Cities Caught Illegally Tampering With Traffic Lights To Increase Revenue Of Red Light Cameras
from the this-again? dept
Just last month there was the latest in a rather long line of reports noting that red light cameras tend to increase the number of accidents because people slam on their brakes to stop in time, leading to rear-ending accidents. Time and time again studies have shown that if cities really wanted to make traffic crossings safer there's a very simple way to do so: increase the length of the yellow light and make sure there's a pause before the cross traffic light turns green (this is done in some places, but not in many others). Tragically, it looks like some cities are doing the opposite! Jeff Nolan points out that six US cities have been caught decreasing the length of the yellow light below the legal limits in an effort to catch more drivers running red lights and increasing revenue. This is especially disgusting. These cities are actively putting more people in danger of serious injury or death solely for the sake of raising revenue -- while claiming all along that it's for safety purposes. Is it any surprise that one of the six cities is Dallas? Remember, just last month Dallas decided it wasn't going to install any more red light cameras because fewer tickets had hurt city revenue.
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
I wonder if they would change their tune if Federal High way funds were cut off for 30 day for each offence
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
of course
America is run like a big business now. The government doesn't care about us, that has been obvious for some time and this announcement really shows that to be true. All the city cares about is revenue. I got a ticket for speeding recently, and they charged a $107 fee for a defensive driving course- on top of me having to pay for the course. That may not be news but it was my first ticket so, it was news to me. Thats just ridiculous.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
I can't see the Fed cutting any funds for that - maybe increasing funding, if anything. It's all about control for the Fed and cash for the local governments.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Florida
Here in Florida we did away with our helmet law for motorcyclists but kept our seatbelt law in tact (probably due to profitability too). They claim it saves lives, helmets don't ?
e
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
You're saying the red light camera causes more accidents? I fully agree that shortening the yellow is despicable, but if people took the yellow light as it's meant, a signal to stop, instead of a signal to hammer on the gas and try and shave 8 seconds off their drive home, there would be far fewer accidents from them slamming on the brakes to avoid a ticket at the last second.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Typical
I don't know about you guys but this does not surprise me ... unfortunately. When someone tells me something is for my own good I check to see where my wallet is.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
Dont forget the cell phone, GPS navigator, DVD player for the screamin kids, and that pesky glass of whiskey. lol
e
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
This shortening of yellow light timing and the increased danger it causes, is a growing news story. Most of the car magazines are onto it, and the National Motorist Association (www.motorist.org) of which I am a member, is actively trying to get action on this issue. Local givernments who put their citizens at demonstrable risk to make money should be ashamed, and potentially prosecuted.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
No Pause?
I thought that would have been standard. My city's lights have a 2-second pause between one set of lights goes red and the corresponding ones turn green. In a moving vehicle, its a surprisingly substantial amount of time, and I've seen it play out for the benefit time and again.
The accidents and traffic jams not having that would make must suck.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Potential prosecution???
Screw that... they should be prosecuted period. And it should be one count of Involuntary Manslaughter for every individual that has passed through a traffic light, that's been modified, and gotten killed or critically injured.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Who really profits?
I know the cities profit some from the red light cameras, but I though the majority of the money goes back to the manufacturer of the red light cameras.
Decreasing yellow light time is a horrible thing for those cities to do. If I lived there I would definitely start a petition to get some people fired and those cameras taken down.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
News?
I don't disagree with the sentiment expressed in this article. My question is, why is this news? This is simply an assemblage of items from the past few years. Why are we reporting on this today? Has something changed?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Potential prosecution???
Amen !!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: News?
That cities are shortening yellow lights and endangering citizens is, I think, new. Maybe not...?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
This wouldnt be a problem at all if assholes didnt always try to run yellow lights. As soon as that light turns yellow it means SLOW DOWN, not punch the gas to get through before it turns red. The yellow light wouldnt need to be more than 1 second if people werent always too damn lazy to wait for the light to turn green again. Id love to see this go into effect everywhere. Its bad enough there is always 2 or 3 assholes that make a left after the light turns red because they are too lazy to wait for 1 or 2 more light cycles to go.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
So, the problem is that there is a point in time and space where the light changes yellow and you are a hazard if you do not continue through. If you slam on your brakes to avoid going through a yellow for fear of being caught by an unthinking camera with no situational awareness, you endanger yourself and others. Shortening the length of a yellow light increases the frequency that this hazardous situation comes up, and not having a pause where *everyone* is red means that it's more likely someone's in the intersection when it's your "turn" to go.
