99% of the reason they are so hated in the US is because so many of them were installed and operated as a money grab. Politicians saw them as revenue generators so they could cut taxes and win re-election. And a lot of cities and counties illegally shortened yellow lights to make it impossible to safely stop before the red light, hoping to catch more hapless drivers and rake in the cash. (Maryland was notorious for this.) Most of that has been litigated and sorted out now, but it took lawsuits to make cities stop using red light cameras as ATMs and start using them for their intended purpose.
In Europe, traffic camrea's (red light ,speed, average speed,...) are everywhere. I guess it makes a difference when the money goes to the state instead of the local level. While there have been protests against those camera's and they got set on fire several times, the government didn't give in. Currently, everybody is used to them and safety has improved.
I was told that red lights cameras didn't reduce runners, instead it created rear end crashes from people hitting the brakes at a sight of a yellow light
@@preciadoalex123 not sure if that stat is true or not, but even if it is, I still would imagine those types of crashes are far safer overall than T-bone collisions, so they do at least have safety benefits in terms of less serious injury/death
Money grabs or not they don’t falsely ticket people. The evidence is generally irrefutable so those opposed are generally people who run red lights and just don’t want to get caught. I had a nearly new vehicle totaled and was injured by someone running a red light. He hit my driver’s door at an estimated 50 mph.
Rob, Thank you for allowing me to be a part of your amazing work! This video is 100% accurate and tells the story in a way far better than I have ever seen during countless presentations to government officials. All of us that do this work (now or in the past) do it for safety. Your work is so good and you are so skilled. I never worried if the story would be accurate and it was. I miss night focusing those plate cameras and sometimes getting yelled at about my relatives...
@@leonarperro Hello there....great question. I caught the photography "bug" but install CCTV for a job with what I learned there. Taking photos car tags at high speed is a challenge, but fun when it worked!
@@joedillon159 I see, it was the other way around! I can only imagine the challenge to calculate the focus where the car is expected to be at the time of the shot, even considering the different speeds that car might be travelling! Respect!
@@leonarperro The computer system helped in an amazing way. It took the vehicle speed and would vary the trigger of the plate camera by milliseconds to make sure the plate was in the frame. The flash system was one flash could only fire twice before recharge. So Flash Take One took a Scene 1 photo before the car entered the intersection with the scene camera only. Flash Take Two would then take Scene 2 photo AND plate shot at the same time after the car was in the intersection. That gave us more visible angles on the plate since not looking so far down. It all happened in less than a second, compiled the data into protected packages and then reloaded for the next one. Amazing stuff.
Interesting. Here in Australia we also have 2 induction loops for detection, but one is in front of the stop line, and there's enough of a gap between the stop line and the cross traffic for them to not trigger it. The camera is then triggered by the second loop which can only be triggered by a red-light runner. Ours also takes 2 photos, to confirm it's a runner and not someone who failed to stop fully before the line.
Here in SA I've noticed that only one loop is used for red light cameras but 2 are used for speed cameras. and both are on the intersection side of the stop line
we also do speed and registration checks, so if your car is unregistered while you are speeding and running a red light, I guarantee that you will be having a garnished wage for a very long time and enough points off to be put on the wall of shame, when it was released in Adelaide there was a few door knocks with "please explain" when they went through at 100kph over the limit through a red light with an unregistered vehicle.
Here in the USA the cities use a "potential revenue map" to decide where the red light detectors are put. So if that gives you an idea of why they don't care to do it right now you know.
in Baltimore they changed the yellow lights out of nowhere to be way shorter. it was a fun lawsuit years ago. so red light cameras were banned for many years
Now they're back... and we're at it again with the same corrupt mindsets. Baltimore, and Maryland for that matter, need to crackdown on stolen; expired and/or illegally registered plates (falsified VA tags) cos those mofos couldn't care less if they get a ticket for a "ghost" plate
Great video as always! In my state, Tennessee, they're legal to install; but they're non-enforceable. As in the state deemed it a few years ago that the cameras fall under "The right to face your accuser" law and if you get a red light ticket in the mail you can simply not pay it and face no repercussions for not paying it. And also certain cities (Knoxville, Oak Ridge, and others) got caught red-handed illegally adjusting the yellow light timers at major intersections with cameras from their recommended time. From around 4 to 7 seconds, down to as little as 1 to 2 seconds as an attempt to boost revenue from the cameras.
