prior court rulings. I do not remember the details, but you might try contacting your local ACLU office and see if they can provide any guidance. Just be sure not to tell the ACLU that you are a gun owner or they will probably not want to talk to you.

[boomerang]

They have to PROVE I was driving, right?

No. It's like a parking ticket.

[dawgfishboy]

Anyone have any REAL suggestions?

Take your wife's car away for a week or two...What she'll save in gas will pay for her recklessness and maybe teach her a lesson.
(good luck with that)

Honestly, I'd be thankful she didn't cause a wreck or even worse kill somebody.

[SCone]

You're not going to beat it, just pay it and stop next time.

Probably true, but the fact that it is true still chaps me. You can't realistically challenge laws like this unless you are independently wealthy - and that has given us some really bad laws.

How can you fight a photo? It shows the violation and the car that did it.

Take heart, the stats say that red-light cameras don't generate the money the city had hoped for, so many are taking them out. There are even some studies that show they increase accidents (rear-end collisions from stopping quickly)

There are some lawsuits that may make some difference, but don't count on it.

[KaiserB]

So, my wife gets a ticket from Humble "Redlight Camera Enforcement Department" for $75. Obviously, she ran a redlight. Now, I have some basic problems with this. Number one, it's just creepy and flies in the face of all that is American; we are NOT supposed to be watched 24/7.

Go time the length of the yellow light. This is about the only way to get these tickets tossed. If the yellow light is illuminated less than the State required number of seconds you can get out of the ticket as the light is not functioning to State of TX standards.

See: http://www.motorists.org/blog/red-light ... or-profit/

[jimlongley]

For a little while I was an "insider" on the Dallas red light program, my company at the time had the contract to provide transport of the red light data from the cameras to a server point for transfer to their central processing point.

As an engineer on the wireless network I participated in turn ups of new sites and pre-implementation tests as well as having a test bed in our lab, I decided one thing. If I ever get a red light ticket I will probably spend at least $75.00 filming the intersection in question, timing the lights and cameras, and questioning the accuracy of the timing devices involved.

At one point one of "our" intersections was taking pictures of cars running green lights, another was taking the pics too late, so they were not getting readable license plates, and a third had the cameras pointed at a different point than the radars, while yet another was taking pictures of the car in front of the violator.

Not all cameras use radar, ours did, others use hysteresis loops embedded in the pavement, and still others use other methods, but they have one thing in common, they must time the vehicle's entry into the intersection accurately and if they don't accomplish this, they will take false pictures. The length of the yellow light is not the only timing factor: when the camera is triggered, where the cameras are pointing, and even how many cars get pictures taken of them can be factors in fighting a citation.

In a couple of cases the poles supporting the radars had to be moved in order to allow them to focus properly, in others the "tweaking" and tuning went on for a couple of days until their engineers were satisfied with the reults Frustration is replacing the same CAT 5 cable three times because a) the client's engineers miscalculated the distance necessary for their radars (yes they did that) or b) the city decided to allow more people to "pink" the light by moving the stop line or adjusting the yellow (and that happened at almost every intersection) and in either case, and in one instance both cases, the poles had to be moved, with all of the attendant sturm und drang, digging, concreting, etc.

I don't work for that company anymore, I fell on the job and broke my finger and didn't get the hint when the president suggested that I use my own insurance, and instead put in for workman's comp. The day after WC released me, so did the company, with a letter stating that "we" had explored all the alternative jobs within the company after my initial assignment as a trainer and subsequent promotion to engineer. Of course I was fired for having the timerity to claim workman's comp, but try to prove it.

Anyway, I don't have access to ALL of the insider secrets that I had when I worked there, but I don't feel at all guilty telling you that improper timing is a problem that could crop up at any time in these systems, and probably is the only way to come close to beating one, but the delay between the actual incident and the arrival of the pics in the mail defeat that plan.

Maybe a dashboard cam?

[DoubleActionCHL]

So, my wife gets a ticket from Humble "Redlight Camera Enforcement Department" for $75. Obviously, she ran a redlight. Now, I have some basic problems with this. Number one, it's just creepy and flies in the face of all that is American; we are NOT supposed to be watched 24/7.

Go time the length of the yellow light. This is about the only way to get these tickets tossed. If the yellow light is illuminated less than the State required number of seconds you can get out of the ticket as the light is not functioning to State of TX standards.

See: http://www.motorists.org/blog/red-light ... or-profit/

I'm looking for TXDOT's guidelines for yellow light intervals, but can't find anything. I found one site (nothing official) that states that timing is 3.0 seconds for speed limits up to 30mph and an additional half second for each 5mph increase. Anyone know where I can find TXDOT's actual guidelines?

NEVERMIND! Found it: http://media.myfoxdfw.com/KDFWMISC/RedL ... elines.pdf

[mr.72]

Anyone have any REAL suggestions?

immediate help: stop at red lights

long-term help: stop voting for whomever is in office that supports the red light cameras. Careful you don't trade in one set of values for another that you agree with even less.

As a cyclist I can tell you that people, in general, don't stop at red lights to turn right, don't stop at stop signs under any circumstances unless there is a dump truck bearing down on the cross street, and routinely accelerate on yellow lights and end up running them when they turn red. You have a rather unique vantage point on a bicycle where you are higher up than all other traffic and traveling at 20mph all the time. I am not a fan of red light cameras but I am even less of a fan of you running stop signs and red lights without getting a ticket. I might support the "red light cameras" if they also put in "stop sign cameras" and made it a universal rule... fail to make a COMPLETE stop (wheels actually stop turning) at a stop sign, same ticket. Maybe even put cameras on speed limit signs with radar that send you a speeding tickets if you speed past the sign. Why not make all traffic enforcement that does not result in a wreck into a civil penalty with a $75 ticket and let cops quit going out handing out speeding, stop sign and red light tickets? IMHO if it can be automated, automate it. You can't automate the cop coming to catch a burglar or car breakin bad guy.

[tarkus]

I am not a fan of red light cameras but I am even less of a fan of you running stop signs and red lights without getting a ticket. I might support the "red light cameras" if they also put in "stop sign cameras" and made it a universal rule... fail to make a COMPLETE stop (wheels actually stop turning) at a stop sign, same ticket.

The trick is to make sure it triggers for bicycles too! And require plates for bikes on public roads so they know where to send the tickets.

[Texian]

Like some others have said: Real help; don't run red lights. Yes the law does apply to you. If you don't like it then work to have it repealed (good luck with that). Personally, I have no sympathy whatsoever. Ask your local EMTs and LEOs what they think of red light runners. Maybe you should try to get a ride along with some of them and then see if you think the deaths and injuries and property damage are worth drivers thumbing their nose at traffic lights.

http://driving.myfoxaustin.com/features ... index.html

Running Red Lights
by Luigi Fraschini for Driving Today

While many drivers fear the stress-inducing crunch of high-speed traffic on Interstate and other multi-lane highways, the most dangerous place on the road might just be the busy corner near your house. If that well-traveled intersection is regulated by traffic signals, odds are that it could be the site of a serious accident. That's because, caught in a time crunch or simply not paying attention, thousands of drivers each day disobey traffic signals, failing to stop on red lights. The toll of this carelessness is staggering.

Each year red light running crashes result in nearly 1,000 deaths and about 90,000 injuries nationally. And, sadly, things are getting worse. Between 1992 and 1998, red light crashes increased at an alarming 18 percent. According to the Federal Highway Administration, 96 percent of drivers fear being hit by a red light runner upon entering an intersection, yet 55.8 percent admit to running red lights.

The leading excuse cited by the red light runners is "being in a hurry!" This sense of entitlement -- my time is more valuable than your safety -- combined with a low expectation of being caught is responsible for rampant disrespect for the rules of the road.

But some believe there is an answer to this growing problem. They advocate the use of automatic cameras that will catch red light runners in the act and result in their being fined. Some say that red light cameras aren't accurate or, worse yet, are a compromise of our Constitutional rights as Americans. But the California Board of Audits has completed its review of red light camera programs in California, finding the programs to be effective in reducing red light-running crashes.

"Statewide collision data indicates a 10 percent drop in accidents caused by motorists running red lights in areas with red light cameras compared to no change in the number of accidents in other areas," the report says. The report also notes that red light running crashes have increased 14 percent in San Diego since the camera program was suspended last year.

"Red light running is a reckless and preventable traffic safety menace and red light cameras provide a solution that works," said Monica Zech of the El Cajon Fire Department. "It's a matter of saving lives. The sooner we resume these lifesaving programs, the better."

Other studies of safety effectiveness in specific localities have also shown dramatic results. A recent audit of the San Diego program found that the number of crashes caused by motorists who run red lights dropped 44 percent at intersections with red light cameras. The red light camera program in Oxnard, California has resulted in a 46 percent reduction in injury causing crashes involving signal or sign violations.

"

Aggressive driving is not a right, and red light cameras present no threat of any sort to safe drivers," said Leslie Blakey, executive director of the National Campaign to Stop Red Light Running.

"But, getting people to change their behavior requires consistent enforcement. With photo enforcement, we can reverse the trend toward this irresponsible behavior."


Cleveland-based auto journalist Luigi Fraschini is always in a hurry, but he always manages to stop for red lights and for red flags waving.

[russ]

2 vehicle's registered to me have had red lite camera violations. I called a few lawyers but none would touch them. They said
dont bother just pay it. My teen age son got one of them and i made him pay it with his own money. The other one was a employee diving one of my business trucks, Took that one out of his check.

[The Annoyed Man]

Third, there is usually NO possible way to prove who was driving the vehicle on that particular day, at that particular time.

In most of the pictures taken from red light or speeding cameras that I've ever seen, the driver's face was pretty clearly identifiable. The other issues aside, I think it is usually pretty easy for the police to tell if it's you or not. Also, even if it is not you, unless you've reported the vehicle as stolen, it is safe to assume that the person's use of your vehicle is authorized and that you therefore know who's face is in the picture. I don't know what the legal issues are to you as the car's owner if that's the case, but personally I wouldn't want the cops leaning on me for what they know that I know, and me trying to withhold the information.

The larger argument, and perhaps the better one if you want to argue against these cameras, is whether or not they actually reduce accident statistics wherever they are located. The reason you want this approach to challenge it is that municipalities pretty much always use the argument that it will reduce accidents if they install these cameras when they are trying to justify them to their taxpayer base. However, wherever the veracity of this claim has been challenged, it almost always turns out that accidents don't actually go down. In some cases, they've gone up. So the safety argument is bogus. But in most cases, it also turns out that the cities won't remove the cameras because they are excellent revenue generating devices.

And the camera aside, you say your wife did run the light. That is illegal. Does she not deserve to pay a fine? If not, then how can you justify fining others for the same infraction when it is witnessed by a police officer? It may be small potatoes, but running a light is a crime of sorts because, whether or not the cameras work or are justifiable, it is incontrovertible that red light runners sometimes kill people who have the right of way. Running a red light really should be punished, and the red light runner really should accept responsibility for their transgression.

Would your wife have been willing to turn herself in and pay a fine if she had not been caught by the camera?

Those are just some thoughts. Good luck with your case.

[jimlongley]

I am not a fan of red light cameras but I am even less of a fan of you running stop signs and red lights without getting a ticket. I might support the "red light cameras" if they also put in "stop sign cameras" and made it a universal rule... fail to make a COMPLETE stop (wheels actually stop turning) at a stop sign, same ticket.

The trick is to make sure it triggers for bicycles too! And require plates for bikes on public roads so they know where to send the tickets.

Bicyclists around here just can't seem to wrap their heads around the idea that they have to conform to traffic laws too. Stop signs are to be ignored unless there is interfering traffic, and then only grudgingly, and stopping for a right turn on red must be a waste of brakes on bicycles because I don't think I have ever seen one do so. Until recently I was kind of ambivalent about requiring registration and plates for bicycles, but an encounter with a pack, none of whom even came close to bothering to even make the slightest attempt to stop at the sign on a cross street on my route to work, including Hawaiian friendship salutes from several cyclists as they answered my horn while I tried to establish my right of way, convinces me that plates would be a good thing. When I called the police they wanted more identifying information than I could give them.

Annoyed, I don't know which cameras you have seen pics from, but the systems in Dallas, Plano, Richardson, and every other one I have seen only take pictures of the rear of the car, it must be quite a trick to get a face shot of the driver under those circumstances. When involved with the project I asked an engineer if they would be using cameras in other positions than behind, and they said they had considered the option but on top of the extra expense that they deemed unwarranted, they felt that the powerful flash required to get an even exposure day or night, might be detrimental to good driving by people exposed to it.

[mr.72]

OK just to make it fair.

At present, every cyclist I know "stops" at red lights and stop signs just as much as any driver of a car "stops" at them. What I mean is, a car may slow to 10mph as they "stop" at a stop sign, and most cyclists will also slow to 10mph at all stop signs.

However there are many practical reasons that cyclists should not be required to follow the same laws as cars, but I figure it would get little traction discussing it in this forum. There is a movement afoot in many cities that is gaining momentum whereby cyclists would be allowed to treat stop signs as if they were yield signs, and red lights like stop signs. Why not go out on a bicycle during rush hour and stop at a stop light on major roads with 6 or more lanes... then when the light turns green see how much fun it is to be mixed up in 25-50 cars trying to do things like run by you on your left then turn right right on top of you, or buzz by you as they accelerate, etc. I guarantee you that you will very rapidly become an advocate of cyclists being allowed to "run" that red light so they don't have to actively interact with that traffic.

Most people I have found are only hostile towards cyclists who run stop signs or red lights because they are jealous... as in, they don't think that it's fair for a cyclist to be able to make as good time as they do in a car, so they want to somehow punish the cyclists. Howabout trying to help keep the cyclists safe? The best way of doing that is to get them away from the cars. If that means letting them get a 10 second head start at a red light, then what is the problem with that?

When I am commuting on my bicycle, my safety is my top priority. Whether I tick off a bunch of drivers is way down the list of priorities. Whether I am violating some traffic law that doesn't make sense for cyclists is not even on the list. Kind of like you guys who say "better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6", well the same is true on a bicycle on the road. I've been hit by a car before in traffic. I will do everything I can to avoid that in the future. If that means that sometime I may get stopped by a cop and have to pay a ticket for "running" a stop sign or "running" a red light, then so be it. I'd rather pay the ticket and not get flattened by a car.

[Lumberjack98]

Wow. This thread really got off track.

So I'll go ahead and contribute to it.

Cyclists have to follow the same traffic rules. Don't be mad when I go buzzing by you at 60mph when you're going 30mph in. My point of view is that your impeding traffic. I could care less if we get there in the same amount of time, just get out of my way.

Back on topic.

I can't stand red light cameras. I've never had a ticket from one, but I despise the idea of them.