red light camera destroyer

[JLSE]

I have enough buses rolling stop signs coming off of secondary roads that
anytime I see anybody rolling or running a stop I make sure to blast my horn..

We used to have photo radar here and it just plain sucked. Same concept
as the red light cams, but for speeding.

Intersections here now have a countdown timer indicating when the light
will turn amber. It is there for pedestrians to judge weather or not it is
safe to proceed, but is a handy addition for the drivers as well.

If you have to hammer the gas to make a light, you are without a doubt putting
yourself and others at risk.

People make lefts, and wait for the amber, gunning it at the last second cost
lives every year which were preventable.

If you wish to be a statistic, by all means continue with running them.

When I have my 2 kids and wife in the car and need to make a left, I always
avoid major intersections just because I know there is an idiot somewhere
whos in a big hurry to get nowhere 4min faster...

If you dont like traffic and lights, move to the stix :beer:



http://www.stopredlightrunning.com/research.htm

 

[Razako]

Am I missing something here???

Irregardless of the constitutional legalness of red-light cameras anyone suggestioning, even in jest, that it would be a good idea to use a laser for destruction of city(or privately owned) properety is assinnine.

"Do it at night with noone else around tho, don't want to blind anyone except the camera... "
^^^ you get a -rep for saying that!!!
Dont like the red light cameras? Then do something other than a felony to change the law. These cameras Have shown to reduce the number of red-light runners and therefore accidents at the same time. How much is the life of another human being worth?

These cameras have shown proof of who was at fault in many accidents.

Those of us who have taken Drivers Ed. and still possess some bit of memory should recall hearing about 'stale' Green lights-- simple really-- we all know the light WILL sooner or later change to yellow then red. Those who think thier need to make the light no matter what are idiots. If the light has been green for a while you need to be 1) aware that it will soon change and 2) be aware of the vehicles behind you. If you are being tailgated, by all means do not make a short stop unless you desire to have someone rearending you. Likewise if you are one of those tailgating a-holes you have a responsibilty to avoid rearending the person in front of you. Only an imbicile would blame such an accident on the person who stopped at a yellow or red light.


2 cents from someone with 47 years of driving experience.

It's called civil disobedience. What else can you do when the fat cats just want to rake in your money for minor offenses? Are you hurting anybody ripping down or otherwise disabling RLcams? As long as you don't get caught nobody suffers. You can always try getting them removed in a legal fashion, but then you need to deal with all of the politicians and city councilmen who probably got a juicy campaign contribution from the RLCam company. Also you gotta deal with the people who have a 'soccer mom' mentality who actually think that putting cameras everywhere will somehow make us safer without greatly eroding our personal privacy and rights.

Anyway the part about the cameras actually making us safer is highly debatable at best. The slightly lower your risk of getting t-boned while greatly increasing the risk of rear end collisions. However the type of people who actually blatantly blow through a red and T-bone people are generally idiots who won't be discouraged by or know about the cameras anyway.

Personally to make the roads safer I think there should be a ban on cell phone driving. Just today I had some idiot on their phone try to kill me when he cut across the road right in front of me while talking on his phone. He was completely oblivious to the fact that I was cruising down the road. Cell phone zombies are about 100x more terrifying to me than the people who floor it to make the lights.

 

[InfinitusEquitas]

I completely disagree.
]How can you say that or possiblely prove any of that?
'In fact' my ass.

If your @$$ is a fact, than you sir should see a doctor:crackup:

Aside from comparing large posteriors though, please actually research these cameras.

There are statistics, and examples to backup that RL companies do actually shorten the yellow light. That's really the only part I take issue with. People who do run red lights should get tickets.

If that's not good enough, than talk to 2-5 NYC cops and they will be happy to tell you how often they have to respond to fender benders where safe drivers stomp on their breaks at the sign of yellow, and the ones behind them react just a split second too late. If you don't want to talk to them, just go around west side highway and listen to a scanner for an hour

Anyway, I'll second the ban on driving with handheld phones. What's truly scary is that if you ever actually talk to that guy/girl who obliviously cuts off 5 people... they will say that they are safe drivers and have never been in an accident because of talking on the phone.

 

[hakzaw1]

Okay I see two connected but seperate issues here.
My main problem with the OP and those saying its a good thing to use lasers to change something you dont like and the red light cameras.

If this were an archery forum and someone suggested shooting those cameras with an arrow I think I know how the forum members would react. Not a good thing for the archery people. for every 'study' showing the cons of these cameras( which I do not like but for different reasons as some others btw.) there are 'facts' to the contrary:

like these


, Council Bluff, Iowa1
90% reduction in red light running crashes
NO increase in rear-end collisions at intersections with red light camera systems installed.
Naperville, Illinois2
33% reduction in injury crashes
75% reduction in angle/turning crashes
8% reduction in rear-end crashes
19% reduction in total crashes
Texas3
45% reduction in right-angle crashes.
80% reduction in crashes in El Paso
Dayton, Ohio4
44% drop in red light running crashes
16% reduction in rear-end crashes
40% reduction in right-angle crashes
Toledo, Ohio5
21% reduction in accidents at photo-enforced intersections


also in Ohio

As part of the Columbus "Focus on Safety" program, city officials deployed intersection safety cameras at 20 intersections to deter red light running and prevent crashes that cause injury and death everyday. After installing the cameras, Columbus city officials saw significant reductions in citations and crashes.

In the first three years, the cameras led to:

58.9%
Reduction in red light running
at photo-enforced intersections

76.7%
Reduction in red light running crashes
at photo-enforced intersections


so lets just say agree to disagree on the cameras but using lasers in any fashion like this is not a good thing for us- the laser hobbiest.


shooting cameras with lasers or 22s will only make things much worse and some day we will all have cameras surgically attached to our heads and GPS trackers shoved up our asses because of 'civil disobienience' not because of the lack of it. Civil non disobiedience got four people killed at Kent State U. in 1970.

Misuse of lasers cannot be condoned here-ever. The laser haters would love to have more ammo to use against us-- can you not see this??

 

[InfinitusEquitas]

so lets just say agree to disagree on the cameras but using lasers in any fashion like this is not a good thing for us- the laser hobbiest.

Agreeing to disagree regarding the cameras. As I said, my issue is mainly with RL cams where the yellow light is shortened. If the yellow light is not shortened, there is really no problem.

As you point out there is always a study to disprove another study with regards to merit.

Now as for using lasers to damage RL cameras, while I don't have any objection on moral grounds, it is stupid because it will draw negative attention to lasers. Therefore I'm against it. Also it happens to be criminally inefficient, and criminal.

 

[Razako]

The cameras in theory aren't so bad. It's when you get private companies running them for profit and shortening the yellow cycle that you have problems. If they were run strictly by the government and all the money from them was used to benefit society in the form of road maintenance I wouldn't have such a problem with them.

Also the whole issue leads to a slippery slope. First are the RLcams. Next they'll start putting up speed cams everywhere. Before you know it they'll require mandatory radio transmitters in your car that broadcast your speed to sensors in the area. If you're detected going >5mph over the limit in a monitored area you get a ticket. No exceptions.

Here's a laser related example for you. Have you ever had fun shining your powerful >5mw laser around outside at night? If you have then you've done something illegal. "that's unfair" you say? "why shouldn't I have some fun with my laser outside? As long as I look out for planes and people on the ground I hurt nobody" Well the same applies to a lot of illegal things in driving such as speeding and blowing through lights. If there's nobody around at all then who does it hurt to narrowly run that light or speed in a wide open area with good visibility?

As far as the whole Camera destruction topic is concerned there are much better things to use than lasers. Just paintball them or use a long pole to stick a rag covered in epoxy to the lens if you really want to wreck the camera for good.

 

[mb300sd]

Ok. I'll agree with you that using lasers would be a bad idea as it would be bad for the hobby. But I still very much support destroying the cameras using other means. Noone is going to put more regulations on guns just because someone decided to shoot a couple cameras... (as opposed to another person, which happens all the time)

 

[hakzaw1]

Careful what you say here--it may end up being used against you in court.

That slope is very slippery for sure. They quickly went from red light runners to catching those who did not stop on red for right turns, then I read that the newer better cameras can read plates so well that having outstanding parking ticket etc could /would be happening too. If we are not careful they will be sending units to chase us down for seat belts etc etc.