I think the cameras set up as revenue systems with excessively short yellow and all-red light durations are the ones that must be addressed. Companies and government agencies pushing for these should be penalized so severely that they wouldn't do this at all.
Plus, and this cannot be overstated, they're citing _THE CAR_ not the driver. (more specifically, the registered owner of the tag.) It's a lot harder to prove who was actually driving, and the courts know it. I've seen figures of 60+% in NC go unpaid. And there's nothing these companies can do about it. (the only one I've ever gotten -- and I wasn't the driver -- was from the 3rd party operator NOT any government or law enforcement agency. So not even the teeth of a parking ticket. And, for the record, the process is 100% automatic - no human involved at all... unless you complain.)
Unfortunately, Oregon ruled on that yellow-light law, after it came up in Beaverton, as being completely legal because there's no law stating a minimum for yellow lights.
1:29 What a small world. A few years ago I was asking Billy about Korean history in the comments section of his videos and it turns out he and Road Guy Rob, another TH-camr in a completely different subject matter yet whom I also enjoy watching and talked to in the comments, happen to know each other.
Even though I've been caught by a red light camera (here in Victoria, Australia), I can still absolutely support their use (given how potentially dangerous it can be to blow through a red light, even accidentally like I did). Passing through a light-controlled intersection is a risky manoeuvre at the best of times, so anything to mitigate any potential risks is a good thing.
They had these in New jersey a while back but got taken out of the amount of lawsuits and false flags. Jersey isnt the best place to drive if u dont know what youre doing. Regardless not being able to stop in time bc of a sudden yellow in front of u, passing the line after the red even though the camera cant see it, not even going pass the red light but pass the line but in the intersection
@@zofferz0 This "sudden yellow" thing is a mystery... lights always turn yellow after green... this should come as no surprise to anyone driving. If the light has been green for a while it's going to turn yellow, that's how it works, drive accordingly.
"accident" is a strange word to apply, even in this context - either you were paying attention to the light sequence or you weren't, but it really does underline how converting an intersection like that to a roundabout would increase driver engagement/awareness.
Would love for you to come to the UK and do a video on Average Speed Cameras in the UK ! - Amazes me that US is banning new safety systems, while we're getting more and more over the pond!
Some states have them, and others have them for work zones or city areas. But generally in America people think they're so important they even dislike traffic enforcement. I lost my cousin because of a car crash so I think traffic safety is very important. Speed kills
Rob, I love that a lot of your filming takes place in and around Los Angeles, because I usually have a story or something connected to an intersection or a street that you show, especially in the San Fernando Valley. I was surprised when the first intersection you showed was Victory and De Soto, because I was certain that there were red light cameras there (I thought you were showing that there were none). Actually, I GOT a camera violation literally one stop over, on Victory and Mason once while entering Pierce College. Also, that clip of Magic Mountain Parkway scared me because we all go pretty fast on that street, especially at night. One time I almost hit a Sheriff's patrol car right under that freeway overpass on Magic Mountain PKWY in the clip.
I moved to southern California four years ago. Financially a bad choice, but for filming, it's great to have so much transportation to film within 2 hours of where I live.
@@LabFind I Knew a few of the clips looked like Bakersfield for example every scene where hes standing in front of an ARCO ampm or carquest its the one next to the 99 on White ln and Wible. At 5:11 hes at Frugatti's on Coffee Rd by the Westside pkwy. He records the Stockdale intersection at 7:31 and after. Now I feel like a stalker...
Cannot wait for the policy video. I've never intentionally run a red light, but I've gotten multiple tickets from insanely short yellow lights where I was certain I was safe.
Red light cameras are fine by me, but the problem is of course when you get money involved. When you have private, for-profit companies running the programs, they have to turn a profit. That means tweaking traffic light timings in hopes of getting money. If the cameras were owned & images processed by the municipality that installed them, and you remove the profit factor, I think they'd be better.
