omg yeah what's up with that?!? and then this greasy looking guy tailgates us, alsmost hits us at the stop sign @ Coles where NObody signals, than is jockeying around left then right trying to decide to pass us b4 he swerves left - just to get closer to the TPK?

From what I have seen the camera has calmed traffic a bit at 18th and Jersey. There are still d-bags who honk when I stop before I make the right but they can eat me. The people who make the right onto 18th from Coles without signaling should be dragged from their cars and beaten. The death of the directional light is the ultimate symbol of the dumbing down of drivers.

Red light cameras are good for two things: increasing revenue and increasing traffic accidents.

Red light cameras do not improve pedestrian safety; traffic calming measures are much more effective.

Quote:
It will be a good money maker...stopping short then get rammed from behind. Actually there should be two traffic lights with the second one 10 feet prior to the intersection this way the first car will have time to react to the camera.

I am so sick and tired of having to count to ten after I see a green light to step out into an intersection. I am so sick and tired of cars turning right on red without stopping after looking for oncoming traffic from the left but not pedestrians in the act of crossing on the right. Put cameras at every major intersection.

Group urges caution on cameras for red light enforcement
Thursday, October 27, 2011
By Jon Schmitz, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

A public interest group today issued a report recommending that governments exercise caution in deploying automated red-light enforcement cameras at intersections.

The Pennsylvania Public Interest Research Group said private companies increasingly are lobbying government officials to install the cameras and that in some cases, safety issues are taking a back seat to profit motives.

"Local contracting for automated traffic enforcement systems may sometimes be a useful tool for keeping drivers and pedestrians safe. But when private firms and municipalities consider revenues first, and safety second, the public interest is threatened," the group said.

The systems use sensors in the pavement to detect when a vehicle enters an intersection after the light has turned red. If it does, an overhead camera takes a photo of the license plate and generates a citation that is mailed to the car's owner.

The Pennsylvania Senate on Tuesday approved legislation that would expand red-light camera enforcement, currently legal only in Philadelphia, to Pittsburgh and all third-class cities with populations of 18,000 or more and full-time police forces. Cities that would be authorized to have cameras include Erie, Altoona, New Castle, Johnstown and McKeesport.

A similar bill is pending in the House Transportation Committee, which plans to hold a public hearing next month.

PennPIRG said nearly 700 jurisdictions have signed contracts with for-profit companies to install the cameras. Some of the contracts pay the company on a per-ticket basis, give the company veto power over locations and include penalties if the municipality tries to cancel them. It urged municipalities not to include incentives in the contracts, to maintain control over enforcement policies and ensure that the contracting process is open and includes public participation.

State Rep. Paul Costa, D-Wilkins, sponsor of the House legislation, has said it will contain a provision requiring PennDOT approval before cameras are installed at any intersection. That, he said, will ensure that the cities use the cameras to improve safety, not to generate revenue.

Both the House and Senate bills require income from the cameras to be returned to the state and used for transportation safety improvements. They also require conspicuous signs warning drivers that cameras are in place.

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety says its study showed a 24 percent decline in fatalities from red-light running in cities where the cameras are used, and reductions of 40 to 96 percent in violations. It has estimated that 150 lives were saved over five years in the 14 biggest cities that use them.

Other studies, though, have shown an increase in crashes, and critics say drivers slamming on the brakes because they are fearful of being cited are causing rear-end collisions.

Alana Miller of PennPIRG said the group has not taken a position on the Pennsylvania legislation.

Jon Schmitz: jschmitz@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1868.
First published on October 27, 2011 at 11:59 am
Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11300/1185449-100.stm#ixzz1c5LsErZK

Red light cameras put profit over safety, consumer advocacy group says

Published: Friday, October 28, 2011, 6:00 AM
By Victoria St. Martin/The Star-Ledger

For many drivers, those automated cameras that enforce red light violations are pretty annoying.

Now, a consumer advocacy group says they may also be threatening the public interest by putting profit above safety.

In a report released Thursday, the New Jersey Public Interest Research Group called on municipalities to not share revenue with vendors on a per-ticket basis, but to create contracts that are "cost-neutral" and carry a flat fee.

