WTF?

Crazy anecdotals cannot outweigh mountains of evidence that say traffic laws are a detriment to society at large. I had three family members killed by a drunk driver, you don't see me calling for more checkpoints.

I'm curious if they cut down the length of yellows where they instituted red light cameras the same way they reduced speeds on roads that have speed cameras.

Vic, where is your mountain of evidence? I'd settle even for a scrap. Traffic Laws like Polution laws give us a common basis for interaction. Did you want that drunk driver charged with a crime for killing your family members? Did you think that your family deserved to die because they wanted to use a public road?

That's what you are saying when you opine "Traffic laws are a detriment to society at large". Go try driving in India or Azerbaijan and see how well it works or doesn't.

When traffic laws (or any other) are used for political or ideological purposes, they aren't as effective, but to say they are a detriment is beyond the pale.

Trumper, the speed reductions are most often because collisions are happening at too high a rate and the severity index skyrockets. A pedestrian has a 70% chance of survive a hit at 30mph and a 30% chance at 40mph. The yellow phase is generally set at a minimum by law, but occational is extended if their is a high volume of 'left-turn sneakers'.

I was told by SHA that yellow lights were set by their traffic engineers and that there was no codification, but that would only apply to Maryland.

The problem with the speed camera scenario is when you lower it from 35 to 25 on a road without any fatal or even remotely close to fatal collisions, they lend themselves to criticism that it's for revenue enhancement. Worse yet, when they put 3 speed cameras in a one mile stretch of roadway (Connecticut Ave) going the same direction, they solidify that criticism. However, the court did strike down sending 3 different tickets and said it's double jeopardy.

Well, I was wondering if the ones here that gotten the tickets ?

Do you still run the red and yellow lights with cameras??? I would think that paying the city your hard earned money, money in which you could have used in better ways than helping out the states ie car pmt, mortage pmt,food, clothing, gas and as high as it is . Im sure the states love you all

Meanwhile in Australia:

In NSW, lowered the threshold for error from 10km/h to 4km/h at the same time as plans to privatise traffic cameras

In QLD, during the floods, a minister went on TV and said our first priority is to restore the traffic cameras... to restore order on the roads.

Lol. In NSW traffic cameras generate a few million revenue per year for the state.

A scrap of ecidence: http://www.hwysafety.com/hwy_montana_2001.htm

My favorite part is this:

8. In traffic engineering findings the vehicles traveling faster than average have the lowest accident rates, yet they are the primary targets of speed enforcement. To this we can now add, with speed limits there was no positive correlation between speed enforcement and accident rates on rural free flowing highways, if anything, the highways became less safe.

Trumper, you are correct their is not one national or international code or regulation of signal phase lengths. However, there are industry-wide accepted calculations that are used with a limited degree of variability. A car stopped at a red light, must accelerate and clear the intersection. Depending on the number of lanes per traffic and the expected turning volume, the range will vary from location to location and sometimes even by time of day. Singal engineers are more concerned with network flow and congestion than earning revenue, so the light will be optimized for the lowest theoretical delay to each direction of traffic.

When you are speaking of speed limit cameras, spot cameras are of little use and average speed cameras actual modify driver behaviour. If they have 3 spot cameras within a mile, it sounds like they'd have been better installing an Average Speed Camera system. As such, it would only send out 1 ticket for driving too fast along the path. In your specific area, there is at least a slight history of serious injury with a collision in March 2011. I wasn't able to find a collision database for Maryland off hand, but from the placement, I might suggest they are more politically motivated than safety justified.

Vic, that webpage is too biased to credited. The only references it cites are itself. Vehicles travelling faster than average have the lowest gross rate of accidents, yet the highest severity index. You can have 100 fender-benders at 5-10 mph in stop and go traffic, but it's not as bad as 1 head-on collision at 120 mph net. Engineers are constantly trying to provide a world where we don't kill ourselves by accident, yet we continually push the limits of safety beyond the breaking points.

In traffic engineering findings the vehicles traveling faster than average have the lowest accident rates, yet they are the primary targets of speed enforcement. To this we can now add, with speed limits there was no positive correlation between speed enforcement and accident rates on rural free flowing highways, if anything, the highways became less safe.

Ineffective speed enforcement on rural free-flowing highways has no positive correlation to accident rates, as effective speed enforcement is required to reduce collision fequencies. I don't have references to hand, but the UK has had a number of sucessful trials of average speed cameras for construction sites, reducing the number of tickets issued by a factor of ~80 and collision rate by ~10 from 7-year historic averages.

Also, we are starting to learn sometimes we need to slow down to speed up. Variable Speed Limits on the M25 and M6 around London and Birmingham allow traffic engineers to manage the growth rate of a tailback after a collision, as such they clear the traffic jam faster, and average speeds rise even as people have to drive slower for 10-20km.

That said, with proper regulation of vehicles and drivers, there is no need for a maximum speed limit of segregated 6-lane highways built to a sufficient standard.

WTF? Did you not read the part where traffic fatalities for the whole state jumped to pre-no limit levels the year they re-introduced the law? That's called "game, set and match" in tennis.

Traffic fatalities are highly variable by nature and any one year statistics are not reliable. Without proper statical correlations with a high confidence, or account for the increase in volume over time, you are just presenting skewed numbers that do not reflect the reality of the roads. It is now 2011, why do they not show the values from 2002-2009, or maybe they don't present the same opinionated view as that single figure viewed in isolation.

Weather plays a larger factor in year-to-year variability than speed limits, maybe that's why? Unless there is a long term trend that's been isolated as independant of other vairables, you can't tell if speed limits in Montana are effective or counter productive.

Oh yeah, steady downward trend following revocation of speed limits, reinstate limits, BOOM! back to old levels.

Your inability to accept rational arguements is irksome, so I've dug a little further to illustrate the point explicitly to you.

They use the 12-month period of June '98 to May '99 to give a stat of 27 fatalities. However in the calander year of '98, the last full year without speed limits, there were 31 fatalities. Now let's look at a slightly less biased reference.

http://www.bber.umt.edu/...holCrashes2010.pdf#page=3

Notice the spike in alcohol and drug related fatal crashes in 2000, with a reduction in deaths in 2001, but an upwards surge in 2002-8. Might drunk drivers be causing fatal accidents more than speed limits? For inter-year fatalities to be related, the statistic should be per vehicle-miles driven, not the gross total.

Need I go on? What I was saying is: no cause and effect is shown, only two data juxtaposed.

i like traffic lights *repeat* ( from the monty python skit )

well i guess silence to my question mean yes you still run the red and yellow lights. lol

Around the Nasvhille area and the Murfreesboro area, I have generally found several features of an intersection with red light cameras.

First, the stop point in pulled back further. In TN, you only violate the red light when your rear wheels are ahead of the stop line. Most cars with only their rear wheels behind the line do not impede traffic crossing the intersection.

Second, left turns are only allowed with a left turn green light.

Finally, the camera is delayed after the light turns red to allow anyone in the intersection to get through before the cameras start taking pictures. I don't know this is true for certain, but I think it is.

Houston turned off their cameras earlier this week.

Sorry, grumpy. I've gotten a photo radar ticket in Alberta and a couple speed camera tickets in the UK, but no red light tickets. I tend to drive around red light cameras, but if I do pass through, I'll go if it's a fresh yellow, or I saw a green countdown timer for pedestrians, so I knew the timing. I've screached my tires once stopping for the red before the line.

I got a ticket in Florida. I will admit if you looked at the video they sent I don't know what I was thinking I slowed up when it was red and then rolled though.

My friend who is Hillsborough Sheriff told me that if I was red and I was over the cross walk I could fight it and had a 50-50 chance of winning it. But he said the judge could stay I was driving at unsafe speed to control my vehicle but normally through it out.

Bottom line he said is the ticket was no points if I did not fight it. Does not go to your insurance so pay the 176 dollar fine and be more careful. I think if you fight it that may not be the case.

When I looked at it on line. I don't know what I was thinking because It was red before I hit the cross walk and I hit the breaks and still went. So must have been thinking of stopping.

OH and they go off the plate on the car. I was driving my wife's car which they are allowed to do down here. If I did not pay it they would have went and issued the bench warrant against her and not me. =) Though I am sure I would not have heard the end of that.

Grumpy I got the ticket and I will admit I am more careful on yellows then I was before that ticket.I mostly look now at the top of polls when I drive now. =P