That's always baffled me about traffic enforcement cameras in the US (and other countries). Over here they are operated by the police. The municipality owns and maintains them, but the police operate them. All fines are collected by the DOJ and are put into the state coffers. So the proceeds do not go to the police, municipality or province that may own the road that the cameras are on. This has basically lead to a situation where the cameras are only in locations where enforcement actually makes sense. Though there are no red-light-only cameras here. There are just speed cameras that pull double duty as red light cameras as well. In which case it is completely possible to be issued two tickets if you're dumb enough to speed through a red.
A new amendment to the constitution should be that no government entity can make money from the fines it levies. This includes private prisons. Tickets could include mandatory community service if they want to increase the punishment.
Rob in another video suggested something that could reduce the profit incentive. Something along the lines of any money generated from fines for infractions is removed from circulation completely. Like withdrawing a grand from your bank account only to burn the money.
You've missed two important topics from those against RLCs: 1) There are a lot of accusations against municipalities saying they've set the yellow timing too short, therefore generating revenue from those who otherwise wouldn't be in violation. 2) There are accusations that safety studies show panic-stops by drivers suddenly recognizing they're in a RLC intersection causes more accidents, and more injuries, then simple running through accidents.
Some municipalities were required to shorten the yellows by their contract with the camera company. Studies showed that lengthening the yellow did more to reduce collisions than cameras.
@@chublez plenty of lawsuits have already been won, and the evidence was presented in those lawsuits. I'm not digging through court cases on the internet to appease your disbelief. Go look for it yourself.
The better solution is Roundabouts: no traffic lights needed in most situations. Speeds get sufficiently reduced that accidents are avoided or less severe.
My city had red light cameras for awhile, but they were removed after a short time. The next city still used them and one intersection you avoided since even if you stopped before making a right turn, it took a photo. I used to cut through the parking lot of the business at that corner to play it safe when turning right.
A few reasons why lots of people hate them: 1. No context - they ignore the situation and external factors 2. They seem "out to get you" with unknown yellow light length or a 2 mph rolling stop that never endangered anyone 3. Can increase stress and decrease safety with people overreacting to avoid tickets
When I got my first red light ticket, I understood I deserve the ticket but I was kinda weirded out because I felt like we're in a surveillance state. Obviously nowadays you expect it, but "automate enforcement" is still kinda iffy for me
@@danieldaniels7571 This seems like a uniquely American thing, with your Constitutional rights regarding prosecution and identifying offenders directly, and such. The UK defaults to fining (and giving penalty points to) the registered keeper, unless someone else takes responsibility, or you can prove it was definitely not you. This can lead to family or friends taking the fall for you if you have too many penalty points already. 😅
Love the use of BeamNG for some of the simulated crashes! RLCs were outlawed because they became a tool of revenue generation instead of safety. Cities were reducing yellow light timings and getting lazy with throwing out the questionable "violations". Eventually people became so paranoid they would brake check at the light and cause rear-end crashes. Besides, most people (I would assume) run red lights that cause crashes due to inattention instead of trying to intentionally save time. A well timed intersection should have a few seconds of all red to allow late traffic to clear the intersection.
The problem with the few seconds of all red is that it just encourages red light running because most drivers know that intersections do this, so they know they have a couple more seconds to enter the intersection when it's completely safe. It basically defeats the purpose of red lights because then people start to stop trusting them and stop taking them seriously. It is important to design things to be truthful rather than safe. If red means danger then you have to make it mean danger, don't show red if there is no danger. It's a boy who cried wolf situation and it's the same reason why when a fire alarm goes off, your first reaction is to think "false alarm" and not "evacuate". Making things too safe actually makes them more unsafe because people lose trust in the system and ignore the rules.
@@pwhnckexstflajizdryvombqug9042 Not for nothing but the cameras would still catch inattentive or dangerous drivers. I've seen post-3 seconds of red-light runners. It was amazing and terrifying. They had to be not paying attention for so long they probably didn't even realize they had run a red light. They are caught when light timing is fair.
@@pwhnckexstflajizdryvombqug9042 Many lights do have a small all-red period for this exact reason. It's only 1-2s so not so much that people notice or want to ignore the light.
I think the people that lock up their brakes after seeing the first flash and still get a ticket because obviously they had the intent to run the red light and then they still ended up in the intersection during a red light
My feeling is that by the time you see the sign, you probably already ran the light. Active traffic calming and roundabouts should keep everyone safer.
Great vid Rob. I wish they would do something in Utah about red light runners. I've witnessed dozens of people in the past 6 months who clearly ran the red light or the yellow changed to red right before/after they crossed the white lines. I would've been hit a couple of times if I wasn't paying attention and had just gone after my light turned green.
In the past I would encounter an intersection of 8 lanes of traffic, it was impossible to cross all lanes on green. Too short of a cycle is a problem too.
In CO the fines for red light cameras are essentially optional. If you get a ticket from one of the private companies maintaining the cameras and you don't pay it, they can't do anything to you. They can't report it to the DMV so it doesn't go on your license, they can't send it to collections, and they can't sue you for non-payment unless the original fine notice was officially hand served to you - not delivered in the mail. To compensate, they make the first notice as alarming and intimidating as possible so you don't look too close at the fine print.
My issue is the inconsistent length of time between a yellow and red light. Some places it's 3 seconds, and others it's half a second. You can get burned if you run a red without even knowing!
The biggest issue with red light cameras are the corrupt officials reducing yellow light time, usually below the minimum DOT requirement, in order to increase ticket revenue.
@UCRXo1FQ2gdTs-_OHk_3mkgw They illegally shorten the yellow light specifically to make the cameras generate revenue. There are minimum permitted yellow durations for a reason.
The solution I like for accidental red light running is adding a flashing white strobe to the red light when energized. I've seen it most often with a horizontal strobe running through the middle of the red light during the red light phase.
American roads being so large and straight is a major contributor, as well as it being legal to pass the stop line on yellow right up until red. Smaller/Narrower roads means that traffic lights will be closer to your field of vision, and make it more obvious that it's a junction/intersection requiring caution. Huge roads ('stroads') like in the US make it feel more like a motorway/freeway, where you can just keep driving at full speed. The fact that flashing lights, massive red lights, and other crazy signals are needed in addition to the standard red light means that the entire junction/road is poorly designed.
The goal of reducing red light crashes is noble, although in alot of cases, it seems more like the goal is to drive revenue. The example of the red light camera notice is a great example. A 75 foot notice seems to tip into the revenue, but the 800 ft notice seems to tip into the safety. Having clear and open communication on the timing of the yellow to red is also another important factor. There has been more than one large city toying with the timing of the yellow light in an effort to increase 'safety' when objectively it looks like it was to increase revenue. Looking forward to part 2 of the video
Also cover cases where cities like Beaverton, OR were intentionally timing the traffic lights wrong at Camera enabled junctions as a source of income to the city.
I'm still trying to grasp how running red lights can be such a big problem... I hardly ever see anyone running a red, except maybe if they've just tried to make it through orange. But this is coming from the Netherlands. I do see plenty of pedestrians and cyclists crossing at red, but usually only when there's no cars around.
Maybe, because of stroads with dumb (timed) lights on every block. At quiet times, a modern, properly designed light in the Netherlands will turn green by the time you slowed to cornering speed. Less annoyance about useless STOP lights.
The past few years I’ve seen a massive increase in Red Light AND Speed Camera combos in Sydney! 😳 Speed through a Green light, you’re done for speeding. Speed through a Red light, you’re doubly done!
I got involved in getting rid of the cameras in Houston. I knew from visiting other communities how dangerous they are, and how they are too tempting for government employees. I also knew the vendor company was a bunch of crooks because they had been one of our resellers at a company I had represented. They were known for “buying” the business, so everyone knew they would be bribing officials. Here’s how it all goes wrong. The cameras are first put in the most problematic intersections. They start generating massive fees, and the city officials are ecstatic. And so are the vendors who get a percentage. Of course, many people get more careful and the money tapers off. Now the fun begins. The goal is no longer safety, it’s income. Why engineer an intersection to reduce violations which costs money, when you can put up a camera and MAKE money? Violations are down? What could get the income back up? Reduce the timing on the yellow, or make other changes, to increase violations. All of these were actually happening around the country. Drivers were being induced to break the law with purposefully rigged traffic engineering in order to fill the coffers at city hall. Serious injuries and fatalities were happening at higher rates, and while you can blame any individual accident on the violators, the rates were telling the true story. Examination of designs at high fee producing intersections were showing obvious problems and variations from engineering standards (mostly light timing problems). One study, paid for by the City of Houston, showed the cameras were not improving safety so the mayor paid the Professor from Rice University to “fix” the study. IOW, Mayor White bribed a college professor to change the results because he wanted that money to pay for programs to make his record look good because he wanted to run for governor. It was all just shameful. This is why the character of politicians should matter more than how good they make you “feel” or how well the “own” the other side.
