Red Light Cameras

AIR DATE: Friday, September 4th 2009
POSTED BY: DAVID MILLER
Photo credit: sylvar / Creative Commons

Portland watcher Jack Bogdanski noticed the other day that the city has put out a bid for a new red light traffic camera system contract. In case you haven't become acquainted with these systems, the basic idea is that a camera snaps your photo if you run a red light. If you're a major cup-is-half-full person, one upshot is that one day you might find that you've received a candid photo in the mail. Of course that photo comes with a ticket — often for over $200.

Portland's not alone. Medford, Newberg, and Salem already have them. And Tualatin is ready to join the club. But should the club be growing?

Blue Oregon's Kari Chisolm wrote in 2007 that he loves red light cameras because they're "egalitarian enforcement":

If you run a red light that's enforced by a camera, you're going to get a ticket. The camera doesn't care if you're young, or old. It doesn't care if you're a shady-looking dude, or a hot blonde with big boobs. It doesn't care if you're a rich and powerful pillar of the community. It doesn't care if you're "driving while black." And it doesn't care how good your excuse is — and it isn't affected by your skill in talking your way out of a ticket.

Of course some people are less sanguine. Red light cameras bring cries of a corporatized big brother. And some point out that rear-end accidents have increased (even if side-impact accidents are down). One blogger is even convinced that the lights with cameras are timed specifically to ensare more drivers. He did his own test:

My friend and I decided to time the traffic lights on the street by driving back and forth. At all intersections but the red light camera ones we counted "one thousand one, one thousand two, one thousand three" for the light to go from green to yellow and "one thousand one and one thousand two" for it to go from yellow to red. Then we came to the red light camera intersection and found that the light would change sporadically. We would count "one thousand one and one thousand two" and it would go form green to red, totally out of sync with the pattern on the rest of the street! Then once it turned form yellow to red it went so fast we could not even say "one thousand one!" It has to be intentional that the city has set the lights like this to trap motorists for the city to make money off the contraptions.

It turns out this isn't completely far-fetched. Six cities have already been caught shortening their yellows for profit.

Have you been caught by a traffic camera? From your experience, do the cameras make you a safer driver — or just a jumpier one? And should a city get all the money from your traffic fine — or is it OK for the camera company to take a cut?

GUESTS:

Tagged as: driving · traffic

Photo credit: sylvar / Creative Commons

About 13 years ago I was in Germany. Contrary to popular belief, long stretchs of the Autobahn are speed limited. They had installed cameras on the overhead signage frameworks. They kept getting shots of pavement periodically. They discovered that the Porsches & BMWs were going so fast they were out of the frame. They re-aimed the cameras.

I was in Aachen. The city had intersection camera boxes, but couldn't afford cameras for all so periodically they'd go out at night and move the cameras to another box.

Fines are fierce in Germany and a very few offeces will get you a lifetime suspension

hal —

My understanding of the Autobahn, which admittedly comes mostly from a two or three year-old, hour-long History Channel story, is that the Autobahn is far safer than our Interstate system for a variety of reasons...but they never mentioned unmanned traffic cameras.

One of the biggest contributors to Autobahn safety is that it is built very very well.

Another is that, outside of the city at least, it follows the terrain instead of having really long, straight stretches.  The continuous curves keep drivers alert.

Another is that police enforce separation between cars in the high speed areas.  They paint two white lines on the surface and ticket a driver if he/she passes the first line before the car in front passes the second.

An interesting contributor to safety that makes sense if you think about it, is that it is illegal to run out of gas on the Autobahn.

I'm pretty sure that causing an accident (any accident, not just a crash) on the Autobahn is one of the ways to lose your license for life, as you mentioned.

I don't know much about German driving schools, but I imagine the driving schools are far better than our's if the penalties are so steep.  Which is probably the real contributor to safety rather than the penalties themselves.

Germany does have some weird problems on the Autobahn, though.  Apparently, it is oddly common for people to commit suicide by driving against traffic with their lights off on the Autobahn.  So common that they have a name for it: Geisterfahrer.

slakr007 —
This comment has been removed by the TOL staff.
godhellyin —

Well, here is at least one article that calls into question the accuracy of the cameras and their contribution to safety.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/01/denvers-red-light-cameras-no-data-just-tickets.ars

The most interesting part is the end:

``The Rocky Mountain News points out, however, that the Denver police's own data shows that it's not the cameras that are improving safety, but rather lengthening yellow light times. The city agreed last summer to experiment with lengthening yellow lights by one or two seconds at a handful of locations and found that violations went down significantly—the daily average dropped to 9, 10, and 16 violations at the different lights, down from 125 violations between the three when the yellow lights were the legal minimum of 3 seconds.''

slakr007 —

I grew up and learned to drive in Colorado (near but not in Denver). I never noticed that the yellow lights were longer, but that's interesting. Even if Oregon doesn't lengthen the yellows, it might think about adding the 1-2 second pause between when one light turns red and the cross street light turns green. That gives those few (often significant) seconds for the intersection to clear and for the drivers trying to squeek through to clear out of the intersection.

sharklady —

Oh yeah, you should always survey the intersection before going.  I actually had this beaten into me during flight school.  When beginning to move or approaching a taxi way intersection, we always verbalize:

"Clear left, clear front, clear right."

I actually found that learning to fly made me a more aware, precise, and in-control driver because of little things like that.

That makes me think driving school should be a lot harder.  Driving schools only pay lip service to those things.

slakr007 —

Here's an article about how cities have been illegally decreasing yellow light timing to generate revenue with traffic cameras:

http://techdirt.com/articles/20080410/011257809.shtml

Here's an article about findings that traffic cameras increase traffic crashes:

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080313/231629539.shtml

And, Mississippi actually listened to these reports and passed a state-wide ban on traffic cameras back in February.

slakr007 —

I think this points to a bigger issue. With more and more traffic on the roads, and our society suffering from a time famine, it is inevitable that rules will be broken. However, I believe that the majority of drivers are unaware of how easy it is to abide by the rules of the road. I frequesntly see violations such as running red lights, driving with fog lights on and failure to use turn signals. Safe driving is a habit that we should all adopt, yet few seem to. That's where the problem lies.

On a side note, if we were to replace many STOP signs with YIELD signs, we could save time and fuel. And save on tickets!

PaulK —

On a side note, if we were to replace many STOP signs with YIELD signs, we could save time and fuel. And save on tickets!

Yep.  Round-abouts (rotaries, traffic circles, whatever) have been proven to be much safer and efficient than four-way stops.  Those are really hard to retrofit, though.

slakr007 —

Since the introduction of red-light cameras I am much more likely to slam on my brakes when I see the light turn yellow.  Each time I'm afraid that this will cause a collision.

ryanknapper —

Good point. I stop on yellow and am always afraid of being rear-ended.

PaulK —

That happened to me last year. It was the first evening drive home after daylight savings, so it was darker than usual, and rainy. I thought I would be extra safe and stop while the light was still yellow. Sure enough, I get hit from behind...my insurance went through the roof! 

amy-OR —

Personally, I'd like to see ALL light controlled intersections have cameras. The rule is "don't go through red", and my understanding is that the cameras only take a picture if the light is red BEFORE you even enter the intersection. A clear infraction.

But then, I live near 28th & Broadway and 33rd & Broadway. At both of these intersections people ROUTINELY go through the red to make turns. At 33rd & Broadway the eastbound-to-northbound, and northbound-to-westbound, lights will often have 2 cars go through the red. Now that second car had plenty of time to stop, they just chose not to. It only works because the regulars KNOW that there is a good chance someone will go on red, so they hesitate before starting through on the green.

Another problem I see is that the yellow is not a standard length of time from light to light in Portland. It is adjusted for the width of the intersection and the supposed speed of the traffic. That can be a problem if the lights you meet routinely are long yellows. You subconsciously expect all of them to be the same and can be caught at streets where they are not as long

The biggest help lately has been those crosswalks that count down the green. I watch those when I'm in a vehicle as well and judge my time accordingly. If I don't have time, I'm already slowing when the yellow changes and can stop smoothly.

katied —

So, repeated studies showing that the cameras cause more accidents, are abused by cities, have unproven accuracy, are not proven to increase safety at all, are usually owned and operated by companies that obviously have a vested interest in making sure citations provide consistent revenue, and proven evidence that just carefully timing yellow lights can very nearly eliminate red light infractions make no difference to you?

The rule is "don't go through red", and my understanding is that the cameras only take a picture if the light is red BEFORE you even enter the intersection. A clear infraction.

Your understanding is probably wrong.  I posted a link to an Ars Technica article about traffic cameras in Denver.  For a year, the company operating the cameras failed to provided data to the Denver Police proving that the cameras were taking pictures of the right cars, were taking pictures at the right time, and that the cameras never dropped below 98% accuracy (whatever that means).

The Denver Police never asked for the data either.  Probably because Denver's revenue from red light citations went from $6,000 to $173,000 per month.

By the way, not providing the data was against the law.  So, that company blatantly broke the law while providing a service that is supposed to catch people breaking the law...and most likely falsely cited people in the process.

AND, the Denver Police themselves, collected data from experiments with yellow light timing showing that, without cameras, timing yellow lights correctly reduced red light infractions almost by a factor of 4.