Add the pause, lengthen the yellow, kill the cameras.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: News?
Its news because they were actually caught being the hypocritical a**holes that most of us know city governments to be. I rank them right up there w/the safety nazis who like speeding tickets and the stalinist a**holes who like random police checks, "You have papers comrad?".
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
As noted above, there's a point where the light turns yellow and you do not have the requisite time and space to stop properly. It's not always about being a jerk, sometimes it's about physics. Lengthening the yellow and adding a pause gives people the time they need to react appropriately to the situation. Adding red light cameras introduces a zero-tolerance factor which encourages people to err on the side of stopping short and sudden rather than risk a ticket, and that's dangerous.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: News?
Aaron, although we share a name, I got to call you on this. News serves the perpose of informing. I had no idea that cities were doing this, and I am often in Springfield, Mo on a weekly basis. So the news is highly relevant to me.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Florida
They did the same thing here in Ohio. The sad thing is helmets could REALLY save lives & head trauma but seat belts have been known in many, many different cases to cause people to die in certain accidents.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
I think a bigger problem is lack of standardization on traffic light timing. Where I live, some stoplights switch back and forth about every 30 seconds, and some lights make you sit for at least 3-4 minutes. This is ridiculous, and I'm sure it confuses people, especially when they're dealing with unfamiliar stoplights.
I also agree that often yellow lights need to be longer than they are. Some lights are fine, and others are way too short (again, lack of standardization). Of course, there should be some variance based on the speed limit of the road the light is on. A 55-mph highway would need a longer yellow light than a 30-mph one would.
BUT, I disagree with the argument that slamming on the brakes for a yellow light endangers others. Driving is dangerous, period. Every licensed driver goes through a training course where defensive driving and careful observation are highly stressed (or at least, they should be, dunno what the quality of driver's ed is these days). Everybody on the road is responsible for themselves and their own vehicle. If you are following somebody so close that you will rear-end them if they stop quickly on a yellow light, then you deserve to be in a wreck, because you are not being a responsible driver. The danger for rear-ending other vehicles is always present, and I don't honestly think a shorter yellow light will make it any more dangerous. The problem is lack of responsibility on the driver's part by not driving defensively and being in full control of their vehicle.
But on the flipside, shortening yellow lights to increase revenue from red light cameras is absolutely despicable, and the cities doing it need to be punished severely. I understand the need for city revenue, but setting up situations that trick people into committing crimes shows that the government is ethically and morally bankrupt. It's true, our society has become one completely obsessed with greed and profit, and some people will stop at nothing to achieve profit, no matter who they have to stomp on to get there. We've also become a society that believes no individual is responsible for his own actions, which ties right into this whole picture as well. I wish I could say there's an easy fix to this, but there isn't.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
One of the arguements is that if people were driving the speed limit they would have plenty of time to slow and stop at a yellow light. You know what else? If we all donated 1 can of food we could feed everyone in africa. NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. They need to look at reality, 99% of people speed, even if its 5 miles over. They need to do some sort of standardizing, or my idea I always liked was, have a visual timer above or next to the light so you can see when its going to change. Sort of like those crosswalk timers.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: News?
"News serves the perpose of informing."
I think that's an overly broad definition of "news". If I wrote an article about the Battle of Gettysburg, it would likely be informative, but certainly not news.
My concern is that this item will upset people because they think that all of the sudden 6 cities were caught doing something wrong. In fact, this is simply a congolmeration of old news stories that are not in and of themselves news.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
You are incorrect. Yellow only means that the light is about to be red, and you better think very hard about whether its a good idea to be in the intersection when its red. Maybe you speed up; maybe you slow down.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Its been going on for as long as the lights have been around
The providers of our red light system were caught doing this quite a few years back.. and talking about standardizing the lights is a good idea... we have one I personally waited for more that ten minutes at 400 am on a barely used road... o cars passed for the entire time... but you can bet there is a cop waiting for me to run the light that was making me late for work as bad as if it was a train
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re:
There is intelligent life!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
I agree totally, a countdown timer would help tremendously.
Also, I see both sides of the slam on the brakes problem. I was in a situation the other day where I was coming throug an intersection with the cameras and the light went yellow. At any other intersection, I would have continued through, it swith right at the point where the decision to go or stop is tough to make. I started to go, then realized there was a camera at the intersection and slammed on the brakes, almost out of instinct.
Now, if someone would have hit me, it technically would/should have been their fault for failing to 'maintain assured clear distance' but if the camera wouldn't have been there, I'm sure I would have cleared the intersection well before the other light turned green and there would have been no possibility of an issue in the first place.
On the other hand, you could be driving down any road and have something unexpected cause you to slam on the brakes anywhere, think animals/children, if somebody rear ends you there, it's their fault, plain & simple.
I think everybody agrees that the cities intentionally causing an intersection to be more dangerous is deplorable behavior. Anyone responsible for making this decision should be prosecuted for endangering public safety, whether or not any accident occured as a result of the change.
Just about every city in America is facing financial challenges right now, but this amounts to theft and criminal mischief as far as I'm concerned.
And yes, it should be BIG news that this is happening!!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
The minimum length of the yellow light should be based on the posted speed of the road with a possible fudge factor added for roads that get driven faster than that speed limit.
If a violation is found all tickets since the last valid inspection should be refunded by the camera operator. In the event of an outside firm operating a camera system the collected fines are still paid to the municipality. That is a 200% penalty on an outside operator.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
Here! Here!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Can we say Class Action
Lowering or shortening traffic signal time below the legal limit may be constued as fraud and potenally purjury. Most traffic vioations are minor criminal offences, if the prosecutor new of the unlawful act of the city and filed anyway they may be laible as well under civil rights law. Things like this cost the piblic more than just a fine, it also may increase your insurance rates etc. It is simply gov't falsifing charges for profit
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: of course
Dick Cheney said it best when he was presented information stating 2/3 of Americans were against the war in Iraq.
Cheney: "So?"
The government certainly does not care about us.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
The one problem with standardisation is that no two junctions are ever quite the same in terms of traffic flow, and can even vary within the same day; what works for a relatively quiet intersection may lead to dangerously heavy congestion and end up provoking drivers into running reds at a more crowded location or time. Enforcing the same minimum standards across the entire country does make sense, though.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Look at the communist states of Virginia & Ohio
Where were the other 5 citys?
Noone should be suprised by this.Citys & states in this country think they can do anything they damn well please.
The town I live in there have been several shootings by police where everyone in town knew the police would be found at fault but are found to be justified.In at least one instance the police claimed the victem had taken his gun so he shot & killed the (unarmed) man in his back yard with his second gun.The cops service revolver was found inside the house nowhere near the victem.The shooting was found to be justified.
As for fines & such the laws are set up specifically to collect revenue.These citys & states could care less about your safty,even the ones not cheating.
Look at the communist states of Virginia & Ohio.Hell in Ohio the state police even wear little Nazi uniforms.
Virginia is becoming more communist than the USSR was.
Most of these city & state politicians see these extorted funds from you & I as a way to hide the loss of revenue from what they have embezzled from us the tax payers.
These people work for you the tax payer!From the Mayor down to the street cop!If they continue to engage in this elegal activity fire them!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Florida
But at the same time, seat belts also save people. It really depends on the situation. Seat belts could kill just as many people as they save. I don't have any numbers or any sort of evidence to prove if seat belts save more than they kill, but if they do, you're best placing your bet on wearing the seat belt.
Maybe someday we'll see an adaptive restraint system that can decide based on data from dozens sensors and physics calculations if it would be best to keep the seat belt on or to release it.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: (comment by kDiddle)
You haven't ever driven, nor have you properly learned to drive, have you kDiddle?
First, the only lights you will EVER run into that are only 8 second stops, are the ones that go red, then proceed to turn green right after. There is a legal MINIMUM time of 15 seconds for a green light, and 3 seconds for a red - that alone is 18 - more than twice what you said. Further - there are many lights in high traffic areas where your wait can be as long as 10 minutes if you are in the minor traffic lanes (10 minutes being the maximum.) So you may theoretically cost someone their life (a lot can happen in 10 minutes) if you force them to stop on a yellow light.
Second, yellow DOES NOT MEAN STOP! It means caution - and in the case of traffic lights, it means Caution, a Red light is coming, prepare to stop. It's there to warn you that you need to stop, but if you can't safely stop then get through now.
Stopping at a yellow is the act of an inconsiderate idiot, unless you can't get through the intersection before it turns red. But I bet you think it's perfectly okay to be in the middle of an intersection after it's red, because it was green when you entered.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Drivers License
"These cities are actively putting more people in danger of serious injury or death solely for the sake of raising revenue"
This applies to a drivers license as well. I can't speak for other states, but Ohio's driving "test", both the written and in car, is pathetic. It's sad how simple it is, and it's done this way to maximize the number of people paying for a license and creating the largest pool of people potentially buying a car and thus tags. This low standard for driving ability is a safety risk for everyone on the road, but is done to make sure the state collects as much money via the DMV as possible.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
While standardization may seem like a good idea at first.. you also have to fully think this through.. the timing of one light affects a much larger picture in places such as cities. Making all of the lights the exact same durations for red, green, yellow is most likely to cause huge traffic jams.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Florida
I'm not sure where you are going with this, but you can't say that just because 'some' passengers would have been bettter off without a seatbealt that you should remove the seatbelt law. These REALLY do save lives.. i'm sure one could find an incident or two where a helmet could have injured someone [though I'm not trying to say we shouldn't wear them, I agree they are helpful] ..there are just always exceptions to the rule, but we can't base our judgements on that
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
First, unfortunately, most drivers are not properly trained before they're given a liscence. My little cousin just recently recieved his (full, unrestricted) liscence and after seeing him drive I assure you I won't be riding with him for at least a couple years yet.
Second, unfortunately, though all drivers SHOULD be responsible for themselves and their vehicles, many are not. The most common example is kids who are driving their parents' cars, but some people are just plain irresponsible.
Finally, as I've noted above, physics matters. For easy numbers, lets say that I can stop my car in about 20ft of space; the numbers aren't important, it's just demonstration. If I see a yellow at 20ft I'm fine -- UNLESS you decide you need to stop at that yellow instead of proceed through. Now I have, we'll say, 12ft of space. I can not stop my car normally; I can either stop short in response or hit you. If *I* stop short, the guy behind ME is now endangered because his stopping zone is smaller. If I hit you, was it because I was an irresponsible driver or you were? (I'm not talking about who's legally culpable, as we all know the guy in back gets the blame in all rear-end accidents.)
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Eliminate traffic lights entirely
We should think about adopting roundabouts, such as are commonly found in Europe. Granted, it would be a learning curve for most folks, but there are a few instances in the US where they work, and work quite well.
No traffic lights and, therefore, no red-light cameras to extort money from the public.
TT
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
kDiddle, where do you live that lights only last 8 seconds? I can finish a cigarette and still not get through some of our lights ;P
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Eliminate traffic lights entirely
American's don't understand how to merge onto the highway, and we've been doing that for AGES. Round-abouts are problematic and will remain to be so. I've even seen some American cities put traffic lights up IN round-abouts because of this.
It's a nice idea, and I agree that if we trained good drivers it would probably help out a lot. I just don't see it (round-abouts or better training) happening any time soon.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
PRICELESS!!
SAINT LOUIS, MO
Suburb : SAINT PETERS / SAINT CHARLES
Lobbying for red light cameras
$650,000
Kickbacks and bribes
$300,000+
Purchase of red light camera hardware
$1 million+
Red light camera installations
$500,000+ for
Still having the most pot holes than any other city in the entire state of Missouri?
PRICELESS!!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Eliminate traffic lights entirely
I hate roundabouts or at least the multilane ones
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
the other 5 cities are:
The cities in question include Union City, CA, Dallas and Lubbock, TX, Nashville and Chattanooga, TN, Springfield, MO, according to Motorists.org, which collected information from reports from around the country. This isn't the first time traffic cameras have been questioned as to their effectiveness in preventing accidents. In one case, the local government was forced to issue refunds by more than $1 million to motorists who were issued tickets for running red lights.
http://www.leftlanenews.com/six-us-cities-tamper-with-traffic-cameras-for-profit.html
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Its been going on for as long as the lights have been around
There's a light by where I live, after 2:00am that light douse not turn green. I sat there for about 15min before running it. (no it wasn't a blinking red)
That same light now has a yellow so short that if you blink you'll miss it. I was driving down that road, actually going the speed limit since I know the cop around there is a dick. I looked at the light and it was green. I was about 50ft from the intersection. I blinked and the light was red. I drive a Jeep. It can't stop that fast. The real funny thing is, we don't have those cameras.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Re: Florida
Yes that is what I am saying remove it as a LAW! If you want to wear it because it makes you feel safer than wear it but its a personal choice & only a personal injury. The only reason that it is a law, is so a cop can & will pull you for no apparent reason and they can then say "oh I didn't see him wear a seat belt". Then search your car because then he has the right to. Why is it that they can now say it is not a law to wear a helmet?
I now know of two people who were in car accidents & if they were wearing their seat belts they would not be here right now. If you are in a side end collision & you have your seatbelt on most likely you will be completely crushed by your seatbelt. The bullshit thing that happened to a friend of mine who wasn't wearing his seat belt. When he was in the hospital, after the doctors told him if he had his belt on he would of been killed. The cops then came in a couple of days later to fill out the report & issued him a ticket for not wearing a seat belt that would of killed him!
They don't care about your safety they care about their payday!!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Source, please
Can anyone provide a real source for this information? The best I'm finding here is the National Motorists Association "which collected information from reports from around the country." I can't find the story on their site, which itself looks like a front for sending business to lawyers who will fight your ticket in court.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Fines
How often is there a red light accident with someone intentionally running the red light? Isn't most of these accidents caused by someone not noticing a red light that has been red for a while? This would make ticketing and fining for running red lights non productive in decreasing accidents. Are these camera's actually installed where there has been a problem with accidents due to running of red lights? I suspect a study of the placements with the before and after accident statistics would be enlightening.
I've often thought that fines should be prohibited from going directly to the city or agency imposing them. There is way too much incentive for overzealousness. If there is truly a safety issue, there will be enough of an incentive to address it without making money. Recovering costs is one thing, but the remainder of the fines should be directed elsewhere. This applies whether or not its automated.
A better option would be to create a state/federal fund that is redistributed without using fines imposed as a measure. You could even have the fine go to the 501c of choice. Just about every area has a small village that uses ticketing through traffic as a revenue source. Removing the financial incentive would put an end to this tactic.
Ohio's test may be easy, but people still fail it. That's kind of scary. I don't have too much issue with the license costs. Roads aren't free.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
--Roundabouts, Stoplights, and Drivers Education--
Germany has the best driver education in the world...and the lowest accident rate! If we just trained our drivers to DRIVE that would help allot!
It still does not make the HORRIBLE actions of these cities acceptable under ANY circumstances! "We the people" not "We the government" They are supposed to be normal people who take TEMPORARY jobs as PUBLIC SERVANTS!!!!! not wh#%re themselves out for money!!!
Disgusting
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Who cares
If your alive today.. Your already screwed, so who gives a dam.. Just run the lights, over the people, and anything else that gets in the way.. Deal with it later.. (here just take my wallet)..
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
seatbelts not as invasive as helmets
I'm not going to argue that seat belts will never cause harm, there is always the possiblity someone would be thrown clear in a collision and avoid a fire, etc. In general with modern cars (Very strong cage around occupants with side impact beams and airbags) the seat belts absolutely improve safety.
So do Helmets, but wearing a large heavy hot helmet when it is 100 degrees outside is far worse than a belt across your lap and shoulder.
