Traffic Cams....

[Pez7378]

Got me! Apparently, there's a new law on the books that says you have to come to a "COMPLETE" stop, before making a right turn on a red light. Haven't they every heard of the "California stop"?

[Grateful Diver]

Thank you for feeding Washington's growing population of cash cows ... these things make million$ for our local PD's, as well as vastly improving the local economy in Tempe, AZ.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

[Dusty2]

Not a new law, it's been on the books for a long time. Just the technology has improved to where they are doing video instead of just snapping a picture. Fife has a couple of sites that they make lots of money on for just that. Another one you need to be careful about in Seattle is the law that sez when you stop for a pedestrian you must wait till they clear the intersection not just until it's safe for you to proceed. If they are not on the sidewalk when you move they can ticket you just the same as if you never stopped at all. :angry: Dirty pool in my book.

[scottsax]

That sucks, Pez. Sorry about that. Were you in Lynnwood? There's LOTS of them there, speed cams, too!

We can probably expect to see more of these, as they're cheap revenue for cash-strapped cities...

[Dusty2]

The really attractive part for the cities is they don't even have to monitor them. The company that leases them also monitors them and sends out the ticket! The city just sits back and lets the cash roll in.

[airsix]

I don't like cameras for traffic enforcement, but at the same time I have had it with 2 specific issues in my area. 1) Red light runners, and 2) drifting from the inside lane to the outside lane while negotiating a turn. These two problems are so prolific here that it is regarded as acceptable behavior. What I want are pop-up tire-shredders on the crosswalk line that deploy at the same time the light goes red. If you're not past the crosswalk when the light goes red you'd better be stopped or be prepared to call a tow-truck. The first week these went online would be a riot.

[scottsax]

2) drifting from the inside lane to the outside lane while negotiating a turn.

I only do that because I'm hurrying to beat the light, and can't hold the car in my lane.

[mz53480]

2) drifting from the inside lane to the outside lane while negotiating a turn.

I only do that because I'm hurrying to beat the light, and can't hold the car in my lane.

Leave earlier for your gig at Toys R' Us next time.....

[Grateful Diver]

The law that is relatively new is the one that allowed traffic cams to be installed in the first place. This law was passed by the state legislature in 2006, and the intent of the law was supposed to be traffic safety ... due to the increasing number of red-light runners. But the legislature specifically stated that they were NOT to be used for fund-raising ... and therefore the fines were to be kept on-par with parking tickets. The cities get around this because there's one type of parking ticket that can cost you up to $250 ... which is parking in a handicapped parking space. So fines at traffic cams run from a minimum of $124 ... failure to stop at right turn, and stopping across the white stop-line ... up to $250 ... running the red light.

These cams have nothing to do with safety ... they're all about making as much money off the driving public as they can. There's no interaction at all with local PD ... it's all handled through the private company in Arizona. And since they make it clear that these tickets are counted on your insurance as "parking" tickets, the message is clear that they're not trying to modify driver behavior, but instead just rake in as much money as possible.

You don't have to do anything aggregious or overt ... you can stop with your tire touching the white line ... cha-ching! $124. Turn right at 1 mph into a completely empty intersection ... ch-ching! $124. The one I got even cropped the video so you couldn't tell whether I had a green arrow or not ... there is one at that intersection, but it's impossible to tell whether or not I actually had a legal right to make the turn as I did. Doesn't matter. You can appeal ... but it's damn difficult, since you're dealing with a private, out-of-state company rather than the police department. And if you fail to pay, it doesn't go against your driving record ... it goes against your credit report as an unpaid bill.

Sooner or later I think someone's going to challenge the legality of these things ... at best they violate the spirit of that 2006 law ... if not the letter of it. Meantime, I think they're doing massive PR damage to the relationship between the local PD and the citizens ... because people see them for what they are ... a blatant money grab.

Traffic control isn't supposed to be about balancing the deficit spending of our local governments ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

[mz53480]

Is it possible to face your 'accuser' in court for one of these tickets?

[Grateful Diver]

Is it possible to face your 'accuser' in court for one of these tickets?

Not that I could figure out ... I finally decided it'd cost me more to fight it than to just pay it ... which, I'm sure, is why it hasn't been challenged yet ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

[pogiguy05]

Not a new law, it's been on the books for a long time. Just the technology has improved to where they are doing video instead of just snapping a picture. Fife has a couple of sites that they make lots of money on for just that. Another one you need to be careful about in Seattle is the law that sez when you stop for a pedestrian you must wait till they clear the intersection not just until it's safe for you to proceed. If they are not on the sidewalk when you move they can ticket you just the same as if you never stopped at all. :angry: Dirty pool in my book.

I have been in downtown and IF you wait for everyone to cross and be on the sidewalk, you will end up in the middle of the intersection as lights turns red.

[pogiguy05]

Once one of my wifes friends told us this story. She had gotten pulled over for running a red light and as the officer was at the car window, her daughter who was I think about 8yo says this...." Mommy says yellow means go faster" Yes she got a ticket....

[Grateful Diver]

Not a new law, it's been on the books for a long time. Just the technology has improved to where they are doing video instead of just snapping a picture. Fife has a couple of sites that they make lots of money on for just that. Another one you need to be careful about in Seattle is the law that sez when you stop for a pedestrian you must wait till they clear the intersection not just until it's safe for you to proceed. If they are not on the sidewalk when you move they can ticket you just the same as if you never stopped at all. :angry: Dirty pool in my book.

I have been in downtown and IF you wait for everyone to cross and be on the sidewalk, you will end up in the middle of the intersection as lights turns red.

Technically, as long as you have a place to go to clear the intersection, that's legal. What's not legal is getting stuck in the intersection and impeding oncoming traffic.

Getting back to the traffic cams ... one downside that's getting noticed is that they actually cause more accidents. People who used to accelerate to get through the intersection on a yellow light are now slamming on their brakes to avoid the ticket, increasingly resulting in rear-end collisions from the car behind them who wasn't prepared for the sudden stop.

But hey ... either way, somebody gets a ticket ... so it's all good ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

[WylerBear]

Not a new law, it's been on the books for a long time. Just the technology has improved to where they are doing video instead of just snapping a picture. Fife has a couple of sites that they make lots of money on for just that. Another one you need to be careful about in Seattle is the law that sez when you stop for a pedestrian you must wait till they clear the intersection not just until it's safe for you to proceed. If they are not on the sidewalk when you move they can ticket you just the same as if you never stopped at all. :angry: Dirty pool in my book.

Portland tried that law for awhile but eventually got it repealed. Now the law is, the pedestrian has to be 6' beyond the lane that you want to travel in. Much better for vehicles although I've almost been rear-ended a couple of times while I wait for the pedestrian to get 3-4 steps into the next lane.

[dsteding]

Hot topic. From a personal perspective, a good friend of ours just got t-boned by a woman who accelerated to try and get through a yellow light. Her car was crushed like a can, and she's lucky to have not been hurt worse than she was. Laws are there for a reason, people . . .

[Joshua Smith]

http://blog.motorists.org/red-light-cam ... -prove-it/

Fwiw, if you drive a van with a ladder mounted to the back, in order to climb up on the roof of your big green van and tie lumber down, you're completely immune to the red light cameras. My license plate can be easily read by a cop, but the cameras don't seem to be able to read it clearly enough to give me a ticket. I don't abuse this power, but over the last few years, I have blatantly run a few of these in my area, unintentionally. And not one ticket, so far.

[fmerkel]

Different but sort of the same. While taking a REEF ID class in the U. District at lunch break a bunch of us went out to move our cars as it was a 2 hour limit. We move them, one about 75 feet forward, the other across the street. Class was longer than we anticipated and we came back to what appeared at annoyed first glance to be overtime tickets. Closer scrutiny showed they were OT + an extra $3 penalty for moving the car and trying to avoid a ticket.

They now photo and GPS ID your car plates - no chalk. They can just drive down the street and the computer recognizes plates, positions and time. You have to seriously move your car AWAY from the area or get a ticket even if you are seemingly OK in the new spot in a reasonable time- you aren't. I do not know know what the distance limitations are.

[Pez7378]

I've heard that the installation of these cameras at certain intersections has statistically improved safety. But any Moron, watching the video of me violating some minor traffic rule can clearly see that there was absolutely NO unsafe operation by my rolling through a Right turn on a red light that had JUST turned red as I reached the stop line. Furthermore, had there been a REAL Police officer behind me, who decided it was worth his time and effort to go ahead and pull me over, I am certain that I would have received a warning, not a $124 ticket.

Oh well. I refuse to just pay the fine. I will request a hearing, and if I can't get it deferred or reduced then I'll pay the fine.

And to be fair to everyone, based on the way I drive from time to time, I deserve the damn ticket. It's just that I haven't been caught in well over 10 years, and now I feel entitled to drive however I damn well please.

Remember the SEAT BELT incident after our dive at TTN??

[Grateful Diver]

Remember the SEAT BELT incident after our dive at TTN??

I do ... that officer truly wanted to give you a hard time.

Let us know how your contest goes ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

[jeffgerritsen]

As far as I'm concerned, it's time to get rid of the red light cameras. However in the interim, the law should be changed so that the local police dept runs them, issues the ticket - a real ticket, and a ticket one can fight them in court just like any other ticket. I'm so pissed off about the privatizing none sense I can spit nails. :angry:

Privatizing ends up costing the citizens more money, and to top it all off, one has to deal with a corporation, having no political recourse what so ever. Ever tried protesting a private corporate office - you'll get thrown into jail so fast, however protesting a local politician's office - it's public property. Getting thrown in to jail takes a lot more effort, not that they can and do get around it, but none the less it's much harder and one has much more rights and appeal procedures!

Jeff

[spatz84]

seems to me that if a company out of AZ. is running these things and the local PD's have nothing to do with it then if someone did fight the ticket (and does so with a competent knowlege of 'due process' and legal procedure) then the AZ company would have to show in court to defend their charge. if they don't - 'Failure to appear', you and I would loose automaticaly if we failed to appear, or simply tried to say a written declaration of innocents is all that is required (the same as thier written declaration of guilt, from AZ. would be all you or I would get from them). I not saying you wouldn't have to be ready to tackle the appeals process abit but one could beat these things if they have the fortitude to stay at it.

[nilsdiver]

Time for everyone in Washington to drive with monkey masks on...

http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valley ... aid_ph.php

[jeffgerritsen]

IIRC, it's not a moving violation as others stated earlier, therefore there is no (or maybe not) court appearance procedure available (correct me if I'm wrong fella's). If you fail to pay, the fine shows up on your credit report.

Where is the force of law with appropriate appeal procedures?

Here in Portland metro area the citation is issued by the local police department, it's a moving violation, and you can appear in court - if you choose. However, good luck, after all "you've been caught with your pants down" and here's the picture to prove it!

Oh and they are expensive! For example the new camera's installed in Beaverton, for the month of Jan you get a warning letter. Starting Feb 1, the fine is something like $400 or there abouts. :angry:

Oh yea, I like the monkey mask idea - that's really great

Jeff

seems to me that if a company out of AZ. is running these things and the local PD's have nothing to do with it then if someone did fight the ticket (and does so with a competent knowlege of 'due process' and legal procedure) then the AZ company would have to show in court to defend their charge.

[Lonestar]

The WA Traffic Safety Commision is who had the legislature change the RCW's to allow traffic cams. The WTSC also funded the first cameras. The intent of the systems is to reduce intersection collisions caused by red-light runners and to increase traffic flow as it reduces/eliminates waiting for the red-light runners to clear the intersection before the people with a green signal can go. They have been successful at this.

Cities contract the traffic cams. Cities have traffic engineers who devise ways to make roads safer. Lower speed limits, speed bumps, traffic circles, illusions of narrower streets, radar reader boards, traffic cameras, etc. The cities pick the intersection approaches they want cameras installed on and a fee is paid per approach. The rate varies but was typically $6000 per approach.

A short video is shot when a car fails to come to a complete stop at the intersection. The company screens the videos in accordance with the criteria provided by the city. If the criteria is met the video is forwarded to the city for a police officer to review. If the officer determines that a violation occured a notice of infraction is issued to the registered owner of the vehicle.

WA privacy laws do not allow the cameras to photograph the driver of the vehicle so the photos always show the rear of the car and not the drivers face. This is why the registered owner gets the ticket regardless of who was driving. Yes there is an affidavit the registered owner can fill out if they weren't the driver.

Any citation can be contested and appealed if you don't agree with the judge.

Contracts for red light cameras are let by city councils. The monies from the citations goes to the city's general fund, not the police department. If you want to give credit to someone for the cameras, give it to the city councilmembers. They would also the folks to talk to if you don't like the cameras. Talk to the traffic engineer if you have a better solution than the cameras.

Are the cameras a cash cow for the cities? Absolutely. Don't want to contribute to the cash cow? You own your actions. No one is making you do what you do other than yourself. It doesn't matter what everyone else is doing; all that matters is what you are doing. No one else is going to pay your ticket. (well maybe someone is in which case hook me up with them and they can pay my tickets too) Why give the State of Washington more of your hard earned money? Why get mad at the cop for how you were driving? If you believe that there were mitigating circumstances then take it to court. The cop is not judge and jury nor infallable. (although some would argue that) They are acting on their observations. If they saw it wrong then tell it to the judge. If they saw it right then own it.