As Pace Struggles, CTA Claims "No Major Delays" After Doomsday Day One
CTA Doomsday Schedule: Day 2
Calumet Fisheries Wins James Beard Award
How To: Roast a Chicken (If You're an Idiot)
30 Percent Chance Of Hailey
Anyone who has received a $100 ticket in the mail for blowing through a traffic light is familiar with red-light cameras. Beginning in 2003, these cameras have been installed at some of Chicago's busiest interactions in an attempt to curb traffic accidents. But are they meeting their goal?
It depends on who you ask. A report from the Chicago Tribune finds a discrepancy between state and city records on the effectiveness of red-light cameras. According to the report, Illinois Department of Transportation records show an increase in crashes at intersections where cameras are installed compared to the years cameras were not present. However, the city's record finds the cameras very successful in reducing traffic accidents.
The state's numbers looked at all 47 intersections that had cameras installed in 2006 or 2007, according to the Tribune. IDOT found that "although some Chicago intersections indeed appear to benefit from the presence of cameras, nearly 60 percent do not," the report said. The city's numbers found that accidents declined more than 60 percent at intersections where cameras were installed in the same years.
Differences in state and city numbers could be attributed to "different interpretations of when an accident is truly intersection-related," according to the report.
The controversy behind traffic-light cameras continues on, as some skeptics think the cameras increase unsafe driving (slamming on the brakes to avoid getting a ticket) and act as a revenue-building scheme (camera-generated tickets brought the city $45 million).
Chicago will have 189 cameras installed by the end of the year, far outpacing other metro cities, such as Los Angeles (32) and New York (150).
[Tribune]
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
They've brought in $45 million? Then they have been meeting their goal.
They may be installed in the name of safety, but I think everyone knows it's all about the money.
Agree. I ride a motorcycle and it is not safe to slam on the breaks - especially if there is any moisture on the road or a car close behind you. Sometimes the safest thing I can do is go through the yellow/red light.
I got one a couple of months ago, but I take umbrage at the phrase "blowing through"...I was making a right hand turn at a red, and I slowed down to almost a stop, there was no traffic anywhere so I just went.
I was technically wrong, I paid the ticket, I didn't contest it...but jeez...like judge judy says: don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining.
This isn't about safety, it's about gouging citizens for even more money.
Had the exact same experience about a year ago. I know I commented here about it in a different red light camera thread.
So you broke the law, you admit you broke the law, and yet you complain about the ticket. Funny.
It's not like I blew through a red light. It was right turn. Nobody was there. I 'almost' stopped. Tell me you haven't done that a million times.
And I'm not complaining.. everyone knows that this bullshit they're telling us about those being there for safety is a lie. That's what I'm complaining about.
Jeez..I'm such a law abiding citizen. I obey the law, I won't even go "In" the "Out" door at a supermarket when it is being held on open. I will push the IN door open and walk in the right way. I'm THAT obsessive about following the rules.
I would never put anyone's life in danger...I was practically at a full stop. That's a different category than just going straight through an intersection when cars are coming at you from the other street. Or speeding up when you're a mile away from the intersection and you see the yellow is half over. These are different scenarios.
But...from now on, at all right hand turns on red, even if I'm in the middle of nowhere and it's the middle of the night and the only one out is Santa delivering presents, I will full stop and wait 3 seconds before making my right hand turn.
Lesson learned. I'm not paying out any more money to local government if I can help it.
Doesn't matter whether you "almost" stopped, whether it was safe, or whether I've done it a million times. You admit yourself, it was wrong. You admit you broke the law. Therefore, you deserved the ticket. Everything else is irrelevant.
I KNOW that. But can't I bitch about it? Jeez...a hundred bucks! What would the ticket have been if I blew through the intersection and actually endangered lives, the same?
Anyway, I just wanted to piss and moan about it. Not justify if.
No. You can NOT bitch about it. You will take your medicine, and you will LIKE IT!!!!!
Ok. FINE!
gawd!
The red-light camera at Hollywood and Sheridan is directly responsible for my totaled car two years ago. I rear-ended the car in front of me because the guy slammed on his brakes to avoid getting a second red-light ticket. So, thanks for the new car payments, Daley.
The problem, then, wasn't that the car in front of you stopped for a light, but that you were following so close that you didn't have time to stop. It's a basic rule of the road, you leave enough space between you and the car in front of you so you can stop if that car stops suddenly. This problem would be nonexistent if Chicago people didn't think they had to drive in the trunk of the car in front of them.
Ladies and gentlemen, meet Mr. Perfect.
Thank you for that fine introduction, mikely1. I hope by my example, I will teach people everyone the folly of driving like a moron and then blaming a camera for it.
And smug, no less.
Smugness is, after all, the American way ... much like blaming others for your own stupidity. I enjoy one, you enjoy the other, and the world just keeps spinning.
That camera is also responsible for waking me up in the middle of the night with that strobelight flash thing that shines through my window even with the shades down.
I know, I know. Jeez. I didn't realize you witnessed PumaBo's accident and saw that he was tailgating the guy in front of him. There's no reason anyone approaching an intersection should have to slam on their brakes, other than to avoid an accident. Cameras basically encourage people to do an unnecessary, unexpected and dangerous thing to avoid a ticket. At the end of the day, the city DOESN NOT want us to stop. They want us to get a ticket and they've made the yellow as short as possible to do just that. It's like forgetting to move your car on street sweeping day. They are counting on our less-than-perfectness to generate revenue. Yes, people shouldn't tailgate (believe me, it pisses me off to no end when jackasses "fill in" the space between me and the car I'm following at a safe distance), but playing message board cop and pointing out the error of PumaBo's and Ingrid's driving indiscressions is just a bit much. I've been driving for 20 years and I've never had an accident. I like to think I'm a safe driver, but I know some of it is just dumb luck. I've had moments of low attention. I've had brain hiccups and done stupid things. I'm a human being and so are you.
You don't have to witness an accident that involves a rear end collision to know that the driver in the following car was following too close to stop. If PumaBo hit the car in front of him, he was by definition following too close to stop. Otherwise, he would have stopped. The only alternative is that he did have time to stop but wasn't paying attention ... which still makes it his fault rather than the light he chose to blame.
As for Ingrid, she said herself she broke the law.
As far as playing internet cop or whatever, everybody on this site does exactly that in one way or another. We all talk about things about which we don't have complete knowledge. If we didn't, we wouldn't say anything. This is the entire point of comment boards. We only say someone is a bit much when that person disagrees with us.
Well, i for one agree with you.
Nearly every complaint I hear from drivers about the cameras has them admitting that yeah, they did blow the red light BUT
-it was raining
-it was a long/short yellow
-their dog ate their homework
I drive through Peterson and Western twice a day. And every time I pass it I see someone getting tagged (the flashing light) for running the red. And they clearly are.
Now, do I think that using punishment as a budgetary fill-in is a good idea? Or that levying heavy fines is doing anything to change behavior? Of course not.
But don't debate the merit/flaw of a system because that system caught you red-handed.
You have captured the aspect of this that bugs me. I can accept and, to an extent, agree with the notion that these things shouldn't be used solely for the purpose of revenue generation ... I'd say that's at least worth a debate. But when people invariably approach the issue with sad stories of them dealing with consequences of breaking the law or driving stupidly, filling their missives with excuses about why they had to break the rules and how they just didn't have a choice, I just brand them a bunch of whiners.
It reminds me of a guy I knew who darted out of a side street into someone's path because parked cars kept him from seeing if it were clear. His excuse: "I couldn't see. What was I supposed to do?" The very simple answer: Don't go.
A bunch of cities have been caught shortening yellows to increase revenue and I seem to recall (when discussing this earlier) numerous reports that longer yellows increased safety. And here we have evidence that the city's fabricating the benefits. If they're being whiners than you're being equally stubborn about not seeing the multiple problems with the camera's as they are currently operating.
Have an independent study determine what the safest lengths for lights are, add lighted countdown timers (those are just cool anyway, I think) and then we I can get more behind electronic enforcement. As somebody who bikes, walks and drives equally, I despise dangerous assholes who blow solid reds as much as anyone else.
Tsk-tsk. You're thinking like someone interested in preventing accidents and bettering the flow of traffic. It's called the Department of REVENUE my man, no the Department of making things work.
Seriously, there are many good solutions to safer intersections. The countdown timers are good, traffic studies that look to create more efficient/orderly light and stop sign placement is better and a road plan that shares the streets better with cyclists and pedestrians as opposed to this haphazard nonsense we have now would be ideal!
But that's all socialism and I'm going to be put in a camp for typing it.
As someone who doesn't comment much here, I'm surprised at the exchange my remark generated. Was I following the car in front of me too closely? Maybe. Is the yellow light at that intersection too short? I think so. I had been driving for eleven years without an accident when this happened, so make of that what you will; however, the driver himself told me he stopped short to avoid getting a second ticket.
I'm not saying there aren't problems with the system ... the comment to which you are immediately relying says as much. Perhaps yellows are too short here, perhaps it is geared exclusively for revenue generation, perhaps there are better ways to work things. I think there are plenty of studies one could do regarding this issue. One might be to see if we're trading an increase in low-velocity rear-end collisions for a decrease in more dangerous high-velocity side impacts. I don't know the answer to that, but it could stand to be studied.
What I do know, though, that those I label whiners I have been addressing in this specific situation were without question driving in an unsafe manner. Ingrid rolled through a light, PumaBo tailgated somebody and was therefore unable to stop. Their problems had nothing to do with a camera.
It's very easy to be driving safely, obeying the speed limit and get caught up in the mega short, yellow light, sweet spot. You're all a little right anyway.
But when people invariably approach the issue with sad stories of them dealing with consequences of breaking the law or driving stupidly, filling their missives with excuses about why they had to break the rules and how they just didn't have a choice, I just brand them a bunch of whiners.
Unless you're also in favor of people being pulled over and ticketed for going 36 in a 35, spare me the sanctimony.
And I wish you showed this much animosity toward police officers who routinely commit moving violations all the time and go unpunished as you do people who air their grievances for being fined (at full price) for committing ticky-tack "violations" like a slow-rolling right on red at an empty intersection.
"And I wish you showed this much animosity toward police officers who routinely commit moving violations all the time and go unpunished blah blah blah."
The next time a police officer who routinely commits moving violations and goes unpunished swings by the site and posts his comments, I'm sure you see that I hold him just as responsible for his own actions as anyone else.