Great comment. We had similar issues up in Chicagoland. Maybe the solution would've been using the cameras temporarily. Once the problem is fixed, then take them down. But we all know that temporary government programs usually end up being permanent.
I'm not sure how uniform this is, but when they had red light cameras in College Station, they ticketed the owner of the vehicle rather than a driver, and there was no appeals process, because it was all handled by the vendor.
@@River-zo6ve That was the way both of the two big vendors operated in Texas and several other states. A friend’s mom, who was like a second mom to me, went back and forth over one of the photos because it wasn’t her, it wasn’t a type of car she had ever owned, and it clearly was not her license number. They sold the debt to a collection agency eventually. Crazy.
My in-laws were visiting from out-of-state several years ago when they got a ticket from a red light camera. The pictures/video clearly showed the car ahead of theirs running the red light, but their car with their license plate never entered the intersection. They called the number on the ticket to ask if they could get someone to manually review it, because it would be obvious to any honest and rational person that they did not run the red light, but they were told the only way to dispute it was to show up to court and argue their case. Their only other option was to check the guilty box on the ticket and mail it back with their fine payment. Since taking time off of work to travel 800 miles to dispute a $150 fine is not very cost effective, they just paid it.
Over here in Switzerland, the cameras use LIDAR-scanners. Terribly expensive but very versatile, with no fixed infrastructure except a power cord needed. This way, semi-mobile enforcement is possible, with cameras moving around every few months. Makes it very effective.
Not necessarily. Roundabouts require more land use, are less forgiving to pedestrians especially those with a limited sight abilities and can create issues for development. Peds are less likely to cross them to get to a store so you often see them as a barrier to continued commercial growth. They also 'equal weight' all approaches which isn't necessarily a good thing if you have uneven volumes of traffic approaching. They are very good as transitions between more rural environments into more urban ones to signify to drivers that they are entering a new environment.
@@jayjackson5705 that's why I said most intersections not all intersections. In the US we use very few roundabouts instead opting for traffic lights everywhere. There are times when traffic lights are superior to roundabouts, however in many cases they are not.
@@bolt5564 you are absolutely correct. Sorry, a lot of people feel that roundabouts are this panacea or magic intersection and choosing them as an option still requires nuance.
An extremely easy way to reduce the red light crashes without having the problems and all of the costs associated with red light cameras is to set up less expensive digital cameras to record the intersection from all directions and have them record to hard drives in the unit that stores the images. Then, when a collision occurs at the intersection have a tech go to the intersection and download the digital recordings from all of the cameras and use the recordings to decide who did what. That stops people getting upset at the red light cameras while bringing attention to the incidents involving a collision and properly assigning fault
As a traffic reporter in Dallas, I pranked my listeners on one April Fool's Day by announcing that TxDOT would be installing spike strips (the kind they had at drive-in movies) at intersections that would activate on red and retract on green. I said that new signs would be going up reading "Severe Tire Damage on Red". Emergency vehicles would retract the spikes remotely.
As ridiculous as the spike strips may sound, I would think that's the only thing that would completely stop red light running. I loved this video but I was hoping some stats would be presented at the end to show if there was any sort of measurable reduction in this type of violation before and after installation of a camera; I suspect not. And if not maybe spike strips should be considered :)
LOL! That's hilarious. How did they take that? Were the drivers enthusiastic or apprehensive? I wonder if these would make people slow down: jovet.net/files/images/Sign_SevereTireDamageOnRed1.png
My answer to reduce fed light crashes is to feplace the signal light intersection with Roundabouts. The City of Carmei, Indiana, is in an ongoing program of doing this, and it works. Accident rates have reduced, gasoline is conserved, and the few accidents that remain are not producing injuries. They save money because they cost less to maintain. Roundabouts are a win-win fix to traffic intersection problems
I think the only part you missed is the danger that they pose from driver's reactions to them. Many drivers would notice the cameras too late to safely stop and would slam on their brakes, causing the person behind them to rear-end them. But yeah, the primary reason they're hated so much is because of their primary use as a fundraiser. Red light cameras probably attract a fair amount of vandalism to themselves, too.
I used to think these were BS and that all tickets should be served by a police officer, but my mind has changed on the matter. A) If the presence of cameras result in drivers being more mindful of red lights, then already they're a success. B) In the US, far too many encounters between motorists and traffic cops escalate badly. For traffic violations, maybe it is best to let machines handle them and reduce bad situations between cops and civilians.
seems to me that a good majority of the argument is, there is no way to argue these tickets. you cant put a camera under oath unlike a police officer. another problem is that these companies have been on record to using some very legal questionable methods for getting their evidence like shortening the yellow light. plus they make money off of this. whether the traffic violation is valid or not, these companies make their $$ regardless of whether its legit. thats not to say its a bad system i just don't think it was deployed properly yet what that new way of using it has yet to be determined. me personally i would remove the monetization aspect and make it more immediate and localized to the scene and remove the ticket part and thus making it more about safety
Bingo. You cannot cross-examine your accuser; a camera. Due process is violated. Just as affidavits are hearsay, you cannot cross-examine an affidavit.
What amuses me mildly about this is the portion using the orange line busway in the San Fernando Valley, is that those cameras malfunction so often. They’re “famous” for taking pictures every single cycle. No car there? Time to take a picture. Cars all stopped on red? Time to take a picture. Every single intersection for weeks it happen, then suddenly it’s fixed. Give it time and it starts happening again. Once and a while the same busway, by Canoga and Vanowen would take pictures on the green. Although I’m fairly sure absolutely nobody is getting tickets for these oddities.
Strange having it on a trigger speed, in Western Australia there is a dedicated loop detector just past the white line that will trigger the camera. Actually that's a bit outdated, they USED to - the new systems I believe use radar as they are also speed cameras!
Same here in Germany, they used to be loops and film, too (even in 2012 still in some places!), but now almost everything is LIDAR and, of course, digital. How they process these pictures depends on each state in Germany, some have punished police personnel, some have an own bureau running this task.
We had a few red light cameras here in Oakland, but they were way too expensive. The company that ran them tried to break the city budget, so we got rid of them. Similar thing happened to parking enforcement
In my opinion, if red light cameras are to be used, they should be overseen by an authority that doesn't stand to make money from them. The manufacturer should only get a flat fee for use, or just money from installing/repairing/replacement of components. Getting a fee per-violation is just ripe for abuse. Even before a red-light camera goes up, an engineering solution should be considered
and also reduce where the money goes so cities dont go installing them as much... put the fines in a state fund for drivers safety instead of policing for profit like many places do
Drivers certainly slow down when PHOTO ENFORCED is posted. I think this is because they can't get away with minor infractions as easily when the human confrontation elements are removed (cops don't want to engage or escalate a situation unless absolutely needed)
Or if you should speed up to make it and stop paying attention to your surroundings because you're watching the timer... This wouldn't work for big American roads, and isn't a good idea for other place's roads. A timer to green might be nice, but a timer to red is asking for trouble.
@@AndrooUK literally use the cross walk timers to determine if i need to slow down for the light when im in phoenix. Would rather start slowing down 2 seconds sooner for a smoother less G load on passengers.
Same like with hidden speed cameras. Hidden in the sense that there is no published map of their locations (at least not here in New York City). The rule here used to be 1/4 mile from the school and on the road the school is located on. Then they changed it to a 1/4 mile radius from the school. So even though there might not be a school where you're driving, the next thing you know is you get a ticket for 'speeding' on a road that was designed for a higher limit but has its max knocked down.
We all have a goal to reduce red-light crashes. But yes, like Marty McFly ("Back to the Future II"), some wonder if there's any harm "making a few bucks on the side."
One major problem with RLCs is so many are installed at intersections where the yellow duration is too short. This is particularly true with protected left turns with a yellow arrow. The guidelines from the Institute of Transportation Engineers have been updated in the last few years but very few cities have adopted them. The short timing puts some people in the Dilemma Zone where they do not have enough time to stop safely and comfortably, but also not enough time to enter the intersection before the red. This results in the majority of violations happening just tenths of a second into the red. These are not the drivers causing T-bone accidents, but are the drivers unfairly carrying the financial burden of the program. I challenged my former city of Santa Clarita on this. I was successful in that the city ended the program. Now I'm working to keep them from coming back to Phoenix.
Do US stop lights do an emergency switch to red when they detect someone running them? I have seen it used on a priority light in New Zealand and thought pretty cool tech.
Typically is there is an "all red clearance" after each yellow where every light is red, usually for a half second. If a vehicle is predicted to run a red light, this all red time is extended. If the next light already turned green it stays green, then it's too late
There's a side-effect from mailing out the violations, too: some people will accept them as the price of driving. Winston Sterzal made a video a few years ago about why so many drivers in China are so bad: the Chinese authorities, faced with a huge increase of people driving, went straight to automated violations, that is, speed cameras and red light cameras. So people simply get fined a few weeks later and there thus isn't enough incentive to change their behaviour. But in countries like the US, it's not that uncommon for police to stop people with traffic violations and that is a much bigger inconvenience than a fine in the mail to be paid.
That or solid steel bollards that pop up when the light is red, and make them square and not rounded. Of course they would have to be made so that if an emergency vehicle is detected, such as an ambulance, police, or fire truck, they could quickly retract back in to let them through.
@@cameraredeye3115 Does the driver deserve to potentially die for running a red? Yes. Does the passengers also deserve it. Yes obviously they're with the driver.
I support red light cameras and speed cameras, however govts often do a disservice by not acting on the data they provide. If you set up one of them, and notice there's a lot of speeding or red light running, then you have a good amount of evidence that there is an issue here. The road is too wide thus encourages speeding, or something with the shape of the road is leading to more speeding or red light running than normal. If so, do something about it, redesign the road to make speeding and red running very hard or impossible (you can use the money from the camera for that). If your govt doesn't do anything, just leaves the cameras up, then yeah, they are now just making money off of an issue they are aware of and refuse to fix. Speeding is preventable, there's plenty of evidence and case studies showing proper street designs lead to fewer crashes and speedings, so local govts have no excuse.
I mean sure, but then you hit exactly the same problems. How many people do you really think there are who oppose red light cameras, but would be fine with the sorts of measures you mention? In a western democracy, a failing government is a reflection on the electorate and not much more.
@@macsound That's why normally the money doesn't go to the ones operating the camera's. So the camera operators don't have the incentive to fine as much people as possible. But if you have private companies running the camera's and they have to make their investment back. That's just asking for problems...
In memphis these kinds of crashes are incredibly common so much so that drivers often wait a second or so because so many ppl enjoy running lights out here.
So why do some states have horizontal traffic lights and others have vertical traffic lights And why do some states have yellow traffic lights and other black/ dark grey ones, and why Louisiana has green ones
In my city they wanted to remove the red light cameras BUT some how the city owed so much money to the private company that ran them, the city was held hostage and now pays the company 90% of revenue from red light tickets. BIG SCAM.
@@AixRush I mean, pull a Netherlands and create roads that don't make you feel safe doing those unsafe speeds. Make the roads tighter, with kerbs right next to the lanes, lot's of trees making the space feel narrow. Subconsciously enforce the speed limits.
Stupid idea... so reduce the efficiency of travel for an entire city to reduce damage in the rare event of a collision. No, you time intersections better (few seconds of all red phase) and invest in car safety technology by crash testing / airbags etc... which is both being done right now.
@@AixRush reducing speed isn't so simple as just putting a lower number on the sign, but actually changing the design of the road. American roads are unreasonably wide, which means people feel comfortable driving very fast. Exceeding the speed limit is often subconscious because drive at what speed feels comfortable, not necessarily whats legal. The solution is to narrow roads, maybe add a protected bike lane or street parking, which makes you much more hesitant to drive fast, reducing speeds and the danger of accidents.
@@Leuel48Fan if you're worried about the efficiency and safety of travel for an entire city, then you shouldn't want cars on the road at all. Cars are one of the most inefficient and dangerous forms of transport that exist. In reality, you should support high quality public transport to get as many cars off the road as possible and make cities more walkable so that people aren't required to drive everywhere. This also has the side benefit of being better for the environment.
Having dashboard cameras installed on your vehicle (front and back) is the best investