Senate passes red-light cameras bill

Senate passes red-light cameras bill

There are 38 comments on the WLFI Lafayette story from Feb 25, 2009, titled Senate passes red-light cameras bill. In it, WLFI Lafayette reports that:

A bill to allow cities to install cameras at intersections is closer to being law.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at WLFI Lafayette.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
tom

Lafayette, IN

#1 Feb 25, 2009
my biggest fear is that you will get a picture in the mail along with a ticket and you were not the driver. lets say you loaned the car to someone else. also there are times when it is to dangerous to try to stop because you are to close to the light when it turned yellow. there is also the situation of the car behind you is to close and if you make a rapid stop you risk be hit from behind. finally it could be a situation that the road is to slick to safely stop ( snow, ice) .
Wondering Why

Alsip, IL

#2 Feb 25, 2009
Why would you loan your car?
Are you kidding

Indianapolis, IN

#3 Feb 25, 2009
Thats ok nobody knows how to drive in these towns anyway cause of the people at All Star driving school or idiots by any other name the person that runs it is a real B and she knows it.
lawsuit in texas

Kansas City, MO

#4 Feb 25, 2009
apparently they havent heard of the lawsuit in texas that awarded ticketed drivers 7 million dollars

the company that installed the cameras changed the yellow lights to shorten them
Are you kidding

Indianapolis, IN

#5 Feb 25, 2009
i could stand to use a million but the officals here are too stupid to know that so why waste your breath on the dumb morons.
wayne

Plymouth, IN

#6 Feb 26, 2009
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/04/430.asp
I guess the senate was not interested in reading any of the studies conducted on these red light(spy)cameras. These cameras clearly increase your risk of death and injury so of course they approved them.
garylaf1

AOL

#7 Feb 26, 2009
They said Duh-We gotta pass something!!!!!
Are you kidding

Indianapolis, IN

#8 Feb 27, 2009
garylaf1 wrote:
They said Duh-We gotta pass something!!!!!
Duh yourself and up yours! MTF!

“"The Chase" SUX!!!”

Since: Jul 07

Lafayette

#9 Mar 1, 2009
I'm ALL for it! If you had been at the intersection on Creasy at Sonic, Tuesday evening, Feb. 24, you would be too. My son and I were were nearly killed by some self absorbed, non-attentive ASSHOLE traveling North on Creasy going about 50mph and never slowed down for the red light until after nearly taking about 4 other vehicles out! I literally stopped just inches short of getting creamed by this Black Suburban or Tahoe! If cameras with the threat of a ticket from "big brother" are what it takes to make people want to pay attention and stop for red lights, then let's do it! Lives are more important than the 45 seconds you will save by putting everyone else at risk. I have the freedom to LIVE too!
laborer

United States

#10 Mar 3, 2009
It is imperative that the people comprehend the nature of a public agency and the administrative state. The public agency stands first as the court of original jurisdiction; which shall administratively adjudicate civil claims in compliance to Indiana's Administrative Orders and Procedures Act.
The way the government prosecutes traffic tickets today is a scam. Indiana's Administrative orders and Procedures Act requires that traffic tickets to be litigated in a hearing held by the BMV before a judical court can be conveened.
Therefore procedural due process is violated when the goveernment skips the BMV agency hearing and improperly moves the alleged defendant into a judical court which sits only in review of the BMV
agency hearing.
Therefore since the judical court sits in review of the agency action and therefore since there was no BMV agency hearing held, consequently there is no BMV agency action in front of the judical court to review.
Your required appearance in the judical court would be satisfied by filing by mail a pre plea motion to dismiss for want of subject matter jurisdiction because there is no subject matter (an agency action) for the judical court to review.
People need to open the law books and read them with comprehension or continue to suffer the usufferable administrative tyranny that is being foisted upon them due to thier singular ignorance of the law and procedure.
Wile E Coyote

United States

#11 Mar 3, 2009
hoosierdirt wrote:
I'm ALL for it! If you had been at the intersection on Creasy at Sonic, Tuesday evening, Feb. 24, you would be too. My son and I were were nearly killed by some self absorbed, non-attentive **** traveling North on Creasy going about 50mph and never slowed down for the red light until after nearly taking about 4 other vehicles out! I literally stopped just inches short of getting creamed by this Black Suburban or Tahoe! If cameras with the threat of a ticket from "big brother" are what it takes to make people want to pay attention and stop for red lights, then let's do it! Lives are more important than the 45 seconds you will save by putting everyone else at risk. I have the freedom to LIVE too!
Do you really think an offender who is trying to run a red light will think about the camera at that particular moment? Receiving some fine in the mail days/weeks after the incident will only be disconnected from the actual violation. A ticket in the mail will be little consolation when a red light violator crashes into another vehicle at an intersection.

Face it people, this is purely a revenue generating device.

“farming”

Since: Feb 09

humboldt tenn.

#12 Mar 3, 2009
RED LIGHTS ARE CONTROL BY COMP. EVER SEEN THE MOVIE EYES .
Sportsman

Indianapolis, IN

#13 Mar 3, 2009
Smile Your on Camera Camera!

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#14 Mar 3, 2009
Don't know if this stuff works.
Anyone have any experience with it in other states?

http://www.phantomplate.com/tech.html

http://licenseplatecovers.info/

“"The Chase" SUX!!!”

Since: Jul 07

Lafayette

#15 Mar 3, 2009
Wile E Coyote wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you really think an offender who is trying to run a red light will think about the camera at that particular moment? Receiving some fine in the mail days/weeks after the incident will only be disconnected from the actual violation. A ticket in the mail will be little consolation when a red light violator crashes into another vehicle at an intersection.
Face it people, this is purely a revenue generating device.
Alot of people are crying about "Big Brother", and tickets they feel aren't fair. Their best defense is to not put themselves in a position to receive one of these tickets. Correct? Enough said!
tax n spend nutjobs

Warsaw, IN

#16 Mar 3, 2009
These kooky dems, they'll darn near pass anything that'll make them a buck.

If were lucky they'll pass an idiot tax and finally pay their fair share.
Scotty

United States

#17 Mar 3, 2009
hoosierdirt wrote:
<quoted text>Alot of people are crying about "Big Brother", and tickets they feel aren't fair. Their best defense is to not put themselves in a position to receive one of these tickets. Correct? Enough said!
Agreed...maybe if these idiots rack up 3 or 4 tickets they might consider actually stopping at the red light.
pull it over

Monon, IN

#18 Mar 11, 2009
http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/news/maryland/0310...

THIS crap is why I'm very wary about how this is going to work out here in Indy. This kind of thing is not at all rare - there are plenty of similar stories in the news about red-light cameras being "miscalibrated" so that they take pictures even of cars that were through the intersection before the light was actually red; intersections where the yellow lights have been shortened in order to catch more people off-guard (the camera as revenue-generator); intersections where there's a right-only arrow on during the time where the traffic going the other direction has a left-only arrow, but the camera takes pictures and fines those who go while they have the right-only arrow; and, the subject of this story, cameras that take pictures of people who just pull up a little too far, regardless of the fact that they haven't actually run a light!

If Indy's implementation of these cameras is as lousy as any of these, somebody's gonna get sued.
pull it over

Indianapolis, IN

#19 Mar 17, 2009
2007 Virginia Study shows that red-light cameras increase rear-end (and total number) of accidents at intersections

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/18/1844.asp

The Virginia Transportation Research Council today released a report expanding upon earlier research into the safety effects of red light cameras in Virginia. The new study, funded by the Virginia Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration, provided a city-by-city assessment that showed significant increases in the number of injuries and accidents at intersections employing photo enforcement.

The change in the frequency of injury accidents varied widely among jurisdictions -- down 5 percent in one but up between 6 and 89 percent in all others. Even within a jurisdiction some intersections fared better than others. In Fairfax County, for example, the total number of crashes increased at every intersection with a camera, except for one -- Route 50 and Fair Ridge. VDOT increased the duration of the yellow light from 4 seconds to 5.5 seconds on August 12, 1998. Research by the Texas Transportation Institute confirmed that longer yellows yield significant accident reductions. Overall, the data in the VTRC report painted a grim picture consistent with prior, independent investigations.

"The cameras were associated with an increase in total crashes. Arlington and Fairfax County saw significant increases, Falls Church and Vienna saw non significant increases, and Fairfax City saw a nonsignificant decrease."

Although it is now widely accepted that red light cameras are associated with increases in the number of rear end collisions, the VTRC report did not solely attribute the overall increase in accidents and injuries to this type of collision. Angle collisions also increased.

"Cameras were associated with an increase of between 31 percent and 54 percent for rear-end crashes overall," the report found. "The association of the cameras with angle crashes differed among jurisdictions, although a preponderance of test results suggested an increase."

Contrary to industry claims, this was not a temporary phenomenon.

"The cameras were not associated with a decrease in rear-end crashes over time after the initial increase that followed camera installation," the report found.
pull it over

Indianapolis, IN

#20 Mar 17, 2009
Some cities decided to shorten the yellow phase to have more violators and therefore more profit from those cameras. It's just too tempting. See reports here:

http://www.motorists.org/blog/6-cities-that-w...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Lafayette Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Lafayette police shooting review awaits results... (Feb '12) Nov 14 Raphele Owens 12
Sex Trafficking Survey Nov 8 Professor Tomerlin 1
I'm Thinking of Moving To Lafayette (Jan '13) Nov 5 Vexed11 11
News Indiana cougar sightings to become common (May '08) Oct 22 Granny 133
A New PUBG Site - Vreecase Oct '17 carrying 1
get PUBG Items & open PUBG Crates fast Oct '17 carrying 1
Elvis at Newport Hill Climb Oct '17 Bveat 1

Lafayette Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Lafayette Mortgages