QUESTION: Do you support the usage of red light cameras to catch/fine people who run red lights?
The Water Cooler: Red-Light Cameras – Yes Or No?
© Copyright 2007 – 2025 Claycord News & Talk
Subscribe to our newsletter!
QUESTION: Do you support the usage of red light cameras to catch/fine people who run red lights?
Subscribe to our newsletter!
© Copyright 2007 – 2025 Claycord News & Talk
No
Always yes. And with respect to red light/ speed camera enforcement, I think the current fine schedule for red light runner isn’t tough enough. I want greater fine and moving violation for those who run red light.
Yes. Why not?
If it would truly be used ONLY for red light running , then yes ….. but do I think their use would be expanded at a future date for “other things”? yes … so unfortunately – no
‘Retired teacher fights SFPD’s ‘Orwellian’ camera surveillance’
https://tinyurl.com/48k5nz4c
Government surveillance of innocent Americans should always be a NO!
For more information, read George Orwell’s book, 1984, or watch the movie.
No more cameras……just a lot more officers!
Totally Agree with you Cyn
revenue generators are all they are, does not stop the action, don’t tend to make things safer. Only something ridiculous like gates will stop red light runners. but feel free to give your money away.
Yes. Why? Because of the self centered immature red light running speeding stop sign running get out of my way because I’m more important than everyone else hazardous drivers. Get rid of them and we wouldn’t need cameras.
No. Simply, I do not want tickets for infractions that may be close (cuz I’d get ’em). I also do not trust the government of CA to have this much access to everyday lives.
NO!!! The answer to government cameras should always be NO!!!
.
Red light cameras don’t improve safety, many independent studies have found that they actually increase the number of accidents.
.
Red light cameras are “sold” to the public as a way to improve safety, but they don’t improve safety, they’re only used to increase revenue for jurisdictions who use them.
Are there any studies that show that running red lights causes accidents?
Cautiously Informed,
.
Do you really need a study for that?
So do you see the irony in my post???
You claim that red light cameras cause accidents, while they create a situation where drivers actually follow traffic laws.
Think about it.
Cautiously Informed,
.
Nope, I don’t see any irony in your post at all!!! You CLAIM that red light cameras create a situation where “drivers” actually follow traffic laws, while they actually cause more accidents. THINK ABOUT IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I don’t really need to. It’s common sense.
Cautiously Informed,
.
You’re correct, it is common sense that red light cameras cause more accidents.
Stopping for red lights(according to traffic laws) causes accidents. Got it.
p.s. Does stopping at stop signs cause accidents, too?
Cautiously Informed,
.
That depends, do those stop signs have stop sign cameras which have the same basic function as red light cameras? If so, then yes, but if not, then no.
How do cameras cause accidents? Do they take control of the vehicle at intersections? Common sence indicates to me that drivers of vehicles cause accidents. Blaming a camera seems dim to me.
p.s. Careful defensive driving reduces accidents, from my experience.
Cautiously Informed, you are correct that drivers of vehicles cause accidents. However, red light cameras are not the solution.
It seems counter-intuitive, but The Black Knight is correct. Studies have shown that red-light cameras reduce t-bone crashes while dramatically increasing rear-end crashes. Go figure!
Red-Light Cameras Increase Accidents – National Motorists Association
Cowellian,
.
Thank you.
Bad drivers cause accidents, and sometimes equipment failures. A camera isn’t capable of causing a vehicle accident.
p.s. how does a camera cause a driver to have an accident???
Cautiously Informed,
.
Since you believe that the existence of red light cameras can’t cause more accidents, then how is it that you believe the opposite, that the existence of red light cameras reduce accidents? Using your logic, if the existence of red light cameras can’t increase the number of accidents, then the existence of red light cameras also can’t reduce the number of accidents, which would make the existence of red light cameras useless, except as a source of revenue.
I do believe that a red light can not cause accidents. You claim and believe that they do. How do they do that? Mind control? Hypnosis ? Voodoo? ….?
Bad drivers cause accidents, whether it’s at red lights, stop signs, or wherever.
Blaming a camera for peoples carelessness, stupidity, lack of awareness and recklessness while driving is absurd and dim.
Cautiously Informed,
.
Red light cameras do cause more accidents, but you believe that red light cameras prevent accidents. How do red light cameras prevent accidents? Mind control? Hypnosis? Voodoo? …..?
.
If red light cameras being the cause of more accidents “is absurd and dim,” then believing red light cameras reduce the number of accidents is just as “absurd and dim,” if not more so!!!
.
I suppose that you believe license plate cameras reduce crime, too.
Don’t matter can’t read my complete rear plates anyway and no front plates on my vehicles.
Good job tipping off traffic cops on what to look for.
My friend’s daughter was killed by a red-light runner.
There should be cameras for red lights, stop signs, school zones, work zones..
Extreme lawlessness calls for extreme measures.
First off, I support running left hand turn red lights whenever it is clearly safe to do so. So no, I don’t want red light cameras to give me a ticket for that but straight red light runners are dangerous inconsiderate idiots and those people deserve severe punishment if/when they hurt others in the process. I’m more for jail and other forms of punishment vs tickets and money grabs when there are no victims involved. No victim no crime!
Haha I knew you would all love my comment hahahaha
No. More government Revenue just means more government.
Revenue source. Shallow dim bulb excuse.
Cautiously Informed,
.
Red light cameras are a revenue source. As an example, the City of Chicago has raised more than $700 million in revenue over a decade on their 300+ red light cameras, and the city intends on installing more red light cameras with the stated goal of increasing revenue to more than $1 billion over a decade.
As I’ve stated before, Americans like to say they’re for freedom, but many Americans actually hate freedom. Just look at how many people here are willing to give up freedom for more government surveillance, all for “PERCEIVED SAFETY,” not “ACTUAL SAFETY.”
Not at all intersections. However, at trouble intersections like Ygnacio Valley Rd/Oak Grove Rd and Treat/Oak Grove, I think they would be a benefit to stop red light runners like the ones that have caused several accidents in those areas.
Heck Yes! Almost every light someone is running red lights many times multiple cars run the light! Do you support laws yes or no? Follow the law not a problems!
A number of Tennessee cities used to have red light cameras, but studies showed that they were mainly revenue generators, while safety actually declined. Rather than outlawing the cameras, the Legislature passed a law that that any mailed camera violations had to include the notice that there were no consequences for not paying the fine: no points, no warrants, and no impound.
As far as I know, there are no cities that still mail red light camera tickets in Tennessee, but almost every city does use license plate readers.
Cowellian,
.
It’s nice to hear of a state legislature that actually works for its citizens.
.
There’s been a movement of citizens working to remove license plate reading cameras from their cities and counties and they’ve actually been successful in removing license plate reading cameras in many jurisdictions.
.
Hopefully, the U.S. Supreme Court will find the use of license plate reading cameras unconstitutional as unwarranted searches, as these cameras effectively treat and find every traveler and driver guilty, until the search of the license plate reading camera systems finds travelers and drivers not guilty. It’s a system of guilty until proven innocent.
.
Should the U.S. Supreme Court find the use of license plate reading cameras by government jurisdictions unconstitutional, we still have the larger and growing problem of private entities using license plate reading cameras and sharing the information that they capture with government entities. As an example, Kaiser, Home Depot, and Lowe’s all employ the use of license plate reading cameras and they share the information that they capture with government entities who are also contracted with these same LPR companies.
.
Just as red light cameras don’t reduce the number of accidents, independent studies have shown that license plate reading cameras don’t really reduce crime.
.
License plate reading cameras were sold to the public as “SAFETY” devices, when they’re actually “SURVEILLANCE” devices, used to “SURVEIL” the innocent.