Red light runners and Licence plate visibility

[Jackal]

I guess the city will be installing more cameras at intersections. As well, they may crack down on licence plate visibility. Does that mean that plastic and tinted cover plates will be ticketed?

"The city could add $2.5 million to its revenue by boosting the effectiveness of red-light cameras at intersections, while continuing to push down collision rates, according to a report from the auditor general’s office.

Between 2000, when the first cameras were installed, and 2009, the program drained more in costs than it took in via fines.

But last year, when fines were boosted to $325 from $180, the program generated $800,000 for the city. The report says that by increasing the program’s effectiveness, the city can glean even more money while continuing to increase safety. Last year, 38,000 tickets were issued to motorists who ran red lights."

"The auditor general recommends asking the province to permit bylaw officers to enforce licence-plate visibility standards in the course of their normal duties. Making sure plate numbers are visible could draw $1.7 million more from the program, according to the report."

[JonsMazda]

"plastic and tinted cover plates will be ticketed?"
Pretty much yea, even the clear ones.

[Ogata]

That would suck if plastic CLEAR visible plates were to be taken down. I always fear the red light camera intersections especially when I purposely brake when I see the cross walk sign counting down to 0 and the driver behind me goes HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONKK!

[ElectroJay]

"plastic and tinted cover plates will be ticketed?"
Pretty much yea, even the clear ones.

Yup... this part isn't new, I think. I've known people getting ticketed for the clear ones for the past several years.

[cwp_sedan]

Technically you aren't allowed to have anything covering your license plate because it decreases the reflectiveness of the plate. They are already illegal but the DMV sells them. If they aren't tinted I highly doubt you will get a ticket.

[Xerox]

That would suck if plastic CLEAR visible plates were to be taken down. I always fear the red light camera intersections especially when I purposely brake when I see the cross walk sign counting down to 0 and the driver behind me goes HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONKK!

I would probably honk at you too. :)
You know not all lights actually turn red at the end of the count down - if a cross-walk button hasn't been pressed by pedestrian or if the sensors don't detect a car at the intersection it won't turn red.
The countdown is for pedestrians. If as a driver you can see it I suppose you can take it into consideration as your approach the intersection but automatically breaking isn't the best idea. </off topic>

[alho]

That would suck if plastic CLEAR visible plates were to be taken down. I always fear the red light camera intersections especially when I purposely brake when I see the cross walk sign counting down to 0 and the driver behind me goes HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONKK!

Apparently red light camera's are more dangerous cause people are over cautious and slams their brakes even if they have time across the intersection safely without speeding up on a yellow.

[SonicBoy]

What's even more annoying is that not all traffic lights are programmed the same.

Going along Finch Ave. E., there are some that count down to zero then wait another 2 or 3 seconds to change to red.

Because of this you see people slowing down to stop then gunning it to make it through the intersection scaring the crap out of the person making the left hand turn coming at you.

As for the license plate cover, got pulled over at a ride stop once and was told that even with the clear, I could get a ticket.

I like how some people smear some grease/black dirt onto the plate to obscure the digits say like a 3 to look like an 8.

[zoso]

I think it's about time they start to crack down on the red lights, there is maybe a couple of reasons that running a red light is okay. but that's like .01% of the time it happens and i think that is a generous number.

For comments about people slamming on brakes... those people shouldn't be driving PERIOD if they act like that for a red then imagine all the other shit they would do. One of my biggest peev's is that it is too easy to get a license I wish they made it a lot harder to get. I would have failed my first test had it been harder and i'm okay with that. but i guess that will never happen since less cars means less money going to Car Companies and Taxes and so forth

What i want to see more focus on are people who lane change without signaling

[Hoodzy]

Has the gov provided any statistics it's reducing collisions?
They say the exact same thing in Alberta however fail to produce any solid evidence it's actually doing anything other than making them money.
Not that I am for running red lights.. it's pretty scary people do it. But it's probably the same thing they are doing with the whole speeding thing. It's simply a technology which makes it easy to fine people and generate revenue. Even though speeding only causes 5% of accidents. Plus how messed up do you have to be in the head to be like well normally i'd run that red light and risk hitting someone but i won't because I'll get a fine. That's effed up and that kind of person shouldn't have even come close to passing there drivers license test.

[Fobio]

Redlight cameras are cash grab...period. They do not deter the behaviour, nor do they prevent accidents and save lives.

An idea in the states from some progressive thinking mayors have actually cut down on red light runners. All they had to do was lengthen the yellow light by 1 SECOND....Eventho this might cause...TOTAL GRID-LACK...in a mega city like Toronto, that's a much more effective solution to the problem.

Toronto...you voted Rob Ford in.

[SonicBoy]

I like that idea of the extra second on the yellow light.

[Hoodzy]

I prefer the idea of just banning bad drivers.

[vinnierap]

Red light cameras are a pure cash grab, nothing more. Creates more of a distraction than anything.

[SirWanker]

Red light cameras are a pure cash grab, nothing more. Creates more of a distraction than anything.

How is it a cash grab? You run the red then pay the fine. if you're driving properly, this is not a distraction.

[Donshaw]

How is it a cash grab? You run the red then pay the fine. if you're driving properly, this is not a distraction.


+1

I ALWAYS lean on the side of stopping every time I think a light is going to change. I couldn't care less if your honking behind me that is going to bother me alot less then some kid coming the other way jumping a green light and side swiping me.

The red light cameras are simple run the red get the fine... don't and you wont get any tickets in your mail box. If they save one life by being there they are 100% worth it in my mind.

[Hoodzy]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/story/2011/01/24/edmonton-tickets-refund.html

There are some situations which the camera can get you depending on how sensitive they are. I've seen it flash basically when the guy was just about to leave the intersection.. Is he a red light runner... no. Does he deserve a 350 dollar fine. God no.
Lots of them in Alberta are tied with speed on green cameras. So every intersection you are watching for cameras instead of the road. If they are set to capture true red light runners then sure I am for them to a point. Do they actually reduce collisions.. I have seen no evidence of that. Therefore we can logically justify calling them a money grab. If you say something is for safety and it doesn't actually make it safer then its simply a money grab.

[tweak_s]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/story/2011/01/24/edmonton-tickets-refund.html

There are some situations which the camera can get you depending on how sensitive they are. I've seen it flash basically when the guy was just about to leave the intersection.. Is he a red light runner... no. Does he deserve a 350 dollar fine. God no.
Lots of them in Alberta are tied with speed on green cameras. So every intersection you are watching for cameras instead of the road. If they are set to capture true red light runners then sure I am for them to a point. Do they actually reduce collisions.. I have seen no evidence of that. Therefore we can logically justify calling them a money grab. If you say something is for safety and it doesn't actually make it safer then its simply a money grab.

I was acutally talking to someone from Calgary the other week... and he did describe that there were tons and tons of cameras all over the place in terms of speeding cameras and red light cameras. The way he was describing it was exactly how you do... it seems like hes more on the lookout for cameras than actual other cars/people/pedestrians. And yes.. I guess one can argue driving properly you don't have to look for these things but I think people instinctively do it too.

[KenYork]

Apparently red light camera's are more dangerous cause people are over cautious and slams their brakes even if they have time across the intersection safely without speeding up on a yellow.

People need to grow up. If someone slammed on the brakes in front of you and you'd have to do the same then you're actually following too close. If we kept the two second rule like how we learned in driving school you wouldn't need to. It's not the cameras making it dangerous, it's the drivers doing it to themselves.

Everyone is so much about themselves these days. Not many take responsibility for their own actions anymore, it's always what someone did to them. Then to go sue(cash grab).

[Slade]

hmm, wonder what would happen if I dropped the tailgate on the truck....

[Hoodzy]

I was acutally talking to someone from Calgary the other week... and he did describe that there were tons and tons of cameras all over the place in terms of speeding cameras and red light cameras. The way he was describing it was exactly how you do... it seems like hes more on the lookout for cameras than actual other cars/people/pedestrians. And yes.. I guess one can argue driving properly you don't have to look for these things but I think people instinctively do it too.

Even if you do still drive properly you still need to check your speed. I don't want to wander 5km over the limit in case my speedo is off slightly. I would rather have 100% of my attention on the road and others around me then which way the camera is facing and if I do need to brake heavily to make sure I don't run the yellow to ensure I have no chance of getting a ticket.
I was on the Calgary Police website and they were bragging about the red light cameras and that they increase safety. I emailed them 2 weeks ago asking if they had any proof of this. No response.. So what does that tell you.

[zoso]

For the speed camera's there is a threshold i think of 10 or so over.


But really and truthfully are people really bitching about worrying more about getting caught and less about actually driving properly?

[Fobio]

before this goes on about who's a better driver and ppl claiming they're holier than thou...here are some scientific evidence on the ineffectiveness of red light and speed camera at deterrence, while being quite effective at filling the coffers of the cities that have them...here's 4...I'l post more as I see more non-sense come up...

Robot Revenuing: Shots Were Fired - Column (http://www.caranddriver.com/features/08q1/robot_revenuing_shots_were_fired-column)

Red-Light Cameras Increase Crashes, Florida Researchers Find (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/03/080311151159.htm)

Rear-End Crashes Go Up After Red-Light Cameras Go In - Column (http://www.caranddriver.com/features/02q3/rear-end_crashes_go_up_after_red-light_cameras_go_in-column)

Meet the Guy Who Helped Take Down Georgia’s Red-Light Cameras (http://blog.caranddriver.com/meet-the-guy-who-helped-take-down-georgia%E2%80%99s-red-light-cameras/)

[KenYork]

I'm not saying who is holier than anyone. Just people should look at their own actions, the law and what they were taught or supposed to be taught. In the end, a persons own action or lack of should be looked at before blaming someone else.

"I rear-ended the other guy caus he slammed his brakes." should be not an excuse.

In the end, is it the cameras that are causing the accidents? or people who seem holier than the law to run the red? or people in too much of a rush to not respect the amber?

How often do you find yourself waiting at a green light while someone rushes the red?

[Fobio]

Why Not Fine Jaywalkers $1000? - Column
(http://www.caranddriver.com/features/03q4/why_not_fine_jaywalkers_1000_-column)

[SirWanker]

before this goes on about who's a better driver and ppl claiming they're holier than thou...here are some scientific evidence on the ineffectiveness of red light and speed camera at deterrence, while being quite effective at filling the coffers of the cities that have them...here's 4...I'l post more as I see more non-sense come up...

Robot Revenuing: Shots Were Fired - Column (http://www.caranddriver.com/features/08q1/robot_revenuing_shots_were_fired-column)

Red-Light Cameras Increase Crashes, Florida Researchers Find (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/03/080311151159.htm)

Rear-End Crashes Go Up After Red-Light Cameras Go In - Column (http://www.caranddriver.com/features/02q3/rear-end_crashes_go_up_after_red-light_cameras_go_in-column)

Meet the Guy Who Helped Take Down Georgia’s Red-Light Cameras (http://blog.caranddriver.com/meet-the-guy-who-helped-take-down-georgia%E2%80%99s-red-light-cameras/)

Again what is your point? If you run a red light, you are breaking the law and fined accordingly.
Besides that, three of your links are to Car and Driver which are distinctly biased against the Red Light Camera use.
Let's just agree to disagree :S

[Fobio]

I'm not saying who is holier than anyone. Just people should look at their own actions, the law and what they were taught or supposed to be taught. In the end, a persons own action or lack of should be looked at before blaming someone else.

"I rear-ended the other guy caus he slammed his brakes." should be not an excuse.

In the end, is it the cameras that are causing the accidents? or people who seem holier than the law to run the red? or people in too much of a rush to not respect the amber?

How often do you find yourself waiting at a green light while someone rushes the red?

Did you read any of the articles?

Let's look at redligh cameras...if your car (not you) got a ticket...you pay for it...eventho it was your cousion driving. Is your cosuin paying? Do you think you getting fined will deter you cousin from running redlights in the future, eventho you gave her a good talking to?

No one is claiming slammed brakes to be what's wrong with redlight cameras...

They are a cash grab. They do not deter the behaviour...now watch them tweak the lights to benefit their system.

Don't drink the koolaid...this is not for public safety.

None of the situations you have mentioned will be deterred or minimized because someone got a ticket in the mail 1 week after the fact.

[Fobio]

Again what is your point? If you run a red light, you are breaking the law and fined accordingly.
Besides that, three of your links are to Car and Driver which are distinctly biased against the Red Light Camera use.
Let's just agree to disagree :S

And you're biased against drivers...what is your point? Blindly following so called laws ios the essence of being a good citizen?

Must be nice being a sheep that never questions the validity of so-called laws...

Prohibition was a law...

[SirWanker]

And you're biased against drivers...what is your point? Blindly following so called laws ios the essence of being a good citizen?

Must be nice being a sheep that never questions the validity of so-called laws...

Prohibition was a law...

Correction.....biased against a$$hat incompetent holier-than-thou drivers.
So based on your logic, red means go?

[Fobio]

Correction.....biased against a$$hat incompetent holier-than-thou drivers.
So based on your logic, red means go?

Wow...you should be politician...an american one.

1. Red-light cameras do not deter running redlights.

2. Saying that running a red light is breaking the law is a given.

3. Saying that red-light camera uphold that law is ignorance.

4. Supporting red-light cameras, and believing that they uphold a law is further ignorance.

5. Twisting my words to suit your arguement is weak.

[SirWanker]

Wow...you should be politician...an american one.

1. Red-light cameras do not deter running redlights.

2. Saying that running a red light is breaking the law is a given.

3. Saying that red-light camera uphold that law is ignorance.

4. Supporting red-light cameras, and believing that they uphold a law is further ignorance.

5. Twisting my words to suit your arguement is weak.

ahem....I never claimed 1, 3 and 4. As for 5, that is relative.
Cheers!

[Fobio]

ahem....I never claimed 1-4. As for 5, that is relative.
Cheers!

Problem understanding my points after looking at you own signature? lol

#1-4 and 5 are my points...in reply to you questioning what my points are...

My point: ppl who blindly believe that the red-light cameras are part of the judicial system and important for traffic control are not well-informed. The politicians who enact redlight cameras claim to do it in the interest of public safety, when in fact the true motivation is for generating revenue...paying themselves and covering their own financial mishandling of public funds.

Many a countries have been invaded in the name of liberation...

[KenYork]

This is becoming funny. It is still the owners fault for lending the car. So yes, owners decision to lend the car does make him at fault. If taken without consent, call the cops.

1 when it hits your pocket hard enough it will.

3&4 no, but they help identify ones involved.

[SirWanker]

Problem understanding my points after looking at you own signature? lol

#1-4 and 5 are my points...in reply to you questioning what my points are...

My point: ppl who blindly believe that the red-light cameras are part of the judicial system and important for traffic control are not well-informed. The politicians who enact redlight cameras claim to do it in the interest of public safety, when in fact the true motivation is for generating revenue...paying themselves and covering their own financial mishandling of public funds.

Many a countries have been invaded in the name of liberation...

Christ on a pogo stick........
Running a red light is against the law. Enforcement of said law is rather pathetic due to apathy/lack of police manpower/poor driver education/training.
The technology is available to compensate for the shortfall in police enforcement or shall we say police efficiency {extreme sarcasm here to the Ford regime}.
How would you feel if the current political regime upgrades the driver license requirement AND costs to be equivalent to those in Germany?

Liberation my big purple Bush-butt..................

[Fobio]

Christ on a pogo stick........
Running a red light is against the law. Enforcement of said law is rather pathetic due to apathy/lack of police manpower/poor driver education/training.
The technology is available to compensate for the shortfall in police enforcement or shall we say police efficiency {extreme sarcasm here to the Ford regime}.
How would you feel if the current political regime upgrades the driver license requirement AND costs to be equivalent to those in Germany?

Liberation my big purple Bush-butt..................

I already treat my driving as a previlege and a responsibility...and despite my personal feelings that most drivers could use more drivers' training, red-light camera is not the right means to an end.

As reviled as we agree red-light runners to be, giving them a ticket by mail, in expectation that it'd deter them from doing it again is naive. It solves some sort of public sense of what justice should be but in reality, no justice is served...no one is nailed for a violation...it's a form of justice, that I think we agree, that is a technological solution to a social problem. As much as we embrace technology, this example highlights an instance where BETTER drivers' education...some being scared straight by tear-jerking videos...becomes the ultimate solution. That is why I help out with Ian Law's Car Control School and the cirriculum it delivers as part of its drivers' training.

However, as much as I'm committed to road safety and drivers control, in hopes of bettering the type of traffic we have, we can only do it one driver at a time. Let's get back to the point.

If red-light runners are as reviled as you say they are, they should be nailed under the HTA with points deducted. Not a traffic ticket driven by the municpal police force or lack thereof...in the name of public safety or streamlining synergies or whatever corporate citizen speak they use nowadays to fool ppl into believing that red-light cameras deter red-light runners. In the same light applies to all our other traffic pet peeves...left lane hoggers...cell-phone users...texters...crazy cyclists...Honda's...ricers...er...ok...you get my point.

There are many instances where these cameras fail...or work properly in the namme of the contracting companies that install and maintain them for a cut of the revenue...see where this is going? We do not live in an utopia where perfect rules mean perfect society. It takes a lot more ingenuity and fore-thought to deliver a public solution to such a problem. Red-light cameras...though effective in the eyes of the sheeps, does no better than subjugate citizens to arbitrary street justice...just like the now abolished automatic impounding of vehicles...just because the punishment is to a lesser extent, does not mean it delivers justice as justice is meant to be delivered.

Like I said...in the eyes of the general public it appears that THEY are at least doing something about it. In reality, the politicians are tasked to solve a problem they have no idea of...you know, just like asking politicians to be economists. Traffic control and drivers' education and the lack of, is a social epidemic. One that is easily swept under the carpet by the need for ill-thought out cookie cutter, lowest cost efforts and quickest ways to get drivers on the road for the need to ovecome the huge expanses of land we dwell on compared to the rest of the world.

I have a solution really...not just ranting...insurance companies should pay for all the drivers education needed to bring the driving standard up in the areas they charge more for if you live there...like Toronto. And with improved drivers, maybe one day we can actually turn Downsview Airport into an motorsport mecca...instead of public outcry the moment it's even mentioned.

One can only dream.

EDIT: Let's not get detracted from the discussion at hand. Red-light cameras, I'd say, is akin to the over-charging by the big telco's like Bell and Rogers, that the government turned a blind eye to, because those funds supposedly helped laid the Canadian communication network, from wireless to braodband solutions. I say to this..."Yes, do good things...but don't pull the wool over my eyes, while telling me you're doing something good when the the so-called good intentions are really to mask the true intention of taking money from my pockets." When these cameras fail and take the wrong pic, since it carries no demerit points, means most ppl will just pay them instead of dealing with the hassle. How is that justice if no one person is held accountable?

Also...how the hell is the owner at fault for the driver running a redlight if they are not the same person? That is indeed funny.

[SirWanker]

I already treat my driving as a previlege and a responsibility...and despite my personal feelings that most drivers could use more drivers' training, red-light camera is not the right means to an end.

As reviled as we agree red-light runners to be, giving them a ticket by mail, in expectation that it'd deter them from doing it again is naive. It solves some sort of public sense of what justice should be but in reality, no justice is served...no one is nailed for a violation...it's a form of justice, that I think we agree, that is a technological solution to a social problem. As much as we embrace technology, this example highlights an instance where BETTER drivers' education...some being scared straight by tear-jerking videos...becomes the ultimate solution. That is why I help out with Ian Law's Car Control School and the cirriculum it delivers as part of its drivers' training.

However, as much as I'm committed to road safety and drivers control, in hopes of bettering the type of traffic we have, we can only do it one driver at a time. Let's get back to the point.

If red-light runners are as reviled as you say they are, they should be nailed under the HTA with points deducted. Not a traffic ticket driven by the municpal police force or lack thereof...in the name of public safety or streamlining synergies or whatever corporate citizen speak they use nowadays to fool ppl into believing that red-light cameras deter red-light runners. In the same light applies to all our other traffic pet peeves...left lane hoggers...cell-phone users...texters...crazy cyclists...Honda's...ricers...er...ok...you get my point.

There are many instances where these cameras fail...or work properly in the namme of the contracting companies that install and maintain them for a cut of the revenue...see where this is going? We do not live in an utopia where perfect rules mean perfect society. It takes a lot more ingenuity and fore-thought to deliver a public solution to such a problem. Red-light cameras...though effective in the eyes of the sheeps, does no better than subjugate citizens to arbitrary street justice...just like the now abolished automatic impounding of vehicles...just because the punishment is to a lesser extent, does not mean it delivers justice as justice is meant to be delivered.

Like I said...in the eyes of the general public it appears that THEY are at least doing something about it. In reality, the politicians are tasked to solve a problem they have no idea of...you know, just like asking politicians to be economists. Traffic control and drivers' education and the lack of, is a social epidemic. One that is easily swept under the carpet by the need for ill-thought out cookie cutter, lowest cost efforts and quickest ways to get drivers on the road for the need to ovecome the huge expanses of land we dwell on compared to the rest of the world.

I have a solution really...not just ranting...insurance companies should pay for all the drivers education needed to bring the driving standard up in the areas they charge more for if you live there...like Toronto. And with improved drivers, maybe one day we can actually turn Downsview Airport into an motorsport mecca...instead of public outcry the moment it's even mentioned.

One can only dream.

110% agreeing with you.

[Fobio]

110% agreeing with you.

Actually...I'd prefer to continue to openly disucss with you, in an intelligent manner suitable for public consumption, both sides to this traffic issue. It's not about being right or wrong, man....when we have an open dialogue about something we hope to change.

We both agree red-light running is wrong. All I'm saying is red-light cameras doesn't solve the problem. Its implementation also masks profit driven motives either by

a) the politicians who willingly enact them in the name of public saftey while creating some profitable venture and positive PR for the sake of re-election

b) the companies who are contracted to implement and maintain the system for a share of the revenue generated, also to minmize implementation costs by the city

c) the politicians who blindly believe that red-light cameras are effective and preach this falsely to the public while patting themselves foolishly thinking they did some public good by generating funds and benefitting the public

d) the profit driven lobbyists who lure cash strapped politicians into implementing a system, that like a drug will need itself to feed itself. The revenue generated will cost very little to the city relative to say, community education and proper policing. Giving up this cheap and easy revenue will be difficult, even if they realize the flaws of the system afterwards cuz it will keep the wheels greased and someone's pocket filled. Even if the companies wrongly ticket individuals, the city has no incentive to spend any money to have a system for citizens to plead their case and confront their accuser, in a due court process like an HTA offence. This is not justice as I understand it.

I must apologize that my writing must be worsening as my previous posts are riddled with edits and rants, along with grammatical and spelling errors.

[KenYork]

Also...how the hell is the owner at fault for the driver running a redlight if they are not the same person? That is indeed funny.

Yes it is funny, but the owner is responsible for who he hands his keys over to. I've see it happen where a friend totals a borrowed car and takes off. It's still the owners responsibility for their car and the damage it does. Only way out is to say it was stolen, but then it should have been reported. It really is about how much you can trust a person.

Yes, many drivers are not experienced enough or simply do not have or lost the skills to drive. I'm lucky enough to get re-trained by my company every couple years. Should also be mandatory to take additional training to purchase spacific vehicles. How often do you see someone learn in a corolla then to buy a minivan. Should they not have learned to drive in a minivan to start?



Yes. I agree with your post (#35).

[Fobio]

Yes it is funny, but the owner is responsible for who he hands his keys over to. I've see it happen where a friend totals a borrowed car and takes off. It's still the owners responsibility for their car and the damage it does. Only way out is to say it was stolen, but then it should have been reported. It really is about how much you can trust a person.

Yes, many drivers are not experienced enough or simply do not have or lost the skills to drive. I'm lucky enough to get re-trained by my company every couple years. Should also be mandatory to take additional training to purchase spacific vehicles. How often do you see someone learn in a corolla then to buy a minivan. Should they not have learned to drive in a minivan to start?



Yes. I agree with your post (#35).

It is not the same...tho you raised an interesting arguement. First of all, if a teenager crashed into a bus shelter and killed someone, the HTA nails the driver, not the parent-owner. having said that, it'd be interesting if in such a case, the parent-owner is then prosecuted for not properly educating their children. But you can see how if the parent got nailed and the kid's in juvy or jail, that it'd create an instance where we just let ppl's lives fail.

However, in your instance, where you drive a company vehicle and you operate it on behalf of the company, then as a legal entity, the company is potentially liable for damage caused in the normal course of business. Despite this, running a red-light is an offence committed by the driver and tho if the driver ran a red-light while on business matters, and thus it appears that fining the company should indirectly reprimand the driver, this particular delivery of justice does not necessarily deter the driver from such actions, if the company consider the ticket as normal cost of doing business...like parking tickets on a UPS van. I even saw an UPS van proudly displaying his 10+ tickets on his windshield like they're badges of honour...

Anyway...I can see instances where charging the company for its driver running a redlight is better than no liability at all. But it is still a problematic delivery of justice.

[Hoodzy]

Sir wanker would you care to provide some evidence that red light cameras increase 'safety' and prevent accidents due to red light runners?

[SirWanker]

Sir wanker would you care to provide some evidence that red light cameras increase 'safety' and prevent accidents due to red light runners?

I never said or implied that the red light cameras would accomplish those claims. It is just a way to administer justice, though imperfect since it fines the owner of the car and not the driver@the time but it is still better than nothing.

Perhaps people should realize that driving is not an entitlement but a privilege with potentially fatal consequences. As such it should be required that a written and practical examination be passed prior to renewing a driver's license.

[Darkice]

Exactly thanks , redlight cameras are way dangerous and where did u hear this from , who everystarted the tread on this , also ive had timted covers on my car for 2 years now and havnt been pulled over once if u seen my car in person , you would be surprised that i dont get pulled over more often , as most of my freinds say



Apparently red light camera's are more dangerous cause people are over cautious and slams their brakes even if they have time across the intersection safely without speeding up on a yellow.

[KenYork]

It is not the same...tho you raised an interesting arguement. First of all, if a teenager crashed into a bus shelter and killed someone, the HTA nails the driver, not the parent-owner. having said that, it'd be interesting if in such a case, the parent-owner is then prosecuted for not properly educating their children. But you can see how if the parent got nailed and the kid's in juvy or jail, that it'd create an instance where we just let ppl's lives fail.

However, in your instance, where you drive a company vehicle and you operate it on behalf of the company, then as a legal entity, the company is potentially liable for damage caused in the normal course of business. Despite this, running a red-light is an offence committed by the driver and tho if the driver ran a red-light while on business matters, and thus it appears that fining the company should indirectly reprimand the driver, this particular delivery of justice does not necessarily deter the driver from such actions, if the company consider the ticket as normal cost of doing business...like parking tickets on a UPS van. I even saw an UPS van proudly displaying his 10+ tickets on his windshield like they're badges of honour...

Anyway...I can see instances where charging the company for its driver running a redlight is better than no liability at all. But it is still a problematic delivery of justice.

Delivery is the industry that I'm in DT Toronto to be exact and I have been a driver. Over the tw year span I've driven as a courier I've recived a total of two tickets. The company does cover the ticket unless you're in front of a hydrant or other such safety violations. It's not just drivers but pedestrians and cyclists. Only problem is how much policing do we need then?

[Jackal]

Exactly thanks , redlight cameras are way dangerous and where did u hear this from , who everystarted the tread on this , also ive had timted covers on my car for 2 years now and havnt been pulled over once if u seen my car in person , you would be surprised that i dont get pulled over more often , as most of my freinds say

Here is the article.
http://www.metronews.ca/toronto/local/article/995524--red-light-runners-could-line-city-coffers-report-says

[Hoodzy]

I never said or implied that the red light cameras would accomplish those claims. It is just a way to administer justice, though imperfect since it fines the owner of the car and not the driver@the time but it is still better than nothing.

Perhaps people should realize that driving is not an entitlement but a privilege with potentially fatal consequences. As such it should be required that a written and practical examination be passed prior to renewing a driver's license.
When you have a gov saying that the reason they pull over speeders and have stop light cameras is to increase safety and they don't.. Then it is simply a money grab. As you are basically saying.
You can only have 2 options.. it is either to make the roads safer or it is to gain revenue.

[zoso]

these so called studies are based on people who are too ****ing stupid to drive. People slam on their brakes because they don't know how to drive safely in the first place. the Yellow light and how it works gives people more then enough time and it also gives extra time if it's wet, cold or both.

People who cannot judge their cars stopping distance properly should not be driving

Red light camera are "dangerous" because of people who cannot drive.

And if you think of it logically how is that pole any different then any other pole that lines the streets? it's an inanimate object that just sits there, it does not move it does not existing on the road, it doesn't drop anything on the road, it just sits there doing nothing to get in the way

[SirWanker]

When you have a gov saying that the reason they pull over speeders and have stop light cameras is to increase safety and they don't.. Then it is simply a money grab. As you are basically saying.
You can only have 2 options.. it is either to make the roads safer or it is to gain revenue.

It is a money grab only if you run the red. So what is the problem with that?
There is only so much the gov't can do in making the road safer. Too bad one cannot legislate common sense.

[Hoodzy]

It is a money grab only if you run the red. So what is the problem with that?
There is only so much the gov't can do in making the road safer. Too bad one cannot legislate common sense.
Frankly they have plenty of options to make the road safer. Guess what they actually do have the ability to legislate common sense on the road.

I am not familiar with how accurate and how strict those cameras are set at. But if they are set properly to ensure situations where it is necessary to be in an intersection while it is red then there is no problem. But the real problem is when a government lies to people saying it's for safety when it's really just to make money. It is purchased with Tax dollars as a safety mechanism to change the behavior of the drivers. If it fails to do this it is then simply a tool for the government to generate revenue which is wrong.

Don't give me dog poo and tell me it's a brownie.

[Donshaw]

I think everyone is loosing sight of what the red light camera's are for. They are there to save lives. Sure the goverment may be making money of people who are performing illegal actions, It's not like they are being sneaky every intersection with a camera has huge signs saying so.

But the truth is do we really care if the government gets some money or someone hits the brakes in front of you. And for how many lives these cameras have already saved we will never know. However I know as long as they are there they are saving lives and thats all I care about.

( Don't Run Red Lights and You Will Never Have a Problem With the Cameras )

[Fobio]

I think everyone is loosing sight of what the red light camera's are for. They are there to save lives. Sure the goverment may be making money of people who are performing illegal actions, It's not like they are being sneaky every intersection with a camera has huge signs saying so.

But the truth is do we really care if the government gets some money or someone hits the brakes in front of you. And for how many lives these cameras have already saved we will never know. However I know as long as they are there they are saving lives and thats all I care about.

( Don't Run Red Lights and You Will Never Have a Problem With the Cameras )

Tell us more about how they save lives? Any evidence? Otherwise, your opinions exemplifies those who blindly believe everything the politicians tell you. Remember...one only gets a ticket after they ran the red light. The camera didn't deter them from doing so the first time around.

Some guy who RAN a red light, AND killed someone already, wouldn't care much whether the camera nailed him/her or not. Unless the cameras stop a car dead the moment it runs a red light, it is NOT SAVING LIVES. It doesn't even reprimand the offender in some cases.

Obviously, you haven't been informed of the many many instances where these cameras nail someone even when they're not running a red.

The "blah blah blah...I don't care what anyone else says as long as it's branded as safety...think of the children..." attitude is exactly what these red-light cameras prey and profit upon.

[Donshaw]

Ok .. i don't care who gets caught... I care about the people who do stop when they see a yellow light because of the camera. There can't be any "stats" for them. and I would much rather be a save the children kind of person then. The government is out to get us all and take all our money give it up the government is not a profitable business good for them getting money from people doing illegal things then then so be it. Id rather see it come from there then other areas. And for the people who get tickets when they didn't run it. Thats why we have a justice system, fight it.

Im not going to fight with you because I really don't care just remember stats don't always show the whole story.


Tell us more about how they save lives? Any evidence? Otherwise, your opinions exemplifies those who blindly believe everything the politicians tell you. Remember...one only gets a ticket after they ran the red light. The camera didn't deter them from doing so the first time around.

Some guy who RAN a red light, AND killed someone already, wouldn't care much whether the camera nailed him/her or not. Unless the cameras stop a car dead the moment it runs a red light, it is NOT SAVING LIVES. It doesn't even reprimand the offender in some cases.

Obviously, you haven't been informed of the many many instances where these cameras nail someone even when they're not running a red.

The "blah blah blah...I don't care what anyone else says as long as it's branded as safety...think of the children..." attitude is exactly what these red-light cameras prey and profit upon.

[Fobio]

Ok .. i don't care who gets caught... I care about the people who do stop when they see a yellow light because of the camera. There can't be any "stats" for them. and I would much rather be a save the children kind of person then. The government is out to get us all and take all our money give it up the government is not a profitable business good for them getting money from people doing illegal things then then so be it. Id rather see it come from there then other areas. And for the people who get tickets when they didn't run it. Thats why we have a justice system, fight it.

Im not going to fight with you because I really don't care just remember stats don't always show the whole story.

They make money from ppl who didn't run a red-light too. And unlike a Hwy Traffic Act offence, you do not get to confront your accuser. And it is not about fighting...it is informing ppl who, like you, in the name of safety, gets fooled into thinking ANY AND ALL measures branded by someone else as safety, must be so...when in fact something like red-light cameras are EXACTLY those kind of measures that betrays that believe: they do little if any public good at the expense of true justice.

I'm still looking for any evidence that red-light cameras save lives. The studies I have pointed to and others like them have repeatedly shown that installing red-light cameras DID NOT lower fatalities, accidents or injuries in the intersections they were installed. Which is also why there is a rash of US cities that have dismantled their system installed by 3rd parties.

I just want to open ppl's eyes to the fact that just because someone says it's good for you doesn't necessarily mean it is or even for the same reason as they say it will make your world safer.

[Hoodzy]

Donshaw.. this is the exact same street when it comes to the government fining us for speeding. Does speeding in fact cause accidents.. no it doesn't when compared to the other causes. Is it justified for the government to fine me for going 10-30km over the limit in the name of safety NO.
Police 99% of the time will set up shop in areas they know the limits are set too low to begin with. Therefore it is simply not about safety anymore. Just like these red light cameras. Resources need to be spent on actually making our streets safer. Not fining people to attempt to deter them for doing something which is a very small part of what causes accidents. Just because it is 'law' doesn't mean it's right.

[Fobio]

Donshaw.. this is the exact same street when it comes to the government fining us for speeding. Does speeding in fact cause accidents.. no it doesn't when compared to the other causes. Is it justified for the government to fine me for going 10-30km over the limit in the name of safety NO.
Police 99% of the time will set up shop in areas they know the limits are set too low to begin with. Therefore it is simply not about safety anymore. Just like these red light cameras. Resources need to be spent on actually making our streets safer. Not fining people to attempt to deter them for doing something which is a very small part of what causes accidents. Just because it is 'law' doesn't mean it's right.

Just to the clarify: running red-lights is against the law. speeding is against the law.

In this instance, my position is that red-light cameras, and in the same light, speed cameras, do not deter ppl from breaking such laws. The also malfunction, further profiting the companies who partner with the city to install them. This hassles everyday citizen, some of whom are nailed by these cameras in error, rather than truly detering the behaviour with proper policing.

Think about it this way....if they install a camera at a particular intersection, it means the know ppl have ran that light...hmmm...why not put some cops around there.

Case in point: I work near Yonge/Eglinton...it's a busy intersection, lotsa pedestrians. There's a red-light camera there. There's also a police station just west of the intersection. Ideally, that intersection should not be a problem since its proximity to a police station and bus station means it should be constantly patrolled and maintained. It is not. So they put up cameras. I don't feel any safer....ppl still run the reds, cuz traffic gets jammed and ppl get caught up. I see it when I get off the bus waiting to cross the road.

[STeeLy]

I'm with Fobio. I've never understood how they save lives. Infact, it's entirely possible that they can cause injury.

Drivers notice the red light camera or the warning for a red light camera. The light turns yellow and the car driver slams on the brakes and stops in time. What the driver failed to notice is the semi coming in from behind him. Smacks into the back of the car. In that instance, the car probably would have been better off trying to get across the intersection through the yellow.

I don't believe red light cameras are the answer to saving lives, but rather, better driver education or even tougher tests

[Fuman]

I am with the camp that is against red light cameras.
Another reason that I do not believe has been mentioned is that
Cities have been caught shortening yellows to get money (http://blog.motorists.org/6-cities-that-were-caught-shortening-yellow-light-times-for-profit/)
google "red light camera short yellow" and you'll find more articles

[Donshaw]

speedlimits really hoodzy? give your head a shake.

I can understand mine and fobios conversation about red light cameras thats one thing but speeding.

[SirWanker]

Donshaw.. this is the exact same street when it comes to the government fining us for speeding. Does speeding in fact cause accidents.. no it doesn't when compared to the other causes. Is it justified for the government to fine me for going 10-30km over the limit in the name of safety NO.
Police 99% of the time will set up shop in areas they know the limits are set too low to begin with. Therefore it is simply not about safety anymore. Just like these red light cameras. Resources need to be spent on actually making our streets safer. Not fining people to attempt to deter them for doing something which is a very small part of what causes accidents. Just because it is 'law' doesn't mean it's right.

Based on this study, should you choose to accept it at face value, speeding can be a factor in accidents:
http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/roadsafety/tp-tp2436-rs200807-menu-158.htm

Personally I would love to have an autobahn(sp?) in Canada but due to poor road conditions, sheer traffic volumes around major cities and primarily sub-standard driver education/attitudes this will never happen here ( at least while I'm still capable of driving ).

[Hoodzy]

Based on this study, should you choose to accept it at face value, speeding can be a factor in accidents:
http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/roadsafety/tp-tp2436-rs200807-menu-158.htm

Personally I would love to have an autobahn(sp?) in Canada but due to poor road conditions, sheer traffic volumes around major cities and primarily sub-standard driver education/attitudes this will never happen here ( at least while I'm still capable of driving ).

You read that article right?? It doesn't actually say anything about how many accidents are caused by speeding. Plus it takes into account speeding as going too fast for the conditions.. that Is a different beast.

[Hoodzy]

speedlimits really hoodzy? give your head a shake.

I can understand mine and fobios conversation about red light cameras thats one thing but speeding.

feel free to elaborate.

[KenYork]

In the end, all this has to do with the bahaviour of drivers. Not the camera, or even speeding.

One, If people knew the rules...
Two if people followed them.

I think people should be re-certified every couple years(3) for their first 9, before they can renew their liscense. This is to certify that they have indeed improved in their driving. Many examiners give lienency to new drivers when examining(excuse of nerviousness and stress). I'm sure after a few years that should have shaken off.

[SirWanker]

You read that article right?? It doesn't actually say anything about how many accidents are caused by speeding. Plus it takes into account speeding as going too fast for the conditions.. that Is a different beast.

well:
" Between 2002 and 2004, more than 700 people were killed and more than 3,500 were seriously injured each year in speed-related crashes. In other words, speeding was a factor in about 25% of deaths and 20% of serious injuries from vehicle crashes.
Speeding crashes happen because drivers routinely take risks, including driving faster than the posted speed limit or at speeds that are unsafe for the prevailing road, weather, or light conditions. Even drivers who don't consider themselves aggressive drivers are prone to speeding. Most crashes could be prevented by changes in driver attitude and behaviour. But those changes are proving difficult to achieve, in part because too many drivers focus on the thrill of speeding rather than the risks—risks to themselves, their passengers and other road users."


True, the exact number of accidents are not revealed in the article but with the given the number of fatalities and injuries, they are not exactly small numbers.
You're an adult and capable of making an informed decision. If you're not happy with the posted speed limit in your jurisdiction, then provide documented proof of what you think it should be to the relevant gov't agency and hope for a change. Until then, man up to the consequences of speeding.

[Hoodzy]

well:
" Between 2002 and 2004, more than 700 people were killed and more than 3,500 were seriously injured each year in speed-related crashes. In other words, speeding was a factor in about 25% of deaths and 20% of serious injuries from vehicle crashes.
Speeding crashes happen because drivers routinely take risks, including driving faster than the posted speed limit or at speeds that are unsafe for the prevailing road, weather, or light conditions. Even drivers who don't consider themselves aggressive drivers are prone to speeding. Most crashes could be prevented by changes in driver attitude and behaviour. But those changes are proving difficult to achieve, in part because too many drivers focus on the thrill of speeding rather than the risks—risks to themselves, their passengers and other road users."


True, the exact number of accidents are not revealed in the article but with the given the number of fatalities and injuries, they are not exactly small numbers.
You're an adult and capable of making an informed decision. If you're not happy with the posted speed limit in your jurisdiction, then provide documented proof of what you think it should be to the relevant gov't agency and hope for a change. Until then, man up to the consequences of speeding.
They are small numbers when compared to other causes of deaths and injuries. I have manned up to the consequences of speeding and will continue to say it's BS.

[m_bisson]

alcohol still causes more accidents than any other factor..... just saying....

[Hoodzy]

alcohol still causes more accidents than any other factor..... just saying....
Actually human error is the largest factor. Alcohol is a close second however I would consider that under human error.
Speeding accounts for the smallest factor overall.