Submitted by Baroness-Ann Da... (not verified) on Mon, 2012-01-30 18:12
Neighborhood/City:
Garfield Park (Chicago)
I do not think that Governor Quinn should reject Rahm Emanuel's plan to expand red-light cameras. These cameras are a necessity when it comes to preventing accidents involving motor vehicles and pedestrians, and I highly support Mayor Emanuel's plan to install more red-light cameras throughout the city because of this.
Submitted by Josephine (not verified) on Mon, 2012-01-30 19:09
Neighborhood/City:
Lakeview East (Chicago)
I would like to see statistics on the efficacy of the cameras. I think we need to install countdowns to give motorists an idea of how much time they have to get through the intersection.
Submitted by Robert Kastigar (not verified) on Mon, 2012-01-30 19:37
Neighborhood/City:
North Park (Chicago)
If you're traveling 30 MPH (the speed limit on arterial streets in Chicago) and the yellow light is 3-seconds (the minimum length at any intersection in Chicago) they you will be about 145-150 feed from the intersection when the transition from green to red begins.
That's plenty of time to stop slowly.
You only get a ticket if you enter the intersection when the light is red. You don't get a ticket if you enter the intersection when the light is yellow.
Submitted by Vitaliy Shtym (not verified) on Mon, 2012-01-30 21:49
Neighborhood/City:
Jefferson Park (Chicago)
I personally have never gotten a red light camera ticket, and i know that this "law" would make intersections more dangerous. In most cases people speed up slightly coming to an intersection when light turns yellow just in case and in this situation going 33mph will yield a ticket so now people will be slamming on their brakes when light turns yellow so they don't get screwed. the math you just did would not apply even in perfect world. Don't forget no one drives 30 in the city, flow of traffic is usually between 35-40.
Submitted by BARNET FAGEL (not verified) on Tue, 2012-01-31 18:45
Neighborhood/City:
Buffalo Grove (Suburbs)
Anyone who has studied this problem knows three things about Chicago's red light camer/traffic signals.
1. Three seconds of yellow is not enough time because the proper observance of perception/reaction time is ignored.
2. Forensic video analysis reveals too many camera-equipped intersections display less than three seconds because their control timers are set at the bare minimums, signals have a turn on delay and camera sensing can influenced by induction loop lead and lag settings. The doesn't check the timing except by just "eye-balling it". State law provides for a properly engineered amount of steady yellow time using the street's traffic approach speed, not the posted speed. Even the city's web site has acknowledged this.
3. The city's municipal judges use video software in determining these tickets which does not allow them to view videos frame by frame and lacks an accurate timing mechanism to see if the yellow lights are legit. The judges don't observe the additional second of yellow time allowed on streets with 35 MPH or higher speed limits due to lack of proper training how curious. Three seconds is not enough time for semi-trucks, people over 60 and buses to stop, just ask the CTA. Newton's Second Law of Motion is being routinely broken by the city. Theticketdoctor.net
Submitted by David Burns (not verified) on Mon, 2012-01-30 19:16
Neighborhood/City:
Beverly / Mt Greenwood (Chicago)
If the mayor is so concerned about the intersections by the schools then take the ones away from corners that are not at schools and relocate them. I just have problems with them trying to make money that way because the day the cameras stop catching speeders they will have to find another way to make money to pay the bills. I say the time is now to find ways to cut the money that they are paying out anyways
Submitted by BARNET FAGEL (not verified) on Tue, 2012-01-31 18:54
Neighborhood/City:
Buffalo Grove (Suburbs)
Letter to Governor Quinn;
Dear Governor Quinn,
This communication points out notable facts about Illinois’ financial love affair red light cameras.
· Chicago has more (387) red light cameras than any other city in North America!
· Chicago fined motorists over $65 Million in 2009 for just red light camera violations, more than any other U.S. city!
· Chicago has distinguished itself as the only city to purchase a red light camera system rather than lease from a camera system vendor, a large capital expenditure.
· Chicago signed a $50M five-year camera service contract with Redflex!
· Chicago does not budget traffic signal annually maintenance funds! The City’s Street Electrical Department depends on motorists to call them about traffic signal failures!
· Chicago’s camera-equipped traffic signal intersections do not comply with Illinois Traffic Safety Memorandum 2-07 red light camera safety specifications due to home rule provisions!
· Suburban and out of area drivers traveling to Chicago on surface streets are greeted with traffic signals with fleeting yellow lights at least one second shorter, usurping motorists out of 44 feet of stopping distance (dilemma zone) at 30 MPH at each intersection! This causes deviously dangerous traffic disruptions shown to increase rear-end crashes and injuries. While camera supporters will point out decreases in T-Bone accidents, the figures are always in percentages because there are typically five to seven times more rear-end collisions than T-Bones.
· Independent forensic video analysis has positively proven at least a hundred or more of Chicago’s red light camera equipped intersections’ traffic signals consistently display less than the three second Federal minimum steady yellow signal interval. This short yellow time also contrasts the Chicago’s own and IDOT’s traffic signal timing engineering policy of a minimum of three seconds. Shorter yellows mean more green money for Chicago’s general fund without using any of the funds to directly upgrade traffic signal equipment to state regulations due to “home rule”.
I implore you Governor to VETO the Automatic Speed Camera Bill, thank you.
Submitted by Eli A (not verified) on Mon, 2012-01-30 19:23
Neighborhood/City:
Rogers Park (Chicago)
The red light camera has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with money. Lets start looking at TIF funds and using them more wisely before wanting the city to look like a camera touting metropolitan. Why are other cities reducing or outright eliminating red light cameras?....because the reason for them being around is plain old revenue. As for kids being in danger near school intersections....higher crossing guards part time if they have a job they spend money and that generates tax dollars...oh wait that eats into profit.
Submitted by Robert Kastigar (not verified) on Mon, 2012-01-30 19:33
Neighborhood/City:
North Park (Chicago)
You talked about red-light cameras, but isn't the issue about the law permitting cameras to issue speeding tickets?
The law permitting the use of speed cameras was passed and given to the governor on December 8th.
Why would added law be needed for red light cameras, since they are already permitted? The law allowing cameras to monitor speeding is what's really needed.
Of course you're going to hear a lot more opposition to these technologies to enforce the law. This is using technology to enforce the law, which frees up the police to enforce crimes against people, like theft, rape, murder, and gang violence.
The only people against red-light cameras and speed cameras are those that break the law, and they use the "right to privacy" as a support of their opposition.
We need both red-light cameras and speed cameras in Chicago to make our streets safer for children, seniors, and all pedestrians. Public space includes more than roads for cars.
Submitted by BARNET FAGEL (not verified) on Tue, 2012-01-31 19:04
Neighborhood/City:
Buffalo Grove (Suburbs)
What you don't know, what was revealed by CDOT is the speed sensor they have chosen to measure our traffic speed has a 20% tolerance. Drivers trying to obey the speed law are sighted by inaccurated sensors, that's unlawful sir. And no independent oversight or certification. Another cash cow except its the public that's realistically going to pay a tax not a ticket. The cameras have yet to prove they provide a safety benefit!
Submitted by SLM (not verified) on Fri, 2012-02-03 11:39
Neighborhood/City:
Lincoln Park (Chicago)
Hey Robert, I respect your views but totally disagree. This whole thing is just another way to extort money from the people of this great city. Are you from Chicago? If so how long have you been here and have you paid attention to what's going on? It's evident, this is about money. Please wake up and not be so docile and sheepish. I'm not going to fill this post with stats, but I will leave you with this: On Kingsbury and Ontario, there use to be a red light camera, after that red light cam strategic positioning didn't generate enough revenue, they moved it. Hopefully, this can let you see that it's not about protecting the people.....it's a business.
In regards to you generalizing people that are against this as speeders and whatever you said, just wait until you get a ticket for goint 1 mile over limit.
Submitted by Taras Hryniw (not verified) on Mon, 2012-01-30 19:45
ABSOLUTELY Quinn should veto the speed cam bill. This bill is nothing more than a grab for money. Speed cams are not a good idea and will not increase safety - most pedestrian accidents happen as a failure to yield situation, not a speeding situation. But hey, you can't set up a cam for failure to yield, so let's just set up speed cams!
Submitted by Vitaliy Shtym (not verified) on Mon, 2012-01-30 21:40
Neighborhood/City:
Jefferson Park (Chicago)
This will create more accidents, just like red light cameras themselves.
This whole idea is just another way to ticket people, there will be much more tickets issued. Like it wasn't bad enough when they sold parking meters.
Submitted by Lynn Smith (not verified) on Tue, 2012-01-31 00:28
Neighborhood/City:
Ashburn / West Lawn / Ford City (Chicago)
It's another tactic to make money. The mayor likes to add "it's for the safety of the kids." Who is going to argue with that? But it's not true! There has not been problems with kids being run down near schools. These cameras cause more accidents than prevent. Everything he has done has cost the citizens more money. Instead of asking the Police Superintendent, who is his puppet and knows nothing about the streets of Chicago being that he just got here. Why not ask the 20 year police veteran who has worked that particular area forever?
Submitted by richard o (not verified) on Tue, 2012-01-31 10:24
Neighborhood/City:
Lakeview (Chicago)
Where are the statistics to support the mayor's claim? How many kids have been hit by cars near their school in 2011? I recall a lot of reports of cars hitting pedestrians but cannot recall even one of a kid hit near his/her school specifically. If car vs kid safety is the priority rather than revenue why haven't we heard significant reports of this happening? We're going to put red light cameras near schools - what about all those schools that are in the middle of a community and not near anything other than side streets? How far away can a camera be put from a school to still be said to be protecting school kids (and if the answer is anything other than from school door to home door doesn't that imply revenue rather than safety)? If, as the mayor says, it is a safety only issue will the cameras be turned off at those times that children are not present (holidays, after/before school hours, weekends etc)?
Too much of this sonnds like it is just a revenue grab rather than safety and so should be vetoed.
Submitted by Howard N. (not verified) on Tue, 2012-01-31 16:25
Governor Quinn should approve the use of red light cameras around schools and parks. Children can be spontaneous and need to be protected. Even one accident due to speeding is one too many. If people obey the speed limit, which they should do anyways, then the red light camera is simply another reminder to drive safely.
Submitted by BARNET FAGEL (not verified) on Tue, 2012-01-31 18:13
Neighborhood/City:
Buffalo Grove (Suburbs)
Cameras can't on any level "prevent" crashes. First, you must examine the Federal Highway Administration statistics which are eye-opening. The overwhelming first cause of red light violations are drunk drivers 38%. The second cause are First Responders, Fire Trucks and para paramedics 31%. The third cause are distracted drivers and those drivers influenced by road rage 26%. Cameras don't and can't stop any of these. The City has yet to publish any independent, peer reviewed reports of any camera safety benefits. When camera referendums are voted on cameras lose 98% of the time by public vote. The city claimed a 20% crash reduction, the Tribune with the same statistics, reported a 5% INCREASE in crashes. 3 seconds of yellow is not enough yellow time, Federal guidelines prescribe 4 seconds for 30 MPH with 60 foot wide intersections. The Mayor tried to equate 5 MPH over the limit to driveby gang shootings. Sorry, that doesn't hold any water, IT'S ONLY ABOUT THE MONEY. LESS TRAFFIC SIGNAL YELLOW SIGNAL THEN MORE GREEN CASH. Theticketdoctor.net
Submitted by James C. Walker (not verified) on Tue, 2012-01-31 21:42
Neighborhood/City:
Loop (Chicago)
The proposed new speed cameras for Chicago are 99.99999999% about revenue and maybe as much as 0.000000001% about safety. It is a pure and simple revenue grab that the Governor should veto. If there were any justice, the Governor would work to prohibit ALL forms of ticket cameras, because they are always revenue grabs based on deliberately faulty engineering set to maximize ticket revenue at the expense of reduced safety.
See the science on our website. James C. Walker, National Motorists Association, www.motorists.org, Ann Arbor, MI (frequent visitor to Chicagoland)
Submitted by James C. Walker (not verified) on Tue, 2012-01-31 21:43
Neighborhood/City:
Loop (Chicago)
The proposed new speed cameras for Chicago are 99.99999999% about revenue and maybe as much as 0.000000001% about safety. It is a pure and simple revenue grab that the Governor should veto. If there were any justice, the Governor would work to prohibit ALL forms of ticket cameras, because they are always revenue grabs based on deliberately faulty engineering set to maximize ticket revenue at the expense of reduced safety.
See the science on our website. James C. Walker, National Motorists Association, www.motorists.org, Ann Arbor, MI (frequent visitor to Chicagoland)
Submitted by alexia (not verified) on Sun, 2012-02-05 22:27
now i guess we are all robots and are so perfect that none of us make mistakes hello lawmakers we are humans not robots until we have cars drive themselves on the road then dont put your speeding law.also if u do put the speeding cameras u better put alot of good big noticable zone signs and speed limits signs. trying to rip off the community because the city and state is out of money. how about doing it in a nice fair way politicians! now we are going to be worse than LA in traffic nice job emmanuel buen trabajo im sure not voting for u ever!
Submitted by Howard N. (not verified) on Mon, 2012-02-06 18:18
I wonder if the use of red light cameras will free up police from sitting in their cars with speed guns and, instead, being used to tackle other crimes. If so, this is very important given the limitations in the city's budget. As long as folks insist on speeding, the city should tackle this as efficiently as possible.
Submitted by Betty B. (not verified) on Mon, 2012-02-06 19:18
Neighborhood/City:
Lincoln Park (Chicago)
What's wrong with giving people who are speeding tickets? I walk a lot in my neighborhood and feel like I'm taking my life in my hands when I cross the street at a 4-way stop sign. Drivers get up to 50mph in a single block between stop signs. They don't want to stop at stop signs. Forget about "pedestrian crosswalks."
Submitted by The Aging Worker (not verified) on Wed, 2012-02-15 19:44
Neighborhood/City:
Portage Park (Chicago)
On tonight's program (2/15), Ald. Dowell stated that in a 5-year period, there have been NINE HUNDRED crashes involving children. REALLY?! That's BUNK!! They'd be leading off the news with this dilemma, just as if another CPS student got shot.
Federal stats, listed from 2005-09, showed 251 pedestrian-related accidents, less than half of which involved speeding and less than one-quarter involved speed zones. Nine hundred kids. . .sheesh.
Submitted by Peter Nadreau (not verified) on Mon, 2012-02-20 02:50
Since I can't post a link, I'll just tell you to Google red light camera los angeles and read the first CBS link at the top. Red light cameras will be outlawed nationwide in the next decade. I guarantee it. Not that I expect the Liberals to listen to reason but....the mayor & governor might want to think twice about adding anymore. There are going to be 1,000s of lawsuits once this is settled.
Submitted by Jim (not verified) on Mon, 2012-02-27 16:33
Neighborhood/City:
Lincoln Park (Chicago)
With or without cameras, the traffic lights are supposed to be a safety measure. The question is actually about enforcement, that is, personal discipline to drive safely and legal enforcement by officers. The consequences are serious when it comes to cars running into each other or into pedestrians: lives are at stake. Having faced guy in a pickup truck bearing down on me in a clearly marked intersection yelling "Get out of my f-ing way," I wonder if we have lost sight of the values of human lives in this important issue. Is waiting a few more seconds at a light worth risking the life of a human being?
Submitted by Stingray (not verified) on Wed, 2012-02-29 23:02
Neighborhood/City:
Villa Park (Suburbs)
The camera system is great for indentifying facts about crashes and blatant disregard for safety. While many photos taken are disregarded without being fined there are many municipalities that certainly have "abused" the technology and use it as a cash cow. Note that while many new units are installed there are also many taken down only because they aren't profitable. Hopefully that correlates to a safer intersection. However, there are no guarantees. The camera's still up then would appear to be unsafe/hazardous intersections if they mandate that type of "constant" supervision. As previously posted, if that's the case why isn't there an officer posted there? Officers are posted at school intersections routinely, without fail. Why not just camera's at the school intersections as opposed to the officers posted at schools during arrival & departure times? What? Not the possibility of a cash cow? Also, those that have been pulled over by a police officer for an infraction aren't always ticketed. It's the officers discretion on that. Most police officers likely issue a warning (written or verbal) if the infraction wasn't due to intentional unsafe action. With camera enforcement one is presumed guilty and not under like circumstances of being pulled over with the opportunity to be dismissed with a warning.
The other issue is upon being pulled over the officer investigates immediately who the driver is. If you did the deed the officer deals with that party. The camera system cannot accurately do that.
I was appalled at the notification I received because I hadn't been at the listed intersection. How'd they get that pic of my car? Then I happened to go through my calendar in having reviewed the listed date. The car was at the shop, the mechanic test drove the car apparently about a 1/4 mile & obtained the infraction for me. The pics don't show much. VP says the the car was slowed to about 3mph but not stopped prior to the right turn. They admitted that cross traffic had left turn arrows only at that moment. So here's the magic question. Would an officer have pulled the car over? If so, would they issue a ticket or warning?
Submitted by Roger (not verified) on Tue, 2012-04-24 20:44
As a person who lives out of state and received one of these tickets, I am completely against these cameras. I may have ran a red light, but there was no intent. I did not know where I was and was looking for a road. I accidentally ran the light and then got a ticket. The company failed to send me notice of the citation and the next thing I know, I received a collection agency notice stating that I owed $200.00. These cameras are unconstitutional.
Video Archive
Expansion of Red-Light Cameras
I do not think that Governor Quinn should reject Rahm Emanuel's plan to expand red-light cameras. These cameras are a necessity when it comes to preventing accidents involving motor vehicles and pedestrians, and I highly support Mayor Emanuel's plan to install more red-light cameras throughout the city because of this.
Red-light cameras
I would like to see statistics on the efficacy of the cameras. I think we need to install countdowns to give motorists an idea of how much time they have to get through the intersection.
Red light cameras
If you're traveling 30 MPH (the speed limit on arterial streets in Chicago) and the yellow light is 3-seconds (the minimum length at any intersection in Chicago) they you will be about 145-150 feed from the intersection when the transition from green to red begins.
That's plenty of time to stop slowly.
You only get a ticket if you enter the intersection when the light is red. You don't get a ticket if you enter the intersection when the light is yellow.
Red light speed cameras
I personally have never gotten a red light camera ticket, and i know that this "law" would make intersections more dangerous. In most cases people speed up slightly coming to an intersection when light turns yellow just in case and in this situation going 33mph will yield a ticket so now people will be slamming on their brakes when light turns yellow so they don't get screwed. the math you just did would not apply even in perfect world. Don't forget no one drives 30 in the city, flow of traffic is usually between 35-40.
Speed Cameras
Anyone who has studied this problem knows three things about Chicago's red light camer/traffic signals.
1. Three seconds of yellow is not enough time because the proper observance of perception/reaction time is ignored.
2. Forensic video analysis reveals too many camera-equipped intersections display less than three seconds because their control timers are set at the bare minimums, signals have a turn on delay and camera sensing can influenced by induction loop lead and lag settings. The doesn't check the timing except by just "eye-balling it". State law provides for a properly engineered amount of steady yellow time using the street's traffic approach speed, not the posted speed. Even the city's web site has acknowledged this.
3. The city's municipal judges use video software in determining these tickets which does not allow them to view videos frame by frame and lacks an accurate timing mechanism to see if the yellow lights are legit. The judges don't observe the additional second of yellow time allowed on streets with 35 MPH or higher speed limits due to lack of proper training how curious. Three seconds is not enough time for semi-trucks, people over 60 and buses to stop, just ask the CTA. Newton's Second Law of Motion is being routinely broken by the city. Theticketdoctor.net
Red-light camers
If the mayor is so concerned about the intersections by the schools then take the ones away from corners that are not at schools and relocate them. I just have problems with them trying to make money that way because the day the cameras stop catching speeders they will have to find another way to make money to pay the bills. I say the time is now to find ways to cut the money that they are paying out anyways
Speed Cameras Will Increase Crashes
Letter to Governor Quinn;
Dear Governor Quinn,
This communication points out notable facts about Illinois’ financial love affair red light cameras.
· Chicago has more (387) red light cameras than any other city in North America!
· Chicago fined motorists over $65 Million in 2009 for just red light camera violations, more than any other U.S. city!
· Chicago has distinguished itself as the only city to purchase a red light camera system rather than lease from a camera system vendor, a large capital expenditure.
· Chicago signed a $50M five-year camera service contract with Redflex!
· Chicago does not budget traffic signal annually maintenance funds! The City’s Street Electrical Department depends on motorists to call them about traffic signal failures!
· Chicago’s camera-equipped traffic signal intersections do not comply with Illinois Traffic Safety Memorandum 2-07 red light camera safety specifications due to home rule provisions!
· Suburban and out of area drivers traveling to Chicago on surface streets are greeted with traffic signals with fleeting yellow lights at least one second shorter, usurping motorists out of 44 feet of stopping distance (dilemma zone) at 30 MPH at each intersection! This causes deviously dangerous traffic disruptions shown to increase rear-end crashes and injuries. While camera supporters will point out decreases in T-Bone accidents, the figures are always in percentages because there are typically five to seven times more rear-end collisions than T-Bones.
· Independent forensic video analysis has positively proven at least a hundred or more of Chicago’s red light camera equipped intersections’ traffic signals consistently display less than the three second Federal minimum steady yellow signal interval. This short yellow time also contrasts the Chicago’s own and IDOT’s traffic signal timing engineering policy of a minimum of three seconds. Shorter yellows mean more green money for Chicago’s general fund without using any of the funds to directly upgrade traffic signal equipment to state regulations due to “home rule”.
I implore you Governor to VETO the Automatic Speed Camera Bill, thank you.
Respectfully,
Barnet Fagel
Red light camera
The red light camera has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with money. Lets start looking at TIF funds and using them more wisely before wanting the city to look like a camera touting metropolitan. Why are other cities reducing or outright eliminating red light cameras?....because the reason for them being around is plain old revenue. As for kids being in danger near school intersections....higher crossing guards part time if they have a job they spend money and that generates tax dollars...oh wait that eats into profit.
Red light cameras
You talked about red-light cameras, but isn't the issue about the law permitting cameras to issue speeding tickets?
The law permitting the use of speed cameras was passed and given to the governor on December 8th.
Why would added law be needed for red light cameras, since they are already permitted? The law allowing cameras to monitor speeding is what's really needed.
Of course you're going to hear a lot more opposition to these technologies to enforce the law. This is using technology to enforce the law, which frees up the police to enforce crimes against people, like theft, rape, murder, and gang violence.
The only people against red-light cameras and speed cameras are those that break the law, and they use the "right to privacy" as a support of their opposition.
We need both red-light cameras and speed cameras in Chicago to make our streets safer for children, seniors, and all pedestrians. Public space includes more than roads for cars.
Speed Cameras Rigged to Ticket
What you don't know, what was revealed by CDOT is the speed sensor they have chosen to measure our traffic speed has a 20% tolerance. Drivers trying to obey the speed law are sighted by inaccurated sensors, that's unlawful sir. And no independent oversight or certification. Another cash cow except its the public that's realistically going to pay a tax not a ticket. The cameras have yet to prove they provide a safety benefit!
Totally against
Hey Robert, I respect your views but totally disagree. This whole thing is just another way to extort money from the people of this great city. Are you from Chicago? If so how long have you been here and have you paid attention to what's going on? It's evident, this is about money. Please wake up and not be so docile and sheepish. I'm not going to fill this post with stats, but I will leave you with this: On Kingsbury and Ontario, there use to be a red light camera, after that red light cam strategic positioning didn't generate enough revenue, they moved it. Hopefully, this can let you see that it's not about protecting the people.....it's a business.
In regards to you generalizing people that are against this as speeders and whatever you said, just wait until you get a ticket for goint 1 mile over limit.
ABSOLUTELY Quinn should veto
ABSOLUTELY Quinn should veto the speed cam bill. This bill is nothing more than a grab for money. Speed cams are not a good idea and will not increase safety - most pedestrian accidents happen as a failure to yield situation, not a speeding situation. But hey, you can't set up a cam for failure to yield, so let's just set up speed cams!
Definitely NO
This will create more accidents, just like red light cameras themselves.
This whole idea is just another way to ticket people, there will be much more tickets issued. Like it wasn't bad enough when they sold parking meters.
Money Maker
It's another tactic to make money. The mayor likes to add "it's for the safety of the kids." Who is going to argue with that? But it's not true! There has not been problems with kids being run down near schools. These cameras cause more accidents than prevent. Everything he has done has cost the citizens more money. Instead of asking the Police Superintendent, who is his puppet and knows nothing about the streets of Chicago being that he just got here. Why not ask the 20 year police veteran who has worked that particular area forever?
Vto the bill
Where are the statistics to support the mayor's claim? How many kids have been hit by cars near their school in 2011? I recall a lot of reports of cars hitting pedestrians but cannot recall even one of a kid hit near his/her school specifically. If car vs kid safety is the priority rather than revenue why haven't we heard significant reports of this happening? We're going to put red light cameras near schools - what about all those schools that are in the middle of a community and not near anything other than side streets? How far away can a camera be put from a school to still be said to be protecting school kids (and if the answer is anything other than from school door to home door doesn't that imply revenue rather than safety)? If, as the mayor says, it is a safety only issue will the cameras be turned off at those times that children are not present (holidays, after/before school hours, weekends etc)?
Too much of this sonnds like it is just a revenue grab rather than safety and so should be vetoed.
Red-light cameras
Governor Quinn should approve the use of red light cameras around schools and parks. Children can be spontaneous and need to be protected. Even one accident due to speeding is one too many. If people obey the speed limit, which they should do anyways, then the red light camera is simply another reminder to drive safely.
Red Light & Speed Cameras
Cameras can't on any level "prevent" crashes. First, you must examine the Federal Highway Administration statistics which are eye-opening. The overwhelming first cause of red light violations are drunk drivers 38%. The second cause are First Responders, Fire Trucks and para paramedics 31%. The third cause are distracted drivers and those drivers influenced by road rage 26%. Cameras don't and can't stop any of these. The City has yet to publish any independent, peer reviewed reports of any camera safety benefits. When camera referendums are voted on cameras lose 98% of the time by public vote. The city claimed a 20% crash reduction, the Tribune with the same statistics, reported a 5% INCREASE in crashes. 3 seconds of yellow is not enough yellow time, Federal guidelines prescribe 4 seconds for 30 MPH with 60 foot wide intersections. The Mayor tried to equate 5 MPH over the limit to driveby gang shootings. Sorry, that doesn't hold any water, IT'S ONLY ABOUT THE MONEY. LESS TRAFFIC SIGNAL YELLOW SIGNAL THEN MORE GREEN CASH. Theticketdoctor.net
Speed Cameras
I just heard Mayor Emanuel is going to put speed cameras by Lake Shore Drive! He's got a valid point, there're schools of fish all along the Drive...
New speed cameras for Chicago
The proposed new speed cameras for Chicago are 99.99999999% about revenue and maybe as much as 0.000000001% about safety. It is a pure and simple revenue grab that the Governor should veto. If there were any justice, the Governor would work to prohibit ALL forms of ticket cameras, because they are always revenue grabs based on deliberately faulty engineering set to maximize ticket revenue at the expense of reduced safety.
See the science on our website. James C. Walker, National Motorists Association, www.motorists.org, Ann Arbor, MI (frequent visitor to Chicagoland)
New speed cameras for Chicago
The proposed new speed cameras for Chicago are 99.99999999% about revenue and maybe as much as 0.000000001% about safety. It is a pure and simple revenue grab that the Governor should veto. If there were any justice, the Governor would work to prohibit ALL forms of ticket cameras, because they are always revenue grabs based on deliberately faulty engineering set to maximize ticket revenue at the expense of reduced safety.
See the science on our website. James C. Walker, National Motorists Association, www.motorists.org, Ann Arbor, MI (frequent visitor to Chicagoland)
Speed camera
On 2/2 ask Gov Quinn if he intends to veto or not sign the law permitting speed cameras in Chicago.
Ask him if he is concerned because it seems to be unpopular.
Then ask him how popular was his big income tax increase.
What is his reluctance to sign a law that makes it safer in Chicago and doesn't cost the state anything?
speed cameras
now i guess we are all robots and are so perfect that none of us make mistakes hello lawmakers we are humans not robots until we have cars drive themselves on the road then dont put your speeding law.also if u do put the speeding cameras u better put alot of good big noticable zone signs and speed limits signs. trying to rip off the community because the city and state is out of money. how about doing it in a nice fair way politicians! now we are going to be worse than LA in traffic nice job emmanuel buen trabajo im sure not voting for u ever!
Red-light cameras
I wonder if the use of red light cameras will free up police from sitting in their cars with speed guns and, instead, being used to tackle other crimes. If so, this is very important given the limitations in the city's budget. As long as folks insist on speeding, the city should tackle this as efficiently as possible.
Red Light Cameras
What's wrong with giving people who are speeding tickets? I walk a lot in my neighborhood and feel like I'm taking my life in my hands when I cross the street at a 4-way stop sign. Drivers get up to 50mph in a single block between stop signs. They don't want to stop at stop signs. Forget about "pedestrian crosswalks."
Slow down. You move too fast.
righttttt
Quinn and Emanuel are all about REVENUE. Enough said.
speedcam law
On tonight's program (2/15), Ald. Dowell stated that in a 5-year period, there have been NINE HUNDRED crashes involving children. REALLY?! That's BUNK!! They'd be leading off the news with this dilemma, just as if another CPS student got shot.
Federal stats, listed from 2005-09, showed 251 pedestrian-related accidents, less than half of which involved speeding and less than one-quarter involved speed zones. Nine hundred kids. . .sheesh.
Red Light Cameras in Chicago
Since I can't post a link, I'll just tell you to Google red light camera los angeles and read the first CBS link at the top. Red light cameras will be outlawed nationwide in the next decade. I guarantee it. Not that I expect the Liberals to listen to reason but....the mayor & governor might want to think twice about adding anymore. There are going to be 1,000s of lawsuits once this is settled.
Red Light Cameras in Chicago
With or without cameras, the traffic lights are supposed to be a safety measure. The question is actually about enforcement, that is, personal discipline to drive safely and legal enforcement by officers. The consequences are serious when it comes to cars running into each other or into pedestrians: lives are at stake. Having faced guy in a pickup truck bearing down on me in a clearly marked intersection yelling "Get out of my f-ing way," I wonder if we have lost sight of the values of human lives in this important issue. Is waiting a few more seconds at a light worth risking the life of a human being?
Red light scamera program
The camera system is great for indentifying facts about crashes and blatant disregard for safety. While many photos taken are disregarded without being fined there are many municipalities that certainly have "abused" the technology and use it as a cash cow. Note that while many new units are installed there are also many taken down only because they aren't profitable. Hopefully that correlates to a safer intersection. However, there are no guarantees. The camera's still up then would appear to be unsafe/hazardous intersections if they mandate that type of "constant" supervision. As previously posted, if that's the case why isn't there an officer posted there? Officers are posted at school intersections routinely, without fail. Why not just camera's at the school intersections as opposed to the officers posted at schools during arrival & departure times? What? Not the possibility of a cash cow? Also, those that have been pulled over by a police officer for an infraction aren't always ticketed. It's the officers discretion on that. Most police officers likely issue a warning (written or verbal) if the infraction wasn't due to intentional unsafe action. With camera enforcement one is presumed guilty and not under like circumstances of being pulled over with the opportunity to be dismissed with a warning.
The other issue is upon being pulled over the officer investigates immediately who the driver is. If you did the deed the officer deals with that party. The camera system cannot accurately do that.
I was appalled at the notification I received because I hadn't been at the listed intersection. How'd they get that pic of my car? Then I happened to go through my calendar in having reviewed the listed date. The car was at the shop, the mechanic test drove the car apparently about a 1/4 mile & obtained the infraction for me. The pics don't show much. VP says the the car was slowed to about 3mph but not stopped prior to the right turn. They admitted that cross traffic had left turn arrows only at that moment. So here's the magic question. Would an officer have pulled the car over? If so, would they issue a ticket or warning?
Out of Stater
As a person who lives out of state and received one of these tickets, I am completely against these cameras. I may have ran a red light, but there was no intent. I did not know where I was and was looking for a road. I accidentally ran the light and then got a ticket. The company failed to send me notice of the citation and the next thing I know, I received a collection agency notice stating that I owed $200.00. These cameras are unconstitutional.
Add new comment