To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 17693
  red light cameras CAUSE accidents
 
(...) Don't get me started on these cameras... they're bad. It's not the rights violation claim (which is false, unless you report the car stolen because it actually was stolen, you're responsible for what people do with your property), it's the (...) (22 years ago, 23-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: red light cameras CAUSE accidents
 
(...) See? I've always told you that you can't trust private corporations to run things! Seriously though, I'd be interested to hear more about the truncated yellows. If the cameras are "causing" accidents because people are pushing the existing (...) (22 years ago, 23-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: red light cameras CAUSE accidents
 
Hm, interesting. I have seen reports of fewer accidents, but I wonder how well you can trust them. The incentives sure are wrong, and certainly present a true risk of incorrect reaction (cutting short the yellow light time). Another interesting (...) (22 years ago, 23-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: red light cameras CAUSE accidents
 
(...) We have a similar issue with speed camera's in the UK: "The effect of the camera on driver behaviour can create new problems such as erratic braking and acceleration and distract drivers from the traffic flow." See: (URL) (...) Which is just (...) (22 years ago, 23-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: red light cameras CAUSE accidents
 
(...) Not in the UK. We always have to maintain a safe stopping distance... which makes sense. As I understand it, the length of the yellow is some kind of (...) Normally the focus is on the "intergreen" period - this will be 5-7 seconds for a (...) (22 years ago, 23-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: red light cameras CAUSE accidents
 
(...) Google it. You'll be inundated with a full range from "well-reasoned and documented" to "wacky paranoid government-out-to-get-us". But it's fairly obviously an issue, and there's good information out there on it. If the cameras are "causing" (...) (22 years ago, 23-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: red light cameras CAUSE accidents
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Frank Filz writes: <snip> (...) Now there it is. Frank, run for office and I'm voting for you. We seem to be reacting to things instead of being proactive! Make sure people learn how to drive properly! Maybe we should (...) (22 years ago, 23-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: red light cameras CAUSE accidents
 
(...) Forget all that. Can you tell me why, when I see those Police Video shows from the UK, the surveillance cameras in the cop cars always show the speed in MPH? Are you folks finally seeing the light and giving up on that cumbersome, (...) (22 years ago, 23-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: red light cameras CAUSE accidents
 
(...) We don't have "cop cars", we have "police cars", "panda" cars and "jam sandwiches". ;) (...) Road signs (speed and distances) have always been in MPH. I have no idea why that was seen as being worth keeping. Scott A (...) (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: red light cameras CAUSE accidents
 
(...) I have a SEVERE issue with this statement. If someone borrows your car (with your blessing) and commits a crime with it, how could you possibly say it is the car owner's fault? Unless the owner is sitting next to the driver when the crime was (...) (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: red light cameras CAUSE accidents
 
(...) More on this topic... a class action suit is in the works in DC (URL) the following is first in a series on these noxious devices (from last year): (URL) (22 years ago, 21-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR