Red light cameras
 

On tonight's CTV newscast, it was reported that ICBC expects to generate 33,000 tickets, or $4.4M in the first year.

So, ICBC installs the cameras with hopes that they will stop people from running lights, but in the same breath says they anticipate 33,000 people will still run the lights.

Isn't that a bit of a contradiction?

hahaha,

honestly i dont know why icbc is being so hard on ppl driving lately. Like being super strict on N drivers. not all N drivers are bad drivers. soon ppl will take transit and they'll be handing out more tickets there too lol

We have a red light camera at one intersection here, an intersection that is notorious for people trying to beat the light. There are two signs in both directions the camera is set for...saying "RED LIGHT CAMERA" ....you can't miss them. But, it is still nailing people!. If IckyBicky was interested in making as much money as they could off this camera, why are they advertising it? Why did they advertise (very heavily...both on the media and signage) the crackdown on the Malahat this summer, if they really wanted to make as much money as they could?

The drivers are the ones that make the contradiction. Drivers will still be stupid enough to run red lights, speed etc. even when advertised!!! Is it a contradiction if you say "the red light cameras will stop some people from running the red light, but thousands will still do it"? Nope. :D

Time to get a plastic cover for my plates :D

here we go again... red light cameras are there to penalize the idiots. the idiots being the ones that have been warned beforehand, where there are cameras and that it will be enforced. if they want to try to beat the light to save 1 min of their life at a red light, so be it. just like speeders.. it is THEIR choice and no one elses.

Agree with the 2 above.

It's not like these are hidden cameras. What's wrong with icbc catching red light gunners? IMO, those are one of the most dangerous maneuvers you can pull.

I live next to a 4 way stop sign in Richmond that people just don't pay attention to. Atleast 1-2 times a week il see someone blast right through without stopping. Pisses me off more than shitty drivers who fail to signal.
Posted via RS Mobile

Does it have to flash twice (front plate entering the intersection, rear plate leaving the intersection) for the ticket to be valid? I remember reading this somewhere but cannot find any facts.

What about those intersections with one way traffic that only have one camera installed instead of two?

So despite the cameras, is that intersection really much safer if people are still running the light?

I agree that it sounds counter intuitive to place advance warning of the cameras if you're trying to make money from them, but clearly there's lots of money being made from them regardless.



Think about it - if your primary goal is improving intersection safety, why not use proven methods that reduce the opportunity for conflict in the intersection?

Set more appropriate yellow-light timing and increase the time delay between one road turning red and the crossroad turning green.

To flat out say "We expect to issue 33,000 tickets in the first year" is the same thing as saying "we expect that 33,000 drivers will run red lights in the first year".

If you know that cars will be in the intersection against the red light, then fix the damn light timing so that those cars don't crash!

And with more traffic officers freed up by red ligth cameras watching over intersections, have you seen an increase in police presence at that 4 way stop?

Red light cameras are not new, we've had them for quite a while in BC.
When you still have intersections where people are blowing through stop signs, can you honestly say that the threat of a red light camera ticket has been an effective behavior modification tool?

I don't know what intersection you're talking about or how big it is, but is it possible to convert it to a traffic circle? That would prevent people running the stop sign and improve safety.

the yellow lights are pretty delayed imo. if you run a red, you are well aware of what you are doing and are not doing it by "mistake".. of course icbc wants to make you pay for it... nothing is free in this world.. what else are they going to do to punish you for you breaking the rules??? no going out on a friday night for a week? your bitching about the road rules are getting old, sebbery

not really ,

i got busted a few years ago trying to catch a yellow and both pics were from the rear. i wouldn't try to fight it since the pics are soo damn clear that fighting it would just get you into more shit. and i think it only flashes from your rear. the other camera on the other side of the interestection is for the oncoming traffic. but im not 100% on that.

but when i asked the icbc rep, she said both pics will show plate but the reason why they take 2 pics is cuz the first one shows your position when it turned red and the second is see where your going. Example : turning right slowly when it turns red, or taking a left but there was on coming traffic. Unfortunatley, i was heading eastbound on marine and the faser interesection caught me. BUSTED.

talked to the lady, she said no points. just pay the $180 fee, no points.... which i was okay with.

If FEWER cars are running it, of course it's safER.

Duh.

I am a firm believer that no matter the penalties, fines, etc, rules will always be broken. Kind of like punishing a kid for not doing his homework by taking away his ps3, freedom to go out, etc, he will still not do his homework.

Hopefully after these 33,000 idiots have been ticketed this year, there will be 33,000 less people running red lights next year. The thing I don't like about putting roundabouts and changing the flow of traffic in areas which are known to be high risk areas, is that we are bending backwards to people who choose not to obey rules. Plus, these same people would probably be the same ones that would interrupt the flow of traffic in the roundabout and give themselves the right of way.

You know what would be an even better alternative? 3 strikes, and you are out. License gone for a long long time. People seem to forget that driving is a privilege, and believe it is a right. Imagine if after being caught the second time running a red, you are facing a driving suspension for a few years if you are caught the third time. If said moron does not understand the logic, then great, he/she is off the road for good.

In the mean time, I agree red light cameras wont stop the problem, but might aswell make them pay for it.

If you get caught by these cameras you've definitely run the red ight and deserve the punishment.

There's cameras at several intersections on Oak and all have decent yellow times. Occasionally I see the flash of the camera as someone goes through just as the light turns red. Adjusting the timing isn't gong to change the behaviours of these drivers, they need to be punished until it hurts enough that they change.

I used to blow through red lights, what changed my behaviour was a friend getting not 1, not 2, but 3 red light tickets in a single day. That's a lot of money to lose, and considering the number of cameras I have to pass daily, I'd rather avoid that.

Studies show people still drive even when their license is suspended, so that won't work either.

I am all for ideas like sebberry mentions, yet even those have diminishing returns. Some people will still drive like asshats and need to be punished accordingly.

just a quick question because I've been caught in this situation more than once, want to see every person's opinion on it:

-I'm trying to turn left at an intersection (car already inside intersection and PAST the stop line), traffic light is GREEN
-Traffic light turns YELLOWand some pedestrians are still crossing (ignoring the blinking hand signal), I'm still waiting to turn so I don't run anyone over,
-Traffic light turns RED, and I'm still waiting to turn left, but stuck in the intersection, so I proceed to finish the turn, because at that time, I'm in no-mans land.

According to what I've read here, I'd get a ticket???

Nope just a statement about how stupid 33,000 drivers will be in spite of this warning, the red lights and the warning signs approaching the intersections.

#1 don't enter the intersection unless the exit is clear...don'\t enter on a yellow light...specially if traffic is almost stopped as you said in your scenario. If the intersection is clear ahead of you and the light is green when you enter, sit and wait at the outer edge of the crosswalk. When the light turns yellow or red, clear when it is 100% safe. You are already into the intersection and that will not triger the cameras which are set up totake pictures when you enter on a red light.

You can punish all you want, but the fact that these cameras crank out thousands of tickets, year after year, clearly shows that people will still run the lights. Sure, hold them accountable, punish all you want, but people still run the light.

Some people run the light because they're in a hurry and consciously sped up, others run it because they made an error in judgement, others run it because they're simply out to lunch (or too busy eating it).

If the name of the game is intersection safety, you will set your lighting timing properly. When setting the timing, you need to anticipate that there will always be problems - this is why freeways have shoulders, medians, runaway lanes, etc..

We know from what has happened in many US jurisdictions when light timing is properly set - red light violations dropped so much that many cameras were losing money and were removed.

I've never run a red light, never crashed in an intersection, yet anytime I approach an intersection with a red light camera there's an extra level of unease that I don't need to worry about.

Perhaps this is where the problem is - the cameras are visible and have signs in advance. There's a natural unease felt by drivers as they approach stale greens with a car following closely behind as it is - no need to throw a camera into the mix.

Again, if safety was a primary consideration, why not hide the cameras? That's the only way to ensure behavior modification takes place - you never know if you're being watched running the red.

Or, just to keep things consistent - when police set up a speed trap, perhaps post signs in advance alerting the driver to the trap.

Sure it's a statement about how stupid 33,000 drivers will be, but it's still a statement that despite the camera installations, the program will fail to prevent 33,000 drivers from running the lights.

Alright thanks, the bolded part is the I am interested in.

Then fix yourself. Don't burden me cause you're stupidly paranoid and cannot handle driving while being monitored.

You know what's easy to measure??? The estimated 33,000 tickets what are expected to be handed out. Do you know what's harder to measure? The number of red light violations prevented. Maybe that red light camera prevented 50,000 violations. And this 33,000 tickets has no comparison to anything, it's simply a prediction by ICBC. Unless you can tell me how many cars pass through that intersection and the number of tickets based on volume of traffic in the past it doesn't mean anything.

And yes the end goal is to prevent dangerous offences such as this one. Some people require different punishment to change the behaviour. Some people only need a verbal scolding. Some people need a written warning from Police or ICBC. Some people need a monetary penalty. Some people need points on their licence. Eventually some people need so many points and loss of money that they can no longer afford to drive which yes is a change in behaviour if they're off the road. And some people need jail time after getting caught prohib driving.

Not really a contradiction. They do stop a lot of people from running the light I'm sure (like someone said its nearly impossible to measure this) but there will always be those that either say they didn't see the posted camera alert sign or think they can beat the yellow. No system will ever be perfect.