ONE: NO MENTION OF HOW MANY CRASHES WERE CASUED BY RUNNING A RED LIGHT

This is common for the RLC side to no want to bring this up. IN One town in TX, if one were to just use angle crashes, it would look like the RLC “work”, but when the RLV crashes were pulled, RLV CRASHES WENT UP! http://www.banthecams.org/Blogs/the-angle-scam-how-cities-use-angle-crashes-instead-of-rlr-crashes-to-manipulate-the-truth.html

(Note a RLC can only “stop” a RLV crash. Frankly I don’t really buy this claim based on videos of RLV crashes at RLC site that the RLC FAILED TO STOP! http://www.banthecams.org/Red-Light-Camera-News/videos-that-show-rlc-will-not-work-they-didnt-stop-these-crashes-where-they-were-installed.html

Two: No mention on the “violations” if raw data was used before RLC being compared to NON Raw data (tickets they sent in the mail, or “citeable” violations).

IT JUST CAME OUT IN MURRIETA, CA that the RLC RIGGED a claim “increase” in rlr when the RLC were ordered shut off. The RLC vendor used “citeable” violations in the RLC period, compared to RAW data in the after period before the RLC vendor threw out “violations” that were not “citable”.

Souce: http://www.banthecams.org/Red-Light-Camera-News/american-traffic-solutions-ats-more-lies-more-deception.html (original: http://saferstreetsla.org/646/american-traffic-solutions-ats-lies-deception/)

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/40/4078.asp

This is just one game RLC vendors play to HIDE the fact that RLC are NOT about safety.

RLC ARE A FRAUD!

Heck it even seems ole Wandal might be working for a RLC vendor Front group now! ATS/NCSR. http://www.banthecams.org/Taking-on-the-Government/does-waldall-work-for-ats-front-group-ncsr-nyt-says-she-is-ncsr-qpresidentq.html

(documents showing that ATS is behind NCSR: http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/35/3585.asp pdf indicating ATS executives part of NCSR. http://www.thenewspaper.com/rlc/docs/2011/ncsrmo.pdf
FIGHT THE RLC FRAUD!

Ban the CAMS!

http://www.motorists.org
http://www.banthecams.org
camerafruad on Facebook.

The program removed over $6.1 million dollars from the local Tallahassee economy and shipped 87.5% of that to the state government and the camera vendor. This $5.3 million dollars could not circulate in local stores, malls, restaurants, service businesses, entertainment businesses, churches, charities, etc. This large amount of money stripped out the local economy does serious harm to the residents and businesses in the area. All for a questionable change in safety.

If Tallahassee simply added one second to the yellow intervals on the lights, it would almost certainly reduce straight through violations by MORE than the cameras have achieved — without the massive economic damage to the area.

James C. Walker, Life Member-National Motorists Association

Another thing is that the automated for-profit cameras are only designed to enforce one law- red light violations (RLV). They are not meant to enforce failure to yield or careless driving (both of which are far more prevalent than RLV), so the true measure of device effectiveness is to consider how many RLV crashes took place for equal periods of time before and after the use of automated for-profit enforcement.

When I did so using DOT crash data, I found there were 9 prior and 7 after. If looked at as a percentage, that’s a 22% reduction!!! However, if looked at as a number, it is only 2, which is well within the normal fluctuation for this type of crash. This scenario is why you rarely see actual numbers used when dealing with automated for-profit enforcement- such as the state’s annual undocumented survey, which failed to include RLV crashes at all, and omitted data from 20 to 30% of the agencies required by law to submit data.

Turning law enforcement into a for-profit scheme is a bad idea, and it breeds corruption.

About a year ago, there was a story about someone who received a ticket due to the turn lane switching to red sooner than the through lanes…

The issue I question is whether or not there is consideration as to placement of the traffic signals – at the front of the intersection, or at the far end of the intersection.

Being tall, if I am close to the white line (within 1 – 3 cars from the line), I cannot see the traffic signal if the light is at the front of the instersection. Is there a timing issue that can come into play? Is there a standard for state-wide application?

Just questions, and most likely mainly for DOT, but questions about the program nonetheless.