I wear a seat belt in the back seat of vehicles when not required by law, and you should at least consider it.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Red Light Cameras & Signal Timing
Laws concerning traffic signal timing vary among states. Most take the data from the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD){http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/} and from the ITE (Institute of Transportation Engineers). Yellow timing (Yellow Change Interval) is based on the approach speed and it sets the yellow time to allow drivers to decide if a safe stop can be made. The all Red time (Red Clearance) is still optional but "allowed". This is about to be changed to "recommended". When a light turns green, It gives drivers permission to proceed once the intersection is clear! NEVER enter an intersection without knowing that someone isn't coming at you. That's just dumb. Changing timing because of a red light camera is is still very wrong! More info: http://www.ite.org/safety/rlr.asp
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
Imagine what is going to happen here in Austin where the initiative for red light cameras has been passed just this year. I am sure we will sart seeing the same thing before long.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
in my neck of the woods the STATE law requires 1 sec. of yellow for each 10 mph. of the speed limit. we have those damn camers now too and have informed all of my friends who inform their friends ect. of the law. 12 tickets have been dismissed and suits filed to recover court costs. the irony?.....they still have not changed the lights to the state law 1 sec. per 10 mph. not enough people know about it yet. At 60 mph you have 6 sec. to react to the light and thats fair in my book. can't wait till the pokey gets on my bumper at that light. SLAM the BRAKES! and hope you survive.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Unfair Taxes
Attempting to up the revenue of a city by using fines is just another form of taxation. Fines that are levied at a flat rate for all citizens become just an annoyance for those who can easily afford them but potentially could harm a family living paycheck to paycheck. Now I'm not going to say get rid of giving tickets to people who run red lights or speed 55 though a residential neighborhood but can we please start using the resources to protect instead of covering the budget.
What I would personally like to see is if we could get fines changed from cash to community service. At least at that level we'd all be giving up the same thing, our time. Instead of some of us giving up a night on the town vs some giving up a weeks grocery bill.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
8 seconds?! You don't get around much. Red light cycles can be over 8 minutes long in some intersections. :-(
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
To those mentioning about waiting many minutes for a green light
A couple of posters here mentioned waiting many minutes for a green light. The most likely reason is their car wasn't detected by the traffic sensor...
Many people don't realize that many lights are triggered by sensors, most of which are triggered by the presence of large concentrations of metal, such as a car.
Two things to greatly improve the odds of the light changing to green in a timely manner:
1. Stop completely prior to the stopbar (the white line).
2. After about 20 seconds, if nothing seems to be happening, inch the car forward very slightly (several inches or so), and repeat a couple of times every 20 seconds or so.
If still no green after 2 minutes, *assuming* no traffic signal activity on any side of the intersection, then it's likely legally ok to go through it.
Most states, such as Pennsylvania, try to limit the duration of a traffic signal to no more than 1 minute per side; 2 minutes or so maximum for a complete cycle. But that's PA ... many states tolerate much longer cycle times - I've seen some traffic cycles, especially in Florida take nearly 5 minutes to complete.
Ron
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
What's easier, to change traffic light cycle times human nature?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Why does it not surprise me that Lubbock is on this list
Dust bowl city that treat outsiders like invaders. This is one town that I avoid and will keep avoiding it now.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
You can not change the law of Physics, Captain!
What is the time to stop a car going the speed limit? s feet
What is the reaction time at that speed? r feet
What is a safety margin for indecision? m feet
How wide is the intersection? w feet
Now compare the time to travel that distance (total=s+r+m+w) to the length of the yellow light.
if yellow > safety then SUE city.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
yellow light time
Any judge that fails to notify a person accused of disobeying a yellow light of the federally mandated minimum yellow time -- I had no idea the Federal had mandated that time -- should be forced to retract the ticket and all consequences of the ticket. If the yellow of the light in question is too short (by the Federal standard), the accused person should get all of the above plus at least $1000 form the community in question for the trouble.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Germany
Most people don't drive much in Germany, due to the costs (Gas, Parking, Car). Almost everyone uses public transportation. This changes the statistics on accidents.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
another reason to not use a license plate!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: --Roundabouts, Stoplights, and Drivers Education--
that's cuz you don't let 16 year olds on the streets!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Just today
I just left my house and as I approached the first light, (on a 30 mph, two lane, residential but very busy road) it turned yellow, so I slowed down and stopped right on the line after it had turned red. The Masshole behind me (yes I live in Mass), ran up behind me and crossed the double yellow line all the way into the oncoming lane to blow though the red light. WTG Mr. Masshole.
And I wish people learned/obeyed the right turn on red AFTER STOPPING law. It can be scary to be turning left on a green light and having people coming from the left, making right had turns, blowing through the red light without slowimg down. A cop could write tickets for that all day long at any intersection in Mass with a light or Stop sign.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Red Light Camera Training
I can personally attest to a situation where being trained by red light cameras to hit the brakes when approaching a yellow/red almost caused an accident.
It was raining, not too hard, I was coming down a hill in the leftmost lane, and very much not speeding. Light changes with about 150 feet to go, I instinctively hit the brakes... and instead of stopping, the wheels lock and I start hydroplaning into the next lane over, where another car already is.
A tense couple of seconds where I let off the brakes, correct and steer with a few feet to spare, thanks to training from an emergency driving course. However, I can see a situation where someone similarly conditioned to just plain STOP would have corrected too late to stop sliding (thanks to water and gravity).
It is a problem because I've seen really LONG yellows, and realy SHORT yellows, and with the number of cameras around, you really don't want to be taking any chances, so the reaction becomes hardwired out of habit.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Red light cameras cause accidents
KDiddle,
Yellow lights are not an indication to stop. They are simply an indication that the light is going to change and that people should make a judgement about proceeding accordingly. If you are very close to the light and would need to slam on the brakes to stop (thus causing a rear end collision), then proceeding through the intersection is the correct choice. If you are far away then stopping is the correct choice.
People will always misjudge lights. Sometimes the yellow is shorter or longer than expected (there are supposed to be formulas for setting the duration but it seems rare that anyone uses them- Predictability is the best way to prevent accidents). Sometimes people just misjudge their speed or the distance to the light. It should not be a big deal and a slightly longer yellow and a pause between yellow and subsequent green for the cross street would all reduce collisions even further.
The problem is that when you put a camera at a light, people don't make sensible judgements about their speed and distance from the light. They do what you seem to think people at a yellow should do- slam on their brakes to make sure they don't get a ticket. The problem is the person behind them, who may not have known their was a camera and was using their judgment- suddenly rear ends the person in front of them because they weren't expecting them to stop like a maniac.
Red light cameras do nothing to stop drunk drivers (unlike an officer who can actually pull the person over) and so I have no idea who or what they are protecting everyone else from.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
I Wonder
If the cameras will get a picture of the bullet that goes through the lens if you fire just after the light turns red.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Florida
Helmets are more of a gray area than seatbelts. For one thing, there are far fewer actual statistics gathered. Also, the design of most helmets cuts vision and hearing of the wearer who might otherwise avoid the accident. The extra weight on the head makes certain types of accidents much harder on the neck, leading to severe sprain, broken vertebrae, paralysis, or even death. Many accidents that would kill or permanently injure someone without a helmet would be just as dangerous with a helmet.
In certain situations, a helmet will save a motorcyclist's life. In others, it causes more harm. It only protects from one type of injury, albeit an important one. Compare that to seatbealts, which only endanger you if you can't get it unbuckled while the car is on fire or immersed in water (or another liquid) or when it's worn improperly. Since you can cut a belt with a knife and special seat belt cutters are available on the market (I keep them in my vehicles), those aren't very strong arguments against them.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
huge scam by the cities. they also use speed calculation devices to determine if the driver is crossing a red light, and this is by definition a "speed trap", however, since they do not cite for speeding it cannot be contested on these grounds. The whole idea is a scam and there is a challenge for 10k that asks if anyone prove a intersection where standard engineering corrections would not suffice over red light cameras. BS BS BS
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
standards for left turns
Even across my own town, the lights are not standardized. Some lights have leading left turns and some have trailing left turns. Forget about timing, how about someone getting T-boned because they thought they were about to get a green?
There was a horrific accident here a few years back when a bigrig driver used to leading lefts saw the left arrow at a trailing left intersection. He didn't even touch the brakes as he tore an SUV in half!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
they forgot San Diego
a few years back( 2001? ) a guy I know got a ticket(camera) at an intersection he very often used. He felt something was strange so he timed the light and then asked the city(San Diego) for the algorithm used to set the timing. He got the run-around but finally got the required information AFTER his court date( not an accident ). He now had proof that the yellow light timing was set below the required timing and that the timing was changed when the camera was installed. Nobody got fined or convicted for the wrong-doing but for a few years, all the red-light cameras were turned off in San Diego and only after the city signed a deal with Lockheed Martin and then handed the contract to another company, has the cameras been slowly been getting turned back on.
So they forgot to mention San Diego.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: To those mentioning about waiting many minutes for a green light
So let me get this straight - you're saying, first, that all light timing is controlled exclusively by sensors and not by timers? I can assure you that in the Chicagoland area this is not the case. I can name a dozen or so intersections where lights routinely turn red even though no opposing traffic is waiting, and don't turn green again for a fixed period of time. Second, you're saying that if it still hasn't changed within a few minutes it's OK to just go (as in, run the red light)?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
what about Miami?
the length of yellow lights in Miami is usually about 4 seconds. Of course, no one actually slows down or stops until well after the light turns red.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: I Don't Understand Yellow Lights
Wrong. The yellow indicates that the light is about to turn red. The intention is for the motorist to stop if he can do so safely, otherwise proceed. Red means stop, yellow is a warning. This seems rather elementary.
I live in Colorado. Here's the relevant statute [42-4-603(1)(b)(I)]:
As you can see, there's nothing in there about stopping.
-Peter
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
The length of time a traffic lights stays yellow should be 1 second for every 10 miles per hour, IN MOST STATES. Anything outside of that range and you should contact somebody. There are two types of traffic lights. Those controlled by sensors and those controlled by timers. You see the timers at the major intersections and during off peak hours and overnight those timers may be increased or decreased.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
If you are following somebody so close that you will rear-end them if they stop quickly on a yellow light, then you deserve to be in a wreck, because you are not being a responsible driver.
What an asinine statement. No, people do not "deserve" to be in wrecks. People, be they drivers or passengers, do not "deserve" to die to satisfy your warped sense of justice.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Re: Florida
> you can't say that just because 'some' passengers
> would have been bettter off without a seatbealt
> that you should remove the seatbelt law. These
> REALLY do save lives
Lots of things would "save lives". Reducing the speed limit everywhere to 10 mph would save lives. Hell, banning motor vehicles all together would save lives. But we don't do that? Why? Because as callous as it sounds, we've decided that the benefit to society of having cars and trucks outweighs the cost of those lives that are lost as a result.
All of life is a cost/benefit risk analysis. We make choices everyday that risk our lives for some perceived benefit.
The thing about seatbelt laws and helmet laws and all other similar nanny-state laws is that removes that decision from me, where it belongs, and gives it to the government. When I vote on election day, I'm not voting for some big-government super-parent to watch out for me and pass laws forcing me to do things for my own good. I'm a grown adult and I can make decisions about my own safety on my own, thank you very much; government bureaucrats in Washington don't know any better what's good for me than I do and there's no reason their judgment should supersede mine.
I was choosing to wear my seatbelt long before the government told me I had to. That's not the point. The point is, it's not the proper function of government to force to wear it in the first place.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Disgusting and Unconstitutional
This practise is sinister AND unconstitutional. The purpose of traffic law is to protect all citizens NOT for the the purpose of revenue, especially if in this specific case it can actually lead to serious harm and puts many people at risk. I am surprised that with this current informtaion not one individual has realized how their constitutional rights are being trampled on and how they are being victimized in the most disgusting way by those who have been given the responsibility to protect them.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: (comment by kDiddle)
> But I bet you think it's perfectly okay to be
> in the middle of an intersection after it's red,
> because it was green when you entered.
That's actually the law where I live. The transportation code explicitly says that if a vehicle enters and intersection legally (i.e. on a green or a yellow), then it's entitled to leave the intersection legally (even if the light has since turned red).
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Can we say Class Action
> Lowering or shortening traffic signal time
> below the legal limit may be constued as
> fraud and potenally purjury.
How in the hell could altering the length of a yellow light meet the elements of perjury? Perjury is lying about a material fact while under oath or other cumpulsory legal process. It has nothing to do with traffic lights.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: