Red Light Cameras - Pro or No?
I've noticed that our friends at the ATA have become quite vocal in support of red light cameras. I wonder if camera-love is widespread among their membership base (in which I'm included). I always ride when I'm not working, but I have to drive on the clock, and I've been nailed twice. Kinda rubs me the wrong way, especially because Chicago seems to have the shortest yellows I've ever seen. Opinions?
Views: 446
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by pistola on
-
How does everyone on this board feel about running red, orange or pink lights on a bike? This may be comparing apples to oranges, but I was wondering how cyclists on this thread felt about being in an intersection that was yellow and about to turn red?
Do we as cyclists get a free pass because we can't get ticketed? Is this as big of a problem as cars running red lights? I'd like to think that because cyclists we don't have the luxury of steel cages or air bags or anti-lock brakes that we are more at risk than cars drivers and therefore should have more concessions/rewards.
Coming to work every morning down Lincoln I hit traffic lights almost every 2 blocks. Of course none of these are timed right for a cyclist. Is the risk of getting run over by a car entering or leaving an intersection worth the reward of beating the red light and not having to stop 22 times in 4 miles (I counted)? I sure as hell think so. Am I the only one here who thinks that drivers in cars who run red lights should get tickets due to the lower risk or being injured?
Just wondering what everyone thought.
-
Permalink Reply by Tank-Ridin' Ryan on
-
pistola said:Is the risk of getting run over by a car entering or leaving an intersection worth the reward of beating the red light and not having to stop 22 times in 4 miles (I counted)?
No - but thanks for playing. Hopefully you live long enough to play again.
-
-
I meant yellow light. Running a red light is illegal.
Tank-Ridin' Ryan said:pistola said:Is the risk of getting run over by a car entering or leaving an intersection worth the reward of beating the red light and not having to stop 22 times in 4 miles (I counted)?
No - but thanks for playing. Hopefully you live long enough to play again.
-
-
Possibly, just make sure you look at the cars in both directions. Hopefully they'll be looking back at you.
pistola said:I meant yellow light. Running a red light is illegal.
Tank-Ridin' Ryan said:pistola said:Is the risk of getting run over by a car entering or leaving an intersection worth the reward of beating the red light and not having to stop 22 times in 4 miles (I counted)?
No - but thanks for playing. Hopefully you live long enough to play again.
-
Permalink Reply by Joe TV on
-
Double Post (here and newer red light forum):
WTF????
From today's Trib:city engineering plans obtained by the Tribune through the Freedom of Information Act show programming instructions dictate three-second yellows at almost all signals tied to cameras. The instructions for the rest of the signals call for four-second yellows
.
-
Permalink Reply by Bob Kastigar on
-
pistola said:How does everyone on this board feel about running red, orange or pink lights on a bike? This may be comparing apples to oranges, but I was wondering how cyclists on this thread felt about being in an intersection that was yellow and about to turn red?
Image this:
Bicycle traveling westbound, crossing a north-south street:
1. Enters the intersection when the light is green.
2. The light turns yellow when the bike is in the right-side northbound lane still going west.
3. The light turns red as the cyclist crosses the left-side southbound lane still going west The left-side southbound lane is occupied by a stopped large truck.
4. Cyclist is now crossing the right side southbound lane on a red light.
This was in the news recently when a cyclist was killed. A significant part of the fault was the car driving in the right southbound lane was actually passing the truck on the right. This by itself is illegal but passing on the right is a time-honored tradition in Chicago and I've never seen it enforced.
-
Permalink Reply by Duppie on
-
This is a nice example of cherry picking one sentence out of the whole article and make it sound like the City of Chicago is having shorter yellows just to ticket drivers.
Reading the whole article it becomes clear that Chicago has reasons (lower speed limits), has had 3 second lights for a long time (fifty years) and is comparable to other cities (New York).
Joe TV said:Double Post (here and newer red light forum):
WTF????
From today's Trib:city engineering plans obtained by the Tribune through the Freedom of Information Act show programming instructions dictate three-second yellows at almost all signals tied to cameras. The instructions for the rest of the signals call for four-second yellows
.
-
Permalink Reply by heather s on
-
This scenario is a little hard to imagine, in Chicago anyway. Three seconds is enough time to cross an intersection if you entered on a green light. Even a big six-corner intersection.
Bob Kastigar said:
Image this:
Bicycle traveling westbound, crossing a north-south street:
1. Enters the intersection when the light is green.
2. The light turns yellow when the bike is in the right-side northbound lane still going west.
3. The light turns red as the cyclist crosses the left-side southbound lane still going west The left-side southbound lane is occupied by a stopped large truck.
4. Cyclist is now crossing the right side southbound lane on a red light.
This was in the news recently when a cyclist was killed. A significant part of the fault was the car driving in the right southbound lane was actually passing the truck on the right. This by itself is illegal but passing on the right is a time-honored tradition in Chicago and I've never seen it enforced.
-
Permalink Reply by h' Zerocats on
-
Agree with Heather-- I don't completely understand this but it seems to me the cyclist would have to be traveling at walking speed for this scenario to ring true.
-
-
OK, maybe I was too harsh when I condemned the endorsements of the Active Transportation Alliance in a recent newsletter. Specifically the items they were endorsing were:
1. Allow red light cameras to be used in the Chicago and St. Louis metropolitan areas.
2. Require tickets issued in Chicago to be reviewed by a technician and a third party that is unaffiliated with the red light camera company.
3, Require tickets issued in communities outside Chicago to be reviewed by a technician and a current or retired police officer
4. Allow anyone ticketed to review the footage online
5. Ticket drivers who pass the stop bar and enter a crosswalk only when pedestrians or bicyclists are present.
All of these items seem to me to be making too many concession to car drivers just to make the red-light-cameras acceptable to them. Instead of making it easier for drivers, I think we should make it harder for drivers.
I did get a nice phone call from Dan Perskey of the ATA, explaining that they were trying to minimize the anti-red-light impact of the car driving group.
With all due respect I'm getting tired of just trying to be accommodated. I want to see us as full and equal. But I can understand their strategy even if I don't agree with it.
There are more car drivers than bike riders, but we're better organized and active than they are. Let me suggest that all of us, each of us individually, contact our state legislators (many of whom are up for re-election this year) and let them know we support the red-light-cameras, that we'd like to see the Right-Turn-On-Red law abolished, that we'd like to see the cameras used for speed monitoring as well as turn monitoring.
You may not even know your state representatives; here's a way to find them:
Go to http://www.chicagojwj.org/ - Chicago Jobs With Justice website
On the right side, "Find Elected Officials"
Fill in your Zip Code - 9-digit is better
Click "Find", Click "State"
Send an email to EACH of your state representatives. Even better, write or call them. Remember that each of you has one Representative and one Senator at the Illinois State level.
We need to "take the lane" in legislative support as well as in the street.
I'll double-post this, since I didn't really know a discussion was already taking place.
-
Permalink Reply by Chris B on
-
Here is a fascinating article:
A Georgia town made a law that at every intersection with a camera they would have to increase the yellow light times. The result was red light running went down so dramatically that they removed the cameras because the fines didn't even cover camera maintenance. I'd be interested to see if red light running went up after removing the camera, but still the lesson is clear: with increased yellow times, red light running dropped dramatically. If we still want cameras, why not do both?
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/27/2705.asp
Just because some people "think" 3 seconds is enough, doesn't mean it is enough. I have to laugh at Steele in that article "what works in one place may not work in another", then he goes on to say how much more dangerous Chicago streets are even at the same speeds, and that justfies SHORTER yellows? Yes different speed limits and types of streets may mean safety is best implemented a different way, but instead of guesswork there is an easy way to determine what is the best light timing: experimentation and observation.
Change the timing and monitor the intersection, and see what happens. That actually gives concrete information, rather than guesswork and "we've always done it this way." Saying "this is how it's been done in the past" is not a reason, and not scientific. Saying "new york does this" is not a reason to do it. Whatever we do should be based on hard evidence of what works best. And when gathering such evidence is ridiculously easy, there is no excuse not to.
-
-
Here we go again - making it easier for drivers to drive and making it more inconvenient and dangerous for bicyclists and pedestrians!
The legislation also would give drivers more wiggle room to creep up to the edge of an intersection before stopping. A complete stop still would be required before making a right turn on red, but drivers could come to a halt after the painted stop line without getting a ticket as long as pedestrians were not nearby. Drivers awaiting a green light to head straight into an intersection also could stop past the line without being nabbed by a camera.
Go ahead - driver over the painted stop line, into the pedestrian crosswalk - just to see if you can sneak through the red and save a couple of seconds.
I still disagree with the Active Transportation Alliance in supporting this legislation and asking us to support it.
--------------------
Curbs on red-light camera tickets OK'd in state Senate
--------------------
By Michelle Manchir and Ray Long, Tribune Reporters
March 25 2010, 6:04 PM CDT
SPRINGFIELD -- Drivers would get a little more leeway at intersections with red-light cameras but face a stiffer penalty for driving at excessive
speeds under separate measures state lawmakers advanced Thursday.
The complete article can be viewed at:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/classified/automotive/ct-met-red-ligh...
Groups
-
Chicagoland Beer Explora…
203 members
-
Critical Mass discussion
262 members
-
Chicago Randonneurs
269 members
-
Walk Bike Transit
63 members
-
British Bicycles of Chic…
172 members
© 2008-2016 The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.
Powered by
