Best
52 Comments
Post
  • #1
    !
    How does the number of serious accidents look? Id rather have my bumper hit then get t-boned by someone running a light.
  • #31
    !
    Maybe if liberals paid more attention to driving instead of worrying about changing the station on their loud radio system there wouldn't be so many rear end collisions.
  • #32
    !
    @Neo_NtheMatrix
    Maybe if Republicans paid more attention to the road and less to their spit cups we would have less accidents.
    BTW, I keep the NPR at a reasonable level at all times.
  • #25
    !
    As a police officer I am offended by speed cameras. In Tennessee the way the law is written if you go through the red light you are guilty and the judge has no ability to reduce or drop the charge regardless of circumstances. The camera has taken away common sense and the officers ability to use discretion when issuing citations. I know of one instance when a vehicle went through a red light because there was a pedestrian who started to step out in the road in front of the car at the last minute. The driver (properly) was watching the pedestrian as she was maneuvering the car to miss the pedestrian. When she looked back up the light was yellow and she didn't have time to stop. She ran the red light by 0.52 seconds. Yes that is half a second. I would equate that to writing a speeding ticket for doing 3 miles an hour over. Ridiculous right? The judge found "That a violation had occurred" and found her guilty. The other issue I have with them is the camera company gets half the fine for every ticket written. That is total nonsense. If a state is going to use the cameras they should be purchased or leased for a flat fee. The camera company is making money for every ticket which could easily lead to abuse.
  • #36
    !
    I agree. Especially if it's a fast changing light. It takes a truck alot longer to get through the intersection, and once I get within 100ft I'm committed to it.
  • #38
    !
    @nomocrap, thank you. Finally a voice of reason backed by authority and experience.

    "The other issue I have with them is the camera company gets half the fine for every ticket written." I didn't know that, thanks for the information. If I ever get a camera-issued citation, I may take it to court on those grounds alone.
  • #47
    !
    The "kick-backs" in the form of a commission alone should be cause for a corruption investigation. That is tantamount to a "protection rackett" and ALL those who are part of the "contract" and its approval need to be DEEPLY investigated to sift out the graft. The officers union should ban together to get you your discretion rights restored and investigating WHO has setup this "system" need to be outed for EVERYONES safety.
  • #15
    !
    Nope.....it has nothing to do with that anyway. It's just another way of generating revenue. It's also unconstitutional and can be challenged and beat.
  • #49
    !
    We worry so much about the federal government screwing us, but nothing makes life more miserable than petty, money-grubbing municipal governments.
  • #48
    !
    While I think red light cameras are wrong, I will say rear-end accidents only happen to those who are following the car in front too closely.
  • #45
    !
    First, these are NOT "accidents", but "collisions" and this goes way BEYOND mere paranoia! This CREATES a "public safety DANGER"!! The city should be footing ALL EXPENSES caused by this purposeful act to INCREASE the "safety RISK" placed onto the Citizenry by a government entity and/or official. Am immdeiate class-action suit should be filed ASAP to seek an injunction AGAINST further "enforcement" of those specific lights at intersections with documentation of the increased collision rate since the local government seems to want more DANGEROUS intersections instead of safer ones. Any DEATHS should be treated as a "premeditated crime" now that there is empirical evidence to show the danger to the PUBLIC SAFETY.
  • #44
    !
    of what value is, keeping the honest person too honest it becomes destructive? when i believe their is a more, sinester agenda going on here. as you may not notice, the sinester intent now. untill it, is too late.
  • #43
    !
    Studies show that the RLCs do reduce the total costs of accidents at an intersection.

    There are usually no points assessed for a violation.

    The rear-end collisions can be reduced by enforcing laws against tail-gating.
  • #35
    !
    these cameras are all over my town and i haven't heard anything like this. seems more of a case of some unfit to drive. worried about cameras they must hide inside the house,or step outside look up and wave to google earth
  • #33
    !
    No, I do not. The type of person that doesn't obey traffic laws is never going to.
    Studies have been done to show that the average driver will go the normal speed limit, whether signs are posted or not. Speeders aren't curbed by the constant reminder regardless how many times.
    How about, not turning our co
  • #30
    !
    My community tried this for a year and the samething happened. Everyone was so out raged 9,000 people showed up for a city counsel meeting the next week the were all taken down.
  • #28
    !
    If by that you mean, that they generate boat loads of money for the government entity that installed them, then I guess you may be right.
  • #40
    !
    @Sonny no I mean once you go through 1 and get the ticket in the mail you're much more careful to stop the next time you approach that particular intersection. and that's the reason for the uptick in rear end collisions... because the people who are stopping already got the ticket once... and the people who are hitting into them are used to running that red light
  • #20
    !
    Whoa, isn't everything Bush's fault? We can blame Obama for stuff now? Yay!! Finally "A New Beginning" :))
  • #27
    !
    @FFX_VA Yeah why not :D... Lets add Superstorm Sandy to that list too. Obama can fake his citizenship, so he can probably control the weather too right?? LOL...
  • R Load more comments...
Post