That does not even get into cities illegally changing yellow light timing to entrap people.

Great system!  I feel safer.

slakr007 —

"...At both of these intersections people ROUTINELY go through the red to make turns."

As a fairly new resident of Oregon I have to ask: What is with people just blatatly ignoring red lights? I see people make illegal turns or just go right through a red light almost every day! These aren't even people squeeking through when the light just turned red, these are people who stop, wait a few seconds, and then go!

Seriously Oregon, what's with that? Is a red light just a suggestion to stop?

sharklady —

@sharklady

As a fairly new Oregon resident myself coming from Florida, I have to say that I have been amazed at how polite and competent drivers are here.  I find most drivers stop on yellow, obey the speed limit within 5 MPH on average, and know why "slow traffic keep right" makes sense.

So...anecdotal evidence...

slakr007 —

Katie, I use those crosswalk count downs too! In the car, on my bike, and yes, on foot.

Emily Harris —

"The biggest help lately has been those crosswalks that count down the green. I watch those when I'm in a vehicle as well and judge my time accordingly. If I don't have time, I'm already slowing when the yellow changes and can stop smoothly."

That is interesting, a countdown clock. That ought to be very easy to implement with the new LED traffic lights for all signals, red, green , and yellow. I wonder how hard that would be to get through the legislators and industries.

Tom D Ford —

Many people only follow speed and traffic laws if 1) road conditions are limiting or 2) fear of getting a ticket. These people will not drive safely simply because it's the intelligent thing to do. Photo radar is needed to control these people.

TJHanson —

Make things better? No. Make things safer? No. Make money? Yes.

Many people who go through red lights do so on accident. Or they are simply afraid to slam on their brakes to stop, because they fear that will cause more harm. These cameras differ from speeding detection in that speeding is almost always intentional-so speed detectors could make sense. But red light cameras do not make sense, because they can't differentiate from the accidental and the intentional. That is a huge problem. Plus if there would have been a physical officer you could potentially explain yourself. 

I don't believe for a second that most traffic accidents happen because people simply break the rules. Nor do I believe they happen because of speeding, as we heard recently suggested. They happen because people don't pay attention or are simply bad drivers. Cameras don't force people to pay attention because of their own safety, they make people afraid. Plus they often make the wrong people afraid, who are already driving responsibly.

scottmil —

I wrote against a ban on radar detectors in Florida and found exactly what you are saying.

Speeding is the least contributor to traffic fatalities in Florida and Virginia (Virginia because they are the only state with a radar detector ban).  However, the number of fatalities related to speeding is higher despite the ban.

The largest number of fatalities are caused by alcohol and intersections.  The NHTSA did not define what "intersection-related" meant, but I imagine it mean running red lights.  The numbers were not disjoint, so alcohol and speeding were involved in many of the intersection accidents.

So, it was pretty clear to me that innovative solutions to drunk driving and implementing round-abouts instead of lights or stop signs were far more likely to save lives than banning radar detectors or traffic cameras.

slakr007 —

slakr007,

Yes. About speeding. A couple of weeks ago they said speeding is a major factor in accidents in some study or other. How do they know this? How does speeding cause an accident anyway, it is functionally impossible. Speeding never, ever causes an accident---how could it? An error causes an accident. Unless you get to some speed where it is functionally impossible to control the car, speed can not be said to cause an accident. And since most people seem to speed, it is like saying driving causes accidents, it means nothing. Certain speeds may increase the risk of an accident, but it still does not cause the accident. 

scottmil —

@scottmil

Yeah, when they say speeding is a factor, they fail to indicate what else was going on.  It is so weird that the focus is shifting from drunk driving to speeding when drunk driving is the bigger problem.

Interestingly, there are studies finding that removing all speed limits will make roads safer.  The idea is that people will no longer fixate on the speed limit and instead drive at a speed they feel is safe.  Almost everyone in the tests chose a speed very near the safe speed AND they modified their notion of safe in adverse conditions...which is the most important thing.

Speed limits tend to make people think that speed is safe in all conditions.

slakr007 —

I’m curious to know how the authorities determine who is the speeder when the flash fires at a group of cars passing the camera and only one or two are actually speeding.

I've seen that happen several times and have worried about getting a ticket simply because I'm at the back of the group and therefore have an easily readable tag.

FairTrade49 —

Yeah, that's why they are advocating the new cameras that take eight seconds of video.

slakr007 —

Your safety guy is saying that the yellow light times exceed the recommended times at all lights with cameras.

Since evidence shows that extended yellow lights reduce infractions, you can't say that the cameras are doing anything.

slakr007 —

What is the problem that needs to be fixed? Is there a terrible increase in accidents at red lights from previous years? Has it gone up? If not then this is not about safety. 

scottmil —

These systems are often installed at intersections where increased traffic flow has caused a rise in congestion and led to people running redlights due to their self interest in their own schedule.

seanm —

"Due to their self interest in their own schedule." I am terribly self-interested in my own schedule and I don't run red-lights. And, believe me I would love to plow through everyone and run them all down. I had my brand new Saab totaled by someone who ran a red light---it also injured me. 

scottmil —

I live in Salem, my wife works near the intersection of 25th & Mission Street.  If I had to meet my wife at her work I did everything that I could to avoid this intersection and Mission Street all together.  To turn left you would often have to wait 3-4 cycles of the light due to the volume of people running read lights.  They were all impatient and therefore block everyone else.  After the installation of red light cameras the safety and flow at this intersection has DRAMATICALLY improved.  Kudos to the City of Salem.  If anyone argues against them it is because they are looking out for themselves and not for the good of the people around them.

planegeek —

Thanks for the example- more evidence that these devices are not 'silly' (as a caller just stated sevveral times) and do work.

PaulK —

I lived in Chapel Hill, NC from 2003-2005. They originally installed the cameras, but after city councilman Mark Kleinschmidt did some research and presented it to the public they were outraged. Turns out there were more traffic accidents at these intersections with cameras as drivers would slam on their breaks abruptly to avoid entering the intersection. On top of that the fine was about (I don't actually remember) $50. But I do remember that all exactly $1 per ticket made it to the city while all the rest of the money went to the camera companies.

Chapel Hill ended up running the cameras out of town and decided it was safer to go without.

A total racket. I was shocked when I moved back to Portland to find that these cameras were actually being used after that experience in Chapel Hill.

gwatland —

I disagree with the last caller about the visor.  I'm 6'3" and sometimes drive a Mini Cooper with reduced vertical visibility.  It's definitely up to me to make sure I'm safe and can see the stop light.

aherbelin —

Well said. Mini Coopers aren't the best for seeing red lights, but it is the drivers responsibility to see the signal.

PaulK —

Have I changed the way I drive?   No, then I do not run red lights if I can avoid it, in 30+ years maybe I have screwed up twice.

I drive defensivly, thus I look on the web, locate the intersections that generate revenue and program them into the GPS, then I do not (if possable) drive through those locations which is also rather often the faster route.

Enforcing this law is a great idea, from a public safety perspective.  This is largly a revenue generator, so be it.

Desolation —

These cameras are rife with comic possibilities:

"Whenever I find one, I like to disguise my license plate and drive through wearing a Richard Nixon mask."

dpatrick —

That last caller was rediculous.  Why wouldn't you slow down or stop if you can't see the light?  Why would you proceed through the intersection without knowing the status of the light?

You deserved that ticket.

PeterO —

Our experience is that these tickets are given for variable late entry into the intersection on the yellow.  Variable lengths of yellow make time necessary to pass through the light somewhat difficult to judge.  My husband has received 2 of these tickets and claimed the light was clearly still yellow when he entered the intersection.  I was with him on one of those ocassions and he clearly entered while light was still yellow.  An internet search of newspaper articles reveals that there is wide controversey in many cities, with data that rear end collisions have increased and pictures triggered when people entered on yellow are common and a big money maker.

I'm opposed unless we're talking about people who truly enter when the light is red.  Mary PDX

kleinm923 —

Have your guest talk about who provides the services for these red light cameras.  Notoriously Blackwater and other military groups service these cameras for profit.  There are clauses that they can eliminate the service if certain lights do not provide enough profit.  I find this isn't about safety but turning a profit in the name of safety.  Do any cities in Oregon follow these contracts?

Strobelski —

The above is great.. The city actually extended the left turn yellow at 25th and Mission to ensure that people would have time to clear this large intersection.

There is huge misunderstanding of how these systems work, they do not attempt to capture you for running a yellow light.  They only get you if you are at least a car length behind the violation line when the light turns red and you keep going.

People's biggest problem is that they don't want to take responsibility for their own actions.

The accident occurance at intersections following the installation of the systems drops significantly.

These systems do NOT cost a couple of hundred thousand dollars to install but rather 50-100k. 

I take exception to the call from the police officer the intersections where they choose to install these systems are intersections that have a large problem with red light runners due to the size and complexity of the intersections.

Anyway these systems are a great improvement in driver enforcement.

seanm —

One of the things that is rarely taken into account is safety of the driver running the yellow/partial red.  I ride a motorcycle, and almost always I feel it is much safer for me to continue through a yellow and into a red, than it is for me to stop.  If I get rear ended while on my motorcycle, I risk serious injury or death.  Whether or not there is video evidence does not change this: I have to make a decision to get through the intersection ASAP, or hit the brakes hard.  With reaction times, I feel proceeding is the safest.

cullenking —

Everytime someone approaches an intersection, you don’t know if the light is going to turn yellow and if it does, you don’t know for how long.  A four light system (green, green w/yellow, yellow, red) would give you a better idea of how far along you are in the cycle.  They did a smilar thing for pedestrian with the countdown clock at busy intersections.  If the focus is truly on safety, you need to change the operation of the red light system, otherwise, it is still revenue. 

hoffart —

Between red-light cameras and the new cross walk rule I'm jumpier than a Coke Cola swilling cat. As a glass-compleletely-empty philosopher I think red-light cameras are an intrusion by Big Brother with the added component of revenue generation.

I don't cotton to the notion that society can be made completely safe. We're going to spatula bikers and drivers off the asphalt occasionally. Life ain't safe.

Sometimes there are going to be horrific accidents on wide open stretches of road because the driver decides to paint their toe nails while talking on their cell phone as a deer steps in front of their speeding rig.

Our attempts to legislate stupidity, inattention or willfull neglect of the law only creates more anger and resentment at the forces who are trying to work for our benefit. Most of us work hard to obey the rules, but their are a handfull who constrict freedom for the rest of us.

I'm offended, angered and tired of so many rules and so much stupidity. Red-light cameras are a waste of money and resources which could be used for making the streets better to drive on.

I like the idea of lengthening certain yellow lights. We've all seen four to ten cars continue to turn on a yellow turning to red. Drivers are still turning while the light is green for straight through traffic because the left-turn green light only lasted five seconds. How stupid is that? Let's sychronize traffiic lights better and make the green light times realistic.

Let's storm city hall and give our Beloved Big Brother a Willamette River Wedgy. Red light cameras need to go.

Anarchy in River City

trurl9 —

I have a concern with the comments from the caller who got a red light ticket.  No one pointed out that the fact that he could not see because of the sun meant that he had the potential to cause a serious accident.   While I sympathize with trying to drive while looking into the sun, that does not change the fact that he was a dangerous driver at that intersection.

Greg2108 —

Several years ago I was "caught" by a red light camera in Beaverton. I had moved a few weeks prior, and even though I updated my contact information with the DMV, they did not have my address correct. Consequently, I never received the citation. In fact, I was not aware of the citation until about 2 years later. I had moved from Portland to Arizona and then from Arizona to Washington. When I tried to get my drivers license in Washington, they informed me that my ODL was suspended. Upon further investigation, I learned about the red light camera citation, the DMV error and subsequent suspension of my driver's license. Ultimately I paid several hundred dollars in fines to the City of Beaverton and the Oregon DMV and I have been ticket free ever since.

aymes35 —

Greg mentioned that the new videos record the time when the light changes from yellow to red. If that is the case, what triggers the video? The red light still cameras record once the vehicle enters the intersection, but the new videos would have to record the vehicle before it enters the intersection. These must be high tech video cameras if they can anticipate actions and record the result. 

lakeplant —

The computer that controls the traffic light knows when it is going to change the light to red and can trigger the camera a few seconds before it changes the light.

Traffic lights have pretty sophisticated computers controlling them.

slakr007 —

I may be missing the obvious, but there would have to be something that causes the camera to trigger. I realize that the video camera is tied to the signal change mechanism, but the only way a video would record someone who ultimately does run a red light is if every signal change is recorded. Then if someone does run the light the video of the signal change is recorded.

I guess it boils down to a question of how the video is initiated. Entering the intersection on a yellow is not a violation is it? 

lakeplant —

Ah, I see your point.

It probably does record every light change.  I think something triggers the photo cameras now.  Maybe they use the same system to throw out videos when the trigger does not detect a violation.

Of course, that's speculation because everybody that supports this stuff is sketchy on the details when it comes to accuracy and privacy.

slakr007 —

Since you guys are arguing over something you have no idea how it functions.

The redlight photo enfocement system gets a signal of the "yellow" and then the "red", it also has sensors to detect motion before the violation line (crosswalk or stop bar).  This can be inductive loop sensors (the round things in the road) or a radar system.

IF there is motion AND the signal is yellow and is about to turn red the motion will be captured.  However the systems are designed to show the rear of the car with the redlight visible and the car clearly traveling over the violation line.

It doesn't take constant video, AND portland hasn't changed from Still film to Video yet so currently it takes two pictures, one face shot IN the intersection and one rear shot showing you cross the violation bar with the light red.

seanm —

Thanks for the clarification seanm.....I didn't realize slakr007 and I were arguing. Forgive me slakr007 if I came across as argumentative. This is the problem with blogs.

It makes sense that the inductive loops in the roadway would anticipate the light-running action and trigger the camera.

lakeplant —

@lakeplant

Oh no, no worries, we were not arguing at all.  We were agreeing.

@seanm

That's basically what I was guessing, you just filled in the details.  I was pretty much guessing that the computer would record a few seconds before and after the red light and maybe use other sensors to keep or dump video based on whether there was a violation.

I was guessing that it would record every light change and throw out what it does not need since it can take a second or two to spin up the recording software (I have a lot of experience synchronizing video with physiological data).  It would be most accurate to spin up before yellow, record through yellow and past red, and then make the decision to keep the video based on other sensors.

slakr007 —

Can we get an answer on how long the yellow lights run?

Similar to your caller, Richard, I noticed the lack of a clear response. I do understand it's multiple factors, but perhaps your guest could give a range.

I'm asking because I often have experienced the yellows turning to red *very* quickly, and I find that if I were to break to not go through the yellow light, I would likely be rear ended. Given the no-fault laws, I'm concerned that I would end up paying out bigtime for somebody rear ending me while I was engaging a strict interpretation of the law.

Also, the traffic fines are *quite* expensive, and it is easy to see how people perceive it as a revenue generator (no matter how the money gets divided) more than a safety mechanism.  I think the folks setting up the systems and timings need to engage a more user-centric perspective, and drop the presupposition that we are all out to run red lights. Not true.

Lisa —

Lisa and others,

I understand your concern. I'm not going to ask again on the air, but I'll follow up after and see if I can pin Greg Raisman down.

Dave

David Miller —

Yellow light timing is based on factors such as limited visibility, grade, speed limit, amongst many other factors.  Traffic engineers set this timing in the office then adjust it in the field while observing actual traffic flow.

seanm —

I agree with cullenking.  I received a ticket for running the light at Allen & Lombard in Beaverton over a year ago.  When I received the ticket it showed that I was going the speed limit and had run the light by .1 seconds.  I don't know how it is humanly possible to make a judgement about .1 seconds.  I had to make a decision to either slam on the brakes or continue through safely at the speed limit.  I did not. accelerate to try and “beat” the light as I often see many drivers do.  I got a $350 ticket that was reduced to about $300 but I still had to pay.  We need to figure out how to use this system without punishing safe drivers too.  

Just be sensible about it - it takes cross section cars at least 1 sec to respond to the green light, so someone going through within .5 sec of turning red is making a tough judgement but I doubt that would ever cause an accident.

gsnoopstock —

There are plenty of things to take in consideration when we drive using vehicles, so we are used to make a right turn depending on the presence of a vehicle (is safe to move) we can make a right turn fairly easy. I agree that this is a strategy to make money and we have to be carefull how we are allowing the city how we can move around in our very own backyard.. So what Can we do? Commplaint? Who is out there that can do something to trully use technology to be safe not to sqeezing us to death with this expenses in harsh times..  I got a ticket when I made a right turn.. Should I defend myself?

Shout out to listeners in Salem, OR

Erubiel —

The light at Marion and commercial is the one you're talking about. 

The camera only takes pictures if you DON'T stop or come close to a stop.. YES a "california stop" IS illegal

seanm —

I have been in Portland when only one car per cycle could get through an intersection due to the traffic jam, therefore the next car in line would jump into the intersection to get through at all.  I think that traffic engineering is usually very poor forcing drivers to non-intuitive stategies to move with traffic.

My wife is disabled and in a wheelchair.  I will never slam on my brakes if there is no reason to because of the way it throws her around.  The yellow light is way too short in most places to allow us older folks to have a graceful stop.

georgeg23 —

No the problem is all the darn people and the fact that they're all driving cars.. get on your bicycle.

seanm —

There is indeed very poor traffic engineering in the US. Even people doing roadwork and the flaggers rarely do things effectively.

They are doing something with the MAX tracks and have lanes merging downtown. They create the merge in the middle of the block rather then at the intersection. So if you prepare in advance and get in the correct lane you never go anywhere because people in the lanes that end go through the light and then get over causing the correct lane to back up. So people who follow directions and plan ahead get screwed. This happens over and over again with the engineering here, like the Truck lane on I-5 north. 

scottmil —

seanm,

This is nothing to do with cycling versus driving. Unless people stop presenting cycling as the moral high-road or a panacea, everyone will come to despise cyclists. 

scottmil —

@scottmil

Actually, it is the other way around.  People that plan ahead before a merge cause the traffic to halt.  Merging should be done at the point where the lane ends and people already in the open lane should give way to exactly one car.

Random merging before the merge point causes havoc.  If you are in the merge lane, stay there until the merge point.  If you are already in the open lane, slow down and prepare to let one person in without stopping.

It slows traffic (which you have to do anyway since it is a construction zone), but it keeps traffic moving at an orderly pace.

The merge point is half way down the block to give people making a right (or left if you are downtown) turn clearance to queue in the merge lane instead having to make a quick, wide turn into the open lane.

slakr007 —

slakr007, 

I don't agree at all. If the merge happened closer to the intersection not that many people could fit through the light in the wrong lanes, so the merging would occur ahead of time. I probably didn't explain the situation clearly, nor do I feel like it now, because it was quite complex. It was three lanes going down to one. 

But anyway, another matter on the freeway, it holds up the entire highway because people don't prepare in advance whether they wish to get on the 405 or the 5/84 North. If people get into the correct lanes well in advance it would create redundancy and the traffic would not need to slow down because people need to change lanes at the last moment.

scottmil —

My first tickets driving, at 16, were for failure to stop at a red light. I have learned from those tickets and drive within the laws now as an adult.

I believe funding put towards education, rather than supporting the infrastructure of government, would increase safe driving. Seeing the accidents and results of car crashes would change minds faster than hitting our wallets.

Use the videos to educate.

rainispring —

The system worked beautifully for me. I received a ticket in the mail for speeding through a work zone. I took the time to go to court, not to contest the ticket, but to see if I could get the fine reduced. The experience was well worth it on several counts. First, after carefully explaining how the process works, the judge gave everyone in the courtroom 20 minutes to meet with the officer who gave us the tickets. Next, the officer who game me the ticket showed me the video of me speeding. Third, the judge reduced my hefty fine by about a third, and last, I enjoyed seeing the fair and efficient process of the system. Yes, it takes time to do this, but the education was well worth my time. I highly recommend that citizens take advantage of this opportunity to see how the system works. P.S. Accepting responsibility for your mistake, with or without an excuse almost always results in a reduced fine.

sheilapastore —

A little something on the way signals work.. there is a "four cycle system" in place.


The light is green, the crosswalk hand is flashing red.. when the hand changes from flashing red to solid red the light is about to change to yellow, then obviously red.

So if you are aware it is EASY to know when the light is going to turn yellow.

seanm —

I really hate the naive notion that cameras are correct because they are controlled by computers and computers are impartial and egalitarian.  Hearing that was like nails on a chalkboard.  It's just not true.

slakr007 —

Hm. The Portland Bureau of Transportation rep keeps contradicting himself. He admits that up to 40% of the vehicles caught on camera don't receive citations for varying reasons. He indicates that often the sensors pick up vehicles that stop partially in the crosswalk (perhaps because, as a caller suggested, yellow lights aren't long enough to stop properly).

Then he says that only people who break the law will have their photo taken. If 40% of the people weren't deemed in violation of the law, why were their photos taken?

There is an inherent flaw in the logic here...

shinylib —

He also said every light with a camera has a longer yellow cycle.  So, what is really reducing the violations at those lights?  The cameras or the longer yellow cycle?

slakr007 —

Portland is hilly, and the angle of the sun can be a problem at dawn or dusk.  I disagree with the caller who says he could not see the stoplight so he ran it.  Clean your windshield and have dark sunglasses in your car.  The driver should take responsibility for seeing while driving.  Take a safer route or pull over if you need to.  Never drive if you can not see.  You can kill someone if you can't see the light.  Our mailman was hit because the driver was "blinded".  Pull over!

BarbaraM —

What is the law with regard to entering an intersection on yellow in Oregon?  What is the definition of "running a red light"? I have been pulled over in Beaverton for running a yellow light. This led to a lively conversation with the officer. I entered the intersection on yellow while traveling BELOW the posted speed limit.  The law and the traffic engineering have to account for this scenario. Had I slammed on the brakes, I would have likely been rear ended. I was ultimately let go with an appology from the officer...

ropegun —

Technically speaking, you are supposed to slow and stop on yellow.  The purpose of yellow is to let people through that absolutely cannot stop.

But, yeah, when I moved here a couple of months ago, I heard from several people that police and courts are extremely strict about yellow.  Which makes sense (not in your case, obviously), but having moved here after living in Florida for 30 years and driving there for 14 years, it seemed odd.

Most Floridians have a rare color blindness disorder that makes them view red as yellow and yellow as green.

slakr007 —

I too was 'caught' at Foster & 96th.  My daughter and I were on our way to a funeral of a very close friend killed in a plane crash.  To answer a couple questions:  the light had been yellow for 4 seconds, red for 0.23 seconds when I entered the intersection.  My daughter's picture is clearly visible in the photo.

Great show, thanks for all that you do!

Brian

BrianPositively —

As a pedestrian and bicyclist, I am happy to see anything to improve compliance with stop lights and signs. I've had to jump out of the way of cars making un-signaled turns and ignoring stop signs and signals. 

Gunderson —

Yes, and just yesterday two cyclists cut in-front of my car in order to catch up with some other cyclist and then turned right through a red light without stopping. I also walk and cycle and have a car. Sister cyclist and the perpetual victims. Who will police the cyclists we ask? Us versus them. Always...

scottmil —

Yep, same with motorcyclists.  Always the victim even though many motorcyclists I have met never took a motorcycle safety class or know how to drive a motorcycle well.

I had a motorcyclist yell at me for following too closely even though he was constantly, and abruptly varying his speed between 70 MPH and 50 MPH.  I never came close to hitting him, in fact I never even used my brakes, precisely because I was following at an extended distance.  He just couldn't figure out how to maintain a constant speed.

slakr007 —

Let me start this out with an anecdote.

Many, many years ago - when I was sixteen and had my first car - I had picked up a few school friends and we were driving down 39th from NE to someplace in SE Portland.  I stopped at a light somewhere (near Hawthorne, I think) and looked back to see a police car right behind me.  (No lights, just happened to be the next car.)  I remember getting mildly nervous - I WAS 16, after all - and looking up to see the second light ahead of me turn green.  I started to pull through the intersection and then quickly realized my mistake.  I freaked out, but pulled through anyway (since I was now in the line of traffic) and pretty much pulled myself over before the office could flip on the light show.

The officer approached and - before even asking for my license and registration - asked me something like, "what the heck are you doing?"  Visibly shaken, I kept saying, "I don't know, I thought I saw the light turn green!"  After checking my license and registration, the officer was able to see that it really was an honest mistake and, with a warning, set me on my way. 

Would this have happened with a camera?  Can a computer make a judgement call of "extraordinary circumstances"?  Can a camera see I've pulled a few feet into the intersection to avoid getting rear-ended by the car that almost failed to stop behind me?

I don't think so.

Furthermore, without blindly repeating what others have said, when there's a financial incentive to commit unethical acts - like shortening yellow lights - I find that to be distasteful.  Without a proper governance system set up, I think red light cameras and speed trap cameras shouldn't be used - period.

burtonsimmons —

Regarding the video recording feature of the newer cameras, when does the recording begin?  Is it at the same time the still photo is taken, i.e. when violation has been detected, or does it begin before a violation is detected?

dogbeard —

I just drive like an old grandma.

I have been in some crashes, I have saved people by dragging them out of their car just before it exploded in fire, I was a passenger in a car that hit a snow bank to stay out of a crash and I opened my door to step out and warn oncoming traffic and had that door crashed into me just before I could get my foot out.

I just get up earlier and leave for work earlier, drive very very defensively, and give way to people in a hurry.

I have been on a grand jury and listened to cases about speeding and impaired drivers and signed indictments.

I have been in a 1965 Pontiac GTO that broke the speedometer that went to 145 MPH so we don't know how fast we went.

I have learned that any driving problem is such a hassle with insurance and the police that it is well worth my time to prevent myself from it.

I have raced and won downhills on snow so I know what adrenaline is like.

Now I drive like an old grandma, I don't need the thrills and the hassles that come with them on the road.

Getting out of bed fifteen minutes early can save you thousands of dollars and many hours of time and hassles and I highly recommend it.

Tom D Ford —

You missed asking some key questions.  The way the red light camera citations work is that once the camera clicks a driver going through a red light, the photo is sent to a police officer who determines whether or not the register owner should be sent a citation.  However, citations can only be sent to owners of vehicles registered in Oregon.  The police officer cannot send citations to owners of vehicles not registered in Oregon, such as those vehicles with out of state or out of country plates.  So only Oregon residents will get these tickets.

Also, if an Oregon owners of a vehicle hasn't kept DMV advised with his or her current address, the citation may not reach them and if it does, they will claim, afterward, that it did not.  Thus, it is only conscientious Oregon residents, who have followed the law in keeping their mailing address current with DMV, who will be penalized.

The foregoing seems patently unfair, especially that part out owners of cars registered in other states.  It seems to also violate Equal Protection of the Law.  But you failed to ask any of your on-air guests re how the citation process works.  Perhaps in a future show.

Michael D. Linick

Redmond, Oregon

mlinick —

Comments are now closed.



Become a sponsor