Kevbo went I started to drive here in California back in the 1960’s you would be cited for running a red light if you were in the intersection when the light turned red. (a Friend of mine failed his driver’s test for entering on the yellow, the DMV guy looked over his shoulder, saw the light go red, and failed him.
Then it was determined that this wasn’t fair. and the law was changed to if you enter on the yellow you are OK. Now people are stretching it more and more.
I cannot tell you the number of times I have been approaching an intersection the light goes yellow, I brake not overly hard and have no problem stopping. Meanwhile the guy 3 car lengths behind me, changes lanes and runs a red light. :eek:
Like I said, stinger missiles is the answer.
Malacandra, just a thought - I suspect speeding is a popular aspect of illegal driving to focus on because it’s easier to enforce than trying to ticket people for reckless driving, or other hazardous behaviors. Speeding involves a single factor that’s relatively easily measured. It’s not the judgement call that recklessness is, and it’s gotten progressively harder to fight in court.
A number of other aspects of poor driving that I can think of, c.f. hand-held cell phone use, don’t get ticketed until the driver is caught doing that in an accident.
This doesn’t affect the numbers you’ve mentioned - just is a factor that I think affects what behaviors get targetted for enforcement.
Why not do both?
And how do you know the speed limit is set artificially low? On most roads I’ve driven in the US, the speed limit is pretty consistent with what I consider to be safe speed. I’m sure that’s because I’m a bad driver, but then again, I’m not the only bad driver out there.
If flagrant violators want to go way out of their way to avoid red light cameras, more power to them. They’ll soon find they’d save more time waiting for the light.
As for misjudgers, I can see it if these people rarely travel through an intersection. Those who go every day will soon learn how to judge the light better - or should stop driving on grounds if idiocy. I haven’t noticed the yellow lights on intersections near me getting shorter. I agree that doing this is wrong. I have experienced the impact of lengthening yellows, which is that people who stop at a yellow and sit for what seems like a long time before the red soon learn not to stop. I’d hope that the recommended timings are based on data.
Since the red light camera on the intersection near me, I’ve noticed many fewer people pushing the yellow. It still happens, often, but not as much as before.
There are interesections I know of, without cameras, where it is customary to wait five to ten seconds after the green to let the red light runners through. This slows down law abiding motorists. One in particular is where there is a left turn lane heading for the freeway. The left arrow must be considered too short, since often several cars enter on the red.
And Rick, I like the way you think. 
Preach it! I have frequently approached a yellow light just on the cusp of “should I stop or continue?” and have decided to accelerate through the light, with the light going red just as I clear the intersection. Just as I’m thinking to myself that I should really have stopped, I look in the mirror and there are several cars behind me. One time, I saw five. FIVE! And they weren’t hurrying either.
This is one reason that I think red camera lights might not be ideal. I can’t remember where I read it (I think it might have been in a thread here), but I remember reading one study that said that red camera lights don’t decrease accidents, they merely move where they happen.
If there is not camera, then people run through the red light, and the likely place for an accident to happen is in the middle of an intersection. However, if a camera is put up at that intersection, then some people will be more cautious and stop sooner instead of running the red light. The people driving behind them might not realize that the driver in front will be stopping for the light, since more people used to run that red light, so now the accident occurs when someone rearends a stopped car. For example, if TheLoadedDog had stopped, then the five people might have been able to get around him or stop soon enough not to hit him, or they might have run into him.
However, the cities and the contractors can show that the number of accidents has decreased in the intersection, and can just neglect to mention that the number of accidents occuring directly outside of the intersection has increased proportionally.
So, because all the people behind are inclined to run red lights, we shouldn’t encourage people to obey the lights by putting up red light cameras?
Awesome logic!
I don’t think that camera lights shouldn’t be put up. It’s just something I think that should be studied more. And I hate it when something is championed as solving a problem, when it just somewhat solves the problem and creates another problem.
Way too many people die from car accidents, and I strongly support finding out successful ways to decrease the number of fatalities. But I don’t want to support a “successful” measure that actually isn’t working. And I don’t know- red light cameras might be helpful in decreasing fatalities. But just like some others have said in this thread, the steps should be based on safety, and the revenue should be incidental, instead of the red light cameras being put up mainly for profit.
But, based on your own scenario, the only other problem it creates is caused by people who assume that it’s OK to blast through the red light. The problem isn’t caused by the presence of the camera; the problem is caused by assholes who think they’re too important to wait for one cycle of the lights.
Roads where people regularly exceed the speed limit which has low accident rates are a dead giveaway.
Even if true ( and the articles on red light cameras in my town make no mention of it) I’d happily trade accidents where a car smashes into the drivers side door for one where a car hits the rear bumper. Much more survivable.
However, plenty of car slow on yellow even at intersections without red light cameras, so you can’t count all accidents like the ones you mentioned, just the increment.
Don’t ask me. But I daresay it’s a lot easier to prosecute a simple violation of a rule. A camera can’t make a judgment about someone driving cretinously, but hey, 15mph over the limit on a deserted road at 3am just makes it all the more a slam-dunk, huh? No other inconvenient traffic to spoil the shot.
The max speed limit in AZ is 75mph–so it’s even worse, really.
It may not be “right” but if traffic is going 10-15 mph above the speed limit, you are significantly LESS SAFE doing the speed limit. Anyone doing a drastically different speed than the cars around them is more likely to be involved in an accident.
(Note, my second and final speeding ticket was in 1991, and I’ve never been in an accident. I’m a safe driver. I just do see some validity to the idea of driving with traffic rather than intentionally going much slower for the sake of the speed limit.)
I challenge all y’all to time the longest red light you normally sit at. The longest one I sit at, which seems to take FOREEEEEEVER, is actually 90 seconds long. When I timed that light, it just shifted my paradigm right there. I can’t be patient for 90 SECONDS? I have to put myself and other people in danger to squeak through that light for 90 SECONDS? What the hell’s wrong with me?
without having read the entire thread (sorry) and being an on again/off again driver for 12 (official) and 16 total years… i can only say, dude, know the roads.
if you are cruising on a stretch where sixty klicks is a patrolled max, watch your speedo - if you run a stretch where you know a buck-eighty is the fastlane norm, go with the flow. just remember to drive safely, and do not stand out against the crowd. 138km/h seems normal in 100km/h zone if everyone else is doing 126km/h. 138km/h is way the fuck out of place if everyone else is doing 84km/h. be smart, and keep your eyes open. both crown vics & impala’s (the two most common police interceptors) are easily recognisable by both headlights & taillights. don’t take unreasonable chances. you’ll never have a need to complain.
Even if that is true, it’s the speeders who are breaking the law and creating the dangerous situation. Not the guy doing the speed limit. I’m not going to break the law just because everyone else is.
I don’t deny that it is the speeders causing the problem, but I’m not going to endanger myself for the sake of following the letter of the law. Now, if I felt the speed of traffic was unsafe I would not drive that fast, but if driving that fast is safe, and will cause me not to become an obstacle in traffic, I’ll drive the speed of traffic. I’d rather get a ticket than get injured/killed in an accident.
I just don’t think individuals have the right to overrule the law and decide for themselves what’s safe. That’s why you have laws to begin with. Also, often the road looks safe enough to drive at higher speed, but there are not-so-obvious factors that make it unsafe.
The street in front of my apartment, for example, has 2 lanes in each direction plus a center lane. It has a 25mph limit but at a casual glance, it looks like it’s safe to drive at 45 mph, and many people do. However, it is a residential area with apartments on both sides. Residents cross it all the time, including children heading for the school bus. There are also gentle curves with trees and bushes on both sides. Even if a pedestrian looks both ways before crossing the street, a 45mph car coming around the curve can easily be forced to slam on the brakes to avoid hitting the pedestrian.