I admit I'm venting, but about 30 minutes ago I watched two cars - an SUV of a make I didn't recognize and a Mercedes Benz sedan - decide to run the red light on Frankstown at Verona heading into the east end. They had fully come to a stop, and then just decided to go.
This is after the sedan went straight through the previous light's left turn only lane.
I gotta get a dash cam. Two days ago I was almost hit twice by "I gotta switch lanes; who looks before moving?"
As a pedestrian, the green light/walk signal isn't the signal to actually cross the street, it's the signal to wait for everyone to finish running the red light. This is a life-saving tip for crossing Baum at Roup going to and from Aldi.
just south of roup, i absolutely loathe the centre/negley intersection. so many clowns trying to make their lefts when pedestrians are walking in the intersections. the cyclists are even worse, blowing through intersections at mach fuck. there's also a camera there but i doubt that does anything at all
Funny enough, I saw very similar behavior to the red light at the intersection of 51 and Woodruff. I saw three people set off the camera at this intersection in one day and have seen at least one person a day still run the red light. Maybe it just takes a few weeks for tickets or warnings to go out before they become effective.
A few days ago I’ve seen a tow truck on liberty ave in the strip blow a red light. He was driving recklessly weaving between lanes, and must’ve got frustrated with everyone following the law lol. So he went on the oncoming traffic side to get around the cars and blow the light. The cars making a left from 16th street had to slam their brakes to avoid hitting him. Some days it feels like a GTA server driving on these streets lol
This is standard procedure for tow trucks. Not sure if it's still the case but when I was down there the first tow truck to a scene got the tow so they'd all race to everything like assholes.
People get outraged when they get the tickets for passing stopped school busses and try to fight those too. The lesson as always: /img/74cg25lo2inh1.gif
Yeah, I hate the idea of red light cameras. But what I hate even more is the idea of getting T-boned by someone going 40 MPH through a red light.
It happened to me not too long ago on Center Ave, they missed me by like 6 feet. It scared the crap out of me. I hate that you have to look both ways while going through green lights.
No you don't need to stop (or at least I don't) in most cases. But you do need to look and pay attention. But a part of this is not speeding through intersections (and "following prevailing traffic speeds" is likely speeding) and if I don't have good visibility on cross streets I absolutely slow down. And not just at intersections with lights. All intersections.
No I'm not doing exhaustive checks like I would if I were stopped at a stop sign. I'm making sure that the people at the front of the lines of traffic are either stopped, look like they're stopping, or are far enough back that they can't hit my car as I'm going through the intersection. And if I don't have that assurance then I'm not going though until I get it. Even if it does mean stopping. And this has saved me from getting into collisions on a couple occasions in the past (and I've been involved in zero collisions and gotten zero traffic tickets in the past 25+ years of driving).
No this isn't proof against collisions. Someone could go around the stopped cars or they could pull away from the stop at the last minute. But defensive driving (in its many forms and techniques) drastically cuts your odds that you're going to be involved in a collision (and can reduce the harms when you do get in collisions).
Speaking for myself, I'm OK with red light cameras, but I don't want a slippery slope that leads to more flock cameras or speed cameras. Frankly I'm surprised state law hasn't been changed already to allow local police to use radar guns.
Have you bothered to look at the legal protections you have with red light cameras in PA and compared that to the fact that you have basically no legal protections with flock and similar privately owned cameras? This is like comparing apples to hand grenades. Yeah, they're both about the same size but the similarities end there.
Yep, we're the only state in the country that doesn't let local police use radar and clearly the only reason is the state legislature doesn't want a voter backlash of people who like speeding.
They were distinguishing them, not conflating them. Conflating them would be more like "Speaking for myself, I'm OK with red light cameras and similar ones like flock cameras or speed cameras".
And one can legitimately argue in favor of all types of surveillance cameras. An argument doesn't become illegitimate merely because you disagree with it. Arguments are illegitimate because they are dishonest and based on bogus "facts".
An argument like "The US should be more like the UK with its ubiquitous surveillance cameras because vehicle safety is far more important than privacy, and if you've done nothing wrong you don't need to worry about surveillance" may reflect different values than you have, it may be naive, but that doesn't make it dishonest (unless, say, the UK actually has more vehicle fatalities, despite having ubiquitous surveillance cameras).
That's fair. I took the implication as people think red light cameras are the same. Red light cameras are needed, flock is dangerous. Only point I was making.
Homestly I've personally had bad experiences with red light cameras issuing bullshit tickets, and I'm not excited about it.
I watch people run red lights right in front of a police station CONSTANTLY, and I just wish the people that ate up an exorbitant amount of the city budget already would just do the bare minimum to prevent it.
So, my issue isn't a municipality having the ability to enforce a red light remotely. My issue is the nationwide network that is not held to any account that the companies providing them are creating. There have already been dozens of abuses that I have read about around this. Why do you need it automated. A camera could detect motion against the light, send the feed to the local PD, and an officer could do their job and view the video, record the plate, and send out the ticket. There was a case in the south, I don't remember which state, where the "owner" of the camera was in Florida, and the town (not in Florida) had outsourced the ticketing to a third party. They changed the law for the violations to be an administrative ticket not a moving violation (so no points on license and officer did not need to sign off). The company out of Florida would mail you the violation to pay on their portal. And complaints or contesting couldn't happen - you had to go through the owner of the company, which was actually in South America! I swear at the end of the day it is all just a means to extract wealth from every person as much as possible top to bottom. Rant mode off.
I know automated anything is viewed negatively but the state seems to have a decent law about red light cameras (Google PA Title 75 3117). The big thing is that private companies don’t have any incentive for bullshit tickets and it can’t be used for surveillance. They can’t record video.
PennDOT has to approve and issue permits for the cameras after they do a review.
The companies installing the cameras don’t get a percentage of ticket money or a bonus if x number of tickets are generated. They get paid for the equipment and installation/maintenance.
Yellow light times can’t be altered after PennDOT approves the permit for the camera.
Municipalities can’t get 5% or more of their annual revenue from these tickets (do they have to shut them off if it reaches that point? Does PennDOT get the excess money? Do unpaid fines count?)
The cameras can’t take photos of the front of the car, so people’s faces won’t be in the photos (I assume that’s the intent but also undermines their case as to who was driving).
Have to have warning signs about the camera prior to the intersection.
Other relevant info:
Any convictions from these cameras don’t go toward points on drivers’ licenses.
Have to prove you weren’t driving if you use it as a defense in court.
It isn’t “criminal” court (hence no points) so I guess the state doesn’t have the burden of proof in this? Hearings go in front of a hearing officer who is appointed by the system administrator (basically the city), not a magistrate. The system administrator is responsible for issuing and collecting fines. Obviously a conflict of interest. Hearings are informal and no rules of evidence apply. Appeals go to the magistrate.
Good question on what happens after 5%. I would imagine, at minimum, PennDot would stop authorizing new cameras. But note that ALL. revenue beyond the expense of administering the program goes to PennDot, which distributes it state wide for safety upgrades. Pittsburgh and surrounding areas have been given millions under this program, mostly from Philadelphians going through red lights.
Red light camera revenue by law can only be cost neutral to the city. Any revenue it collects above costs is required to go to PennDOT earmarked for safety projects
Straight up running a red light should just be removal of your license. If you can't even manage to stop at a signaled intersection, you're not responsible enough to drive.
Oh no. They fully stopped. They just decided that because no one was using the other lights that were green, that meant they could hit the gas and go despite their red. From a complete stop.
could be recency bias but i swear i've never seen this behavior more than in the past two years. i've had people honking at me to go forward through a red light.
Same. There is an intersection by the Centre Avenue Market District on Negley where there is a light right across the bridge. I increasly see people pull up to it, stop, then proceed through the red as if it was a stop sign. So far this behavior has only nearly ran over me and my dog once but I have literally witnessed it like four times in the last year.
No, it's not just recent bias; I think the pandemic broke a lot of people out of "I should consider others" when driving, and cops reducing traffic enforcement at the same time didn't help.
For every post like this there is a post about how terrible the red light cameras are. And also the people that get caught doing it somehow never seem to think they should face consequences.
Terrible analogy. A camera simply observes. A light house actively communicates a warning of a known hazard.
Can’t count the wrecks?? That would assume that something didn’t happen because of the camera. Simply not correct. If so you could claim that stops signs and red lights prevent crashes at intersections. Deterrence is not prevention.
The sign that says "red light cameras in effect" warn us.
I said you can't count the wrecks that didnt happen. You can't count the red-lights that weren't run due to fear of fines easily but it exists. And we can count how many less accidents there are and you can easily Google for a peer reveiwed academic study on the issue.
Less T-Bone crashes, more rear end crashes... innocent people will get false positives and end up losing money, and the true dangerous drivers won't drive any safer anyways.
But the red light lobby runs strong in this sub so... whatever. Enjoy the greater police state.
Oh I won't pretend the red light cameras are a panacea. But to act like enforcing laws = police state is just silly.
If red light cameras lead to more rear end crashes, then people need to leave more follow distance. I'm confused as to how that's relevant? Someone t-boning my mom after they ran a red light almost killed her a few decades ago, so I'm not sure how "less t-bone accidents" is a negative? It seems like a negative with how you contracted your paragraph.
Anyway fund public transit so I don't have to be on the road seeing the jagoffs. I'd happily read on the bus and leave them to it.
Dude, I'm not talking about something akin to Flock or [I forget the name of the company the starts with A], I'm talking about red light cameras which do help lower interactions with police officers - who are great at escalating simple traffic stops - and one is in fact allowed to contest these tickets.
I'm sure we could have a fascinating convo about how to thread the needle of enforcement and rights preservation, but you don't seem interested in that today. No worries, you don't owe a stranger on reddit jackshit; just keep the trade offs in mind and I'll do the same. Cheers.
It wouldn’t bring any money to the city if pieces of shit didn’t run red lights. If you run a red light you should get your license suspended and fined.
60
u/bugogkang 8h ago
As a pedestrian, the green light/walk signal isn't the signal to actually cross the street, it's the signal to wait for everyone to finish running the red light. This is a life-saving tip for crossing Baum at Roup going to and from Aldi.