The national report by the advocacy group also said municipalities should first investigate traffic-engineering solutions for problem intersections and roadways.

Jen Kim, of NJPIRG, said too many cities wrongly sign away power to ensure the safety of citizens by privatizing traffic law enforcement, and that the contracts with private companies focus more on profits than safety.

"We really think that these red-light cameras should be used a last resort," said Kim. "Not just revenue for cash-strapped cities."

In a five-year pilot program overseen by the state Department of Transportation, cameras have been placed in at least 24 municipalities. Joe Dee, a DOT spokesman, said the program, which ends in 2013, is to see whether the cameras promote safety.

Red-light cameras now operate in municipalities including Newark, Wayne, Jersey City, New Brunswick, Woodbridge and Linden.

Linden Mayor Richard Gerbounka said the cameras have reduced accidents.

He said Linden has checks and balances: the vendor sends video and camera stills to the police department; where officers review the evidence before sending out tickets.

A flash goes off when you get stuck in the intersection at 18th and Jersey.

I have experienced it a couple of times, but I haven't received a ticket.

Anyone here ever get a ticket from that camera?

In the long run it's probably a good idea. With today's urban society it is dangerous for a city cop to chase down a red light runner only to get shot. Having cameras doing the job is safer...safer for the motorist getting shot by a traffic camera then an innocent victim.

Quote:

Does the camera capture and fine idiots blocking the junction? If so, then great.

Safety or $$$ I've noticed motorists, frustrated by the tunnel traffic, zipping through there (since it is such a large intersection ) and getting caught in the red, so it will certainly get good use.

I was actually on my bike turning right when it got me.

Is there a state or municipal policy on the placement and use of these cameras? I'm generally in favor of these cameras, but would rather see a policy of placing them for public safety (accident blackspots) rather than a tool for generating revenue.

I'm not convinced that 18th and Jersey is an accident blackspot, compared to say 6th and Marin.

Thanks o73o2. Interestingly enough, I've seen cars in Manhattan run RCL's from a dead stop and the camera still went off. I really wonder what the lower threshold is supposed to be.

Quote: hmmm ... http://auto.howstuffworks.com/car-dri ... ices/red-light-camera.htm

Quote:

I never contradicted myself. A car can come to a complete stop, then make a right on red, and the camera will still take the photos as if the car was running the red light because technically it is running the red light even though in this case you are legally allowed to make a right on red.

The camera does neither detect if the car came to a complete stop or a rolling stop. Simply put, it is not designed to determine what kind of stop a car made, but whether or not the car enters the intersection on a red light.

Your statements leave the reader with the false impression that if a vehicle comes to a full stop, it will not set off the camera, when in actuality the camera will be activated regardless of the type of stop.

Quote:


You just contradicted yourself. Rolling through a red light = running a red light. Just like "Not coming to a complete stop" = "Not Stopping at a Stop Sign"

And yes, a police officer has to review and formally write the ticket.

Quote:

The cameras do not detect if you came to a complete stop or not. They are designed to detect any vehicles that runs a red light. The triggers are usually induction loops. These sense a change in current, not whether or not a vehicle came to a full stop. Lasers, radar, and video loop comparison models also don't discern these differences.

After the photo is taken, a person is required to review the several photos that are taken to determine whether or not a violation occurred.

More red light cameras for JC and I'd love to see cameras at STOP signs too.

Quote:


Must come to a complete stop on Red, not roll through it. Camera will detect if there's no complete stop.

No this is by the Tiger Mart, just before the railroad going in/out of Hoboken.
The light at 14th and Erie has no turn on red, and no right turn during "rush hours" when the traffic is bad.

Quote:
I guess you are refering to a "no turn on red" sign the one with the red slash going through the arrow depicting a turn.

I've noticed that it takes a picture if you turn right on red as well. As far as I recall there was never a sign saying a right on red was unacceptable...anyone been there lately to verify?

Any idiot who runs a red light deserves a ticket!

as an FYI ... there is a red light camera installed at the intersection of jersey ave and 18th street ...