Red light camera installation in Newport News delayed

First it was early 2008. Then late fall 2008. Now it's probably not even this year.

[Confused]

I was all for red-light camera enforcement, but after reading this article, I’m starting to have second thoughts. Isn’t the purpose of the cameras public safety, not money making? Where does a private company, and not City officials and engineers, decide which intersections are “dangerous enough” for their cameras? It’s a shame that RedFlex Traffic Systems would put drivers (and the police officers who would have to do on-site enforcement) at risk at a major intersection just because there MAY not be much of a profit margin. Hopefully the cameras will be installed at the intersections based on safety factors, not dollar signs!

[Don]

Confused wrote:

I was all for red-light camera enforcement, but after reading this article, I’m starting to have second thoughts. Isn’t the purpose of the cameras public safety, not money making? Where does a private company, and not City officials and engineers, decide which intersections are “dangerous enough” for their cameras? It’s a shame that RedFlex Traffic Systems would put drivers (and the police officers who would have to do on-site enforcement) at risk at a major intersection just because there MAY not be much of a profit margin. Hopefully the cameras will be installed at the intersections based on safety factors, not dollar signs!

I am afraid you will be disappointed. This is all about money, not safety.

[Signal hater]

This City will cause red light running by timing the lights to stop traffic at every intersection. They know people will become impatient, and the City makes $$.

Confused wrote:

I was all for red-light camera enforcement, but after reading this article, I’m starting to have second thoughts. Isn’t the purpose of the cameras public safety, not money making? Where does a private company, and not City officials and engineers, decide which intersections are “dangerous enough” for their cameras? It’s a shame that RedFlex Traffic Systems would put drivers (and the police officers who would have to do on-site enforcement) at risk at a major intersection just because there MAY not be much of a profit margin. Hopefully the cameras will be installed at the intersections based on safety factors, not dollar signs!

[Lee Hall]

Looks like the police wioll have to obey traffic signals if it is put in.

[Gary W]

Lets face it, like everything else government does the stated purpose (which is usually benevolant sounding - i.e. reduce traffic injurie) is almost never the real motivation behind a "program". Lowered speed limits in the name of safety are just a way of producing revenue by creating a ridiculous low limit that is unrealistic and difficult to maintain - the speed trap. These cameras are nothing more than that, a revenue producing device. In some places the even sink as low as shortening yellow light times to trick drivers into running a red...low. The best way to keep their thieving hands out of your pocket is to know where the cameras are an avoid them. The simplest way is to use your GPS unit with data you can get at a site like http://www.gpscameradetector.com .

[Lol]

Confused wrote:

I was all for red-light camera enforcement, but after reading this article, I’m starting to have second thoughts. Isn’t the purpose of the cameras public safety, not money making? Where does a private company, and not City officials and engineers, decide which intersections are “dangerous enough” for their cameras? It’s a shame that RedFlex Traffic Systems would put drivers (and the police officers who would have to do on-site enforcement) at risk at a major intersection just because there MAY not be much of a profit margin. Hopefully the cameras will be installed at the intersections based on safety factors, not dollar signs!

you people have been warned about this on topix for over a year by others,only to respond,"Well, I obey the laws so..." Face it.It is a money sucking machine.You may as well mail in your fines now to a city bankrupt.The traffic court has been promoting this for 5 years(from the bench, actually when that fat stupid Judge was there before he retired.
Why? so they won't have to pack the place.Told you people you were screwed.It's Socialism 101.

[Lol]

Lee Hall wrote:

Looks like the police wioll have to obey traffic signals if it is put in.

doesn't apply to them. Ask Maryland.
I just love these Law Abiding posts here , NOW complaining.