Disqus - Friends of ringrunner

Re: City sets contract for cameras at red lights

PhotoRadarscam — Thu, 14 May 2009 11:20:20 -0000

Another deceitful article about photo enforcement. They limit the discussion to number of collisions and citations issued, but refuse to address the real important number... numbers of injury accidents and fatalities, and this must be normalized for changes in traffic volume. The reason they don't publish these numbers is because typically photo enforcement causes and INCREASE in accidents. It isn't about safety, it's about revenue.

Re: City sets contract for cameras at red lights

PhotoRadarscam — Mon, 18 May 2009 03:43:36 -0000

blackbike, where are your "studies" that show that accidents are reduced? Many cities across the world have scrapped their photo enforcement systems because they failed to improved safety. You can continue to trust what the government tells you, or you can research the truth yourself. I think I know what you're going to do. Ignorance sure is bliss.

Re: 3 cities have traffic cameras on their radar - Metro - SignOnSanDiego.com

PhotoRadarscam — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 10:10:52 -0000

The IIHS numbers are not to be trusted - they have a vested interest in seeing more photo enforcement. Additionally, their numbers don't jive with the likes of Peoria, AZ and Grande Prairie Canada where accidents MORE THAN DOUBLED after red light cams went in. Instead of trying engineering changes like increased light timing or signal visibility or signs, cities jump to the solution that brings them the most cash without even hiring and engineering study. The only way to fight is with a can of spray paint or a ballot initiative. Ask your city officials where the traffic engineering study is for those intersections!

Re: BCLocalNews.com - The political puzzle of public safety

PhotoRadarscam — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 00:06:34 -0000

Everyone is ALWAYS in danger, this is nothing new. How did we survive so long without speed cameras? They aren't necessary. The speeding crisis is not new, nor is it a crisis. And cameras don't necessarily save lives. MANY studies show no reduction or an INCREASE in accidents. Slower is not always safer. In the US, when national speed limits were raised, accidents actually went down. Get your facts straight, and stop trying to make this an emotional issue.

Re: Lake Country Calendar - A fine solution

PhotoRadarscam — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 03:18:30 -0000

You said right in your letter that the cause is not paying attention, NOT speed! And you're right, distracted driving is the #1 CAUSE of accidents. A speed camera isn't going to change that. If the majority of drivers on the road are going above the limit, then the problem is probably that the limits are set too low. Study after study shows that the safest speed limit is the 85th percentile speed. And many studies show INCREASES in accidents where photo radar in installed, so it is not the solution you make it out to be. Photo radar is nothing more than a revenue machine that makes roads more dangerous.

Think about it... if you know where the cameras are at, people just slow down for that 1/4 or 1/2 mile and then speed back up again. Changing and adjusting speeds is more dangerous than staying at a consistent speed with smooth-flowing traffic. And sending a ticket to the vehicle owner - who is not the driver on average more than 25% of the time - WEEKS LATER - does not accomplish anything.

Re: New partnership seeks more �red light� cameras

PhotoRadarscam — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 10:48:56 -0000

This is all misleading propaganda. "He pointed out that of the 37,261 fatalities on U.S. roadways in 2008, 31% were speeding-related, according to Department of Transportation (DOT) data."

Speeding-related doesn't mean above the posted limit or that the cause was speeding. According to NHTSA figures, less than 5% of all accidents are caused by exceeding the posted limit. Cameras on the other hand, have been found to INCREASE accidents where they are installed, so cameras are not the solution.

Regarding intersection safety, again, cameras have been show to cause an INCREASE in accidents and many cities across the country have removed their cameras due to no incrase in safety. Engineernig improvements - many simple like signage, signal visibility, pavement markings, and light timing - make the BIGGEST improvement in safety in an intersection after a thorough engineering study is conducted. Rather PARS - the lobby for the camera vendors - just wants to make money on equipment sales so rather than fix intersections, they'd rather set drivers up for failure and then charge them for it.

Re: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/may/20/city-plans-to-photo-enforce-5-intersections/

PhotoRadarscam — Fri, 21 May 2010 12:54:20 -0000

Actually, many cities have seen accidents more than double when installing red light cameras. However, extending yellow light times and other intersection improvements have yielded safety gains far greater than any other measure, and are chaep and easy to implement. OTOH, the company is proposing doing business with Redflex, a shady company that can't be trusted (FireRedflex.com). One thing to ask - has the city council done any engineernig studies to determine that ROOT CAUSE of the safety problems and evaluate ALL possible solutions? No, of course not, they are only interested in the money they can make with these machines.

Re: Bill would allow Pottsville to install red-light cameras

PhotoRadarscam — Fri, 16 Jul 2010 10:44:11 -0000

There's a reason why several cities across the country have ENDED their programs - they didn't improve safety. The rest of the cities are too addicted to the revenue. This article was wrong - tickets aren't sent to the drivers, they are sent to the car OWNERS. This is not always the same person, and introduces a built in error rate of over 28%. The machines are not accurate - the vendors will not even publish accuracy stats or claims.

If you had a plumbing problem, you would call a plumber. If you have a traffic safety problem, you should call a TRAFFIC ENGINEER. Those guys are the only people who can improve safety. Studies are needed to identify the ROOT cause of safety problems and then evaluate and propose solutions. Sometimes the solutions are as easy as adding signs or adjusting light timing. Politiicians and police are NOT QUALIFIED to make these evaluations and decisions.

Re: Photo Enforcement Failure: When Humans Can’t Keep Up With Machines

PhotoRadarscam — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 16:39:31 -0000

Yes, and they were dishonest about the stats on "saved lives" and crashes. Never did they compare the numbers to national numbers or those of neighboring states who also showed similar improvement WIHTOUT using cameras. The reduction in crashes and fatalities was part of a continuing long term trend of safety improvement due to safer cars but also because of the poor economy with fewer drivers and lower traffic volumes and densities.

Re: Photo enforcement in Federal Way gets the green light through 2013 - Federal Way Mirror

PhotoRadarscam — Tue, 27 Jul 2010 03:41:40 -0000

Of course they renewed it - collecting checks is easy! Why not continue to drain the local economy? Who cares about actually citing the driver instead of just the owner, or the fact that they have done NOTHING to improve safety. The scam is growing until the citizens put this on the ballot.

Re: MontCo employs more speed cameras, police for start of school year | Washington Examiner

PhotoRadarscam — Thu, 26 Aug 2010 19:25:33 -0000

"Since 2003, car accidents have caused three fatalities and 122 injuries within a half-mile of the school."

And taking pictures of drivers in - not the owners - in 2 locations and mailing them tickets a few weeks later is going to help this? A radius of 1/2 miles is quite large, and 7 years is a long time to spread those numbers out over. Sounds like puffery. Several cities across the country have ended their photo enforcement programs because they INCREASED accidents.

Re: School starting – so will speed photo cameras - Bellevue Reporter

PhotoRadarscam — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 01:18:28 -0000

Notice they didn't say locations were selected due to a history of safety problems or accidents. Nope, they were selected based on number of violations which translates to profitability. It's all about the money.

Re: Council gives red light cameras the green light

PhotoRadarscam — Tue, 23 Nov 2010 09:41:58 -0000

Pretty pathetic that the council would deny public input in light of an accident. I'm not familiar with the accident, but would taking a photograph really have prevented the accident? Would driving a few mph slower have prevented that accident, or was the driver simply distracted? This is just an excuse to bring in that revenue.

This shoot-from-the-hip reactionary government is a cover for an agenda to fill the city coffers. Where were the enginering studies? Did traffic engineers have any suggestions on other traffic calming methods? Were any alternatives even considered? OF course not! They are not interested in saftey, or qualified to make traffic engineering decisions, and they are so arrogant that they refuse to conduct the professionals that really can make a difference in traffic safety.

Re: Council gives red light cameras the green light

PhotoRadarscam — Tue, 23 Nov 2010 13:30:06 -0000

Be appalled if you want, but there is no evidence (other than that (surprise) provided by the camera vendors) that they increase safety, and in fact there are several studies that say they INCREASE accidents. Many cities across the country have ended camera programs because they DID NOT IMPROVE SAFETY. I am appalled that you would argue against using science and data and consulting professionals (traffic engineers) who know how to make roads safer, and instead rely on the whims of politicians and police who have been lobbied heavily by camera salesman.

Re: Did TSA cave on scanners for Thanksgiving rush?

PhotoRadarscam — Sat, 27 Nov 2010 19:09:22 -0000

Just passed through security at DIA (Denver) and didn't see a single body scan while I went through... There were agents apparently manning hte machine, but no one was directed through in the 10 min span I was in the area... lines were small and quick Sat evening.

Re: Did TSA cave on scanners for Thanksgiving rush?

PhotoRadarscam — Sun, 28 Nov 2010 12:32:35 -0000

This was two days AFTER thanksgiving (Sat). That's what I saw, there's no point in making it up. I don't know why no one was being scanned, all I know is that I didn't see anyone get scanned or patted down.

Re: I-Team 10 investigation: Tracking red light camera fines | www.WHEC.com

PhotoRadarscam — Fri, 14 Jan 2011 16:35:56 -0000

IF it was about safety, the city would hire traffic engineering studies to analyze the dangerous intersections and evaluate ALL solutions. They did not do this. Instead, a slick-talking camera salesman made a presentation and promised profits to the city. Meanwhile, millions will be drained from the local economy to go to the camera vendor.

Re: Red Deer Advocate - Supt. applauds move to add three officers

PhotoRadarscam — Tue, 18 Jan 2011 11:15:33 -0000

The photo radar van is all about the money. The city is addicted. Then it will be two more. Then 4 more. Easy money. Drain the local economy.

Re: Review: Verizon Motorola Droid Pro – An Android phone for the BlackBerry set?

PhotoRadarscam — Mon, 24 Jan 2011 16:46:09 -0000

The droid pro IS NOT a good replacement for the Blackberry. There are several key differences not mentioned here:
1. The DP is NOT email-oriented like the BB. With the BB, you get an email notification, pick up your BB and you are looking at the latest email received. With the DP, you pick it up, unlock the phone, navigate to the email app, open the email folder, and select an email to read. Way more cumbersome.
2. The email app that comes with the DP is awful. Maybe it works better with Outlook email, but interfacing and working with Cox was nearly impossible, I had to resort to a 3rd party app.
3. The DP polls for email every few minutes (depending on how you set it). If you run a PC with email app that does the same thing, they may conflict, locking the other app out for a short period of time. There were never any conflicts with BB.
4. Apps like my real time stock quotes/charts lose connectivity on the BB and are unable to reconnect without exiting and restarting. This could be app-specific, but it seems to happen with other apps as well, and with general things like wi-fi. I never had this problem on the BB.
5. I want to set a specific aural (non-vibrate) ringtone for text notifcation from a specific source like I had with BB, that persists even if phone is in vibrate mode. With DP, this does not seem possible.

Re: Motorola Droid Pro Review

PhotoRadarscam — Thu, 03 Feb 2011 01:12:14 -0000

The droid pro IS NOT a good replacement for the Blackberry. The DP is a computer for Apps first and a phone and email machine second. There are several key differences not mentioned here:
1. The DP is NOT email-oriented like the BB. With the BB, you get an email notification, pick up your BB and you are looking at the latest email received. With the DP, you pick it up, unlock the phone, navigate to the email app, open the email folder, and select an email to read. Way more cumbersome.
2. The email app that comes with the DP is awful. Maybe it works better with Outlook email, but interfacing and working with Cox was nearly impossible, I had to resort to a 3rd party app.
3. The DP polls for email every few minutes (depending on how you set it). If you run a PC with email app that does the same thing, they may conflict, locking the other app out for a short period of time. There were never any conflicts with BB.
4. Apps like my real time stock quotes/charts lose connectivity on the BB and are unable to reconnect without exiting and restarting. This could be app-specific, but it seems to happen with other apps as well, and with general things like wi-fi. I never had this problem on the BB.
5. I want to set a specific aural (non-vibrate) ringtone for text notifcation from a specific source like I had with BB, that persists even if phone is in vibrate mode. With DP, this does not seem possible.

Re: Valley Fever - James King - State GOPers Want Photo-Radar Gone for Good

PhotoRadarscam — Fri, 18 Feb 2011 13:06:06 -0000

This is NOT a partisan issue and you need to educate yourself. The cameras do NOT replace cops, and the cameras have INCREASED accidents. Why do you want to raise revenue at the expense of the health and safety of all drivers?

Re: Valley Fever - James King - State GOPers Want Photo-Radar Gone for Good

PhotoRadarscam — Fri, 18 Feb 2011 13:06:44 -0000

Actually, legislators are immune from photo tickets while they are in session.

Re: Valley Fever - James King - State GOPers Want Photo-Radar Gone for Good

PhotoRadarscam — Fri, 18 Feb 2011 13:07:51 -0000

Ban the cameras! It is a revenue grab at the expense of the health and safety of all motorists. Just check out http://PhotoRadarScam.com/l... for dozens of articles of accidents INCREASING due to cameras.

Re: The Republic - Ariz. Senate's tie vote rejects bill to prohibit use of speed, red-light enforcement cameras

PhotoRadarscam — Wed, 02 Mar 2011 20:05:21 -0000

How unfortunate. People need to write their reps and let them know that we don't want these dangerous revenue cameras on the roads. The cities are trying to make money at the expense of the health and safety of residents and visitors.

Re: Daily Journal - Arizona House gives preliminary approval to bill on photo enforcement speeding violations

PhotoRadarscam — Mon, 18 Apr 2011 20:52:56 -0000

It's a shame we have to enact a bill to get the people who send out these phony tickets to be honest.