As far as having private Cos. install-run -collect the fines and send the cities thier share...well people need to get on thier local governments to make any red light cameras be the property of that local government. No body forces cities to use them and if people petition to NOT use outside cameras Cos ,then we will have much more control and a larger(all) amount of the fines collected going to that city. Using an outside Camera company allows them to push for thier own personal agenda-- more money. I dont know if I buy into the shortened yellow light theory- that waould be something that ONLY the local city could do- not the private camera companies.

We all know that 57.89% of all statistics are made up on the spot.(< like that one)

whatever your particular views are numbers can be found to 'prove' that you are right. And some things are impossible to prove with them anyway.

It iis just sad that as a society fines and pentalties must be imposed to make people do what is correct and safe for all. But that is just the way it is. last comment-- you will almost never find agreement between a NYC driver and a driver from the country or suburbs. In NYC cabs especially only see yellow lights as an extension of green and I do not suggest that you stp or even slow down if a cab is on you backside. They piggy-back with the cars ahead and run red lights ALL THE TIME- so unless you have no one behind you, forget stopping at yellow/pink 0r even the first few seconds of red lights. You will get heavy horn and many hand gestures coming your way.

If you move to NYC(or most any huge city)sell your car- there is no place to park and the cost of a spot by the year there is higher than the rent of a nice home elsewhere.

I lived there for three months- got towed once per month and had to get up at all hours to move the car, just not worth the pain to have one and the buses-trains and subways can take you anywhere you want to go.

my last dos centavos on this thread.

hak

 

[Bionic-Badger]

Where I live there are a lot of areas with a 25 limit that could EASILY be 30 and some 30 areas that should be like 40+. The limits have simply never been updated or reviewed. Also the rich neighborhoods have tons of 4 way stops and speed bumps that serve no other purpose than to discourage traffic from going through their neighborhood.

I'd love to have some speed bumps on the somewhat busy neighborhood street near where I live. 25 mph is the correct speed limit for smaller residential roads anyway, because of the close proximity of people, pets, and objects in the area. If you want to go faster, go on one of the more major roads.

What I would like to see removed are these empty, useless bike lanes that DOT installs on these more major roads. They end up reducing the road to a single lane, with unused bike lanes and daytime parking. Cycling policy is so out of whack, because they want to be treated as vehicles, but not be forced to be licensed OR obey automobile laws like forcibly stopping at red lights or going the speed limit minimum. Then there is all this wasted money to put bike lanes in on busy roads, when the cyclists should be forced to take smaller residential roads which already have low speed limits and lack traffic lights.

 

[InfinitusEquitas]

Speed limits in many cases are simply absurd. There are areas where they should be lower... such as a residential streets.. with houses on both sides.. 40mph.. and others where the speed limit is super slow. I mean 25mph on a wide two lane, straight, always empty road in an industrial park, with perfect sight lines... where is the sense in that?

Meantime I regularly see people jump on my tail when I actually drive 40mph on that road:thinking:

 

[punk3r]

devono morire con i fotored mi sono arrivate 6 multe perche quei disonesti hanno alterato il tempo della luce gialla avevo pensato di comprare un flessibile a batteria per tagliare i pali delle telecamere ma con un laser da 1w risolvero il problema

 

[InfinitusEquitas]

fotored must die with me because those fines came six rogue have altered the time of yellow light I thought about buying a flexible battery of cameras to cut the poles but with a laser 1w solve the problem

For those of us who don't read italian.

Using a laser for this purpose is retarded.

 

[Tonga]

Not if you use a 12ga before you get to the light.

In our area we have 4 of these newly installed cameras within a 1/4 mile stretch of road going to the grocery store. Since the install they now stop traffic even if there is no opposing traffic even at 12 midnight!
I really like TJ's idea here or at least I can fantasize:beer:!

 

[punk3r]

I apologize for writing in Italian, but I had to google
translator on and I had forgotten, I apologize for my
excess of anger, but put the time of yellow light to
traffic light at less than 2 sec in my opinion is criminal

 

[InfinitusEquitas]

@punk3r

Less than two seconds does seem criminal to me. Even going speed limit, @25mph I doubt that's enough time to stop on any larger car or truck.

 

[HIMNL9]

^ well, is for some reasons that one of our police offices have more than 3600 causes against them, for have placed a, say, 2.5 seconds yellow time

Gasoline and matches, gasoline and matches solves a lot of these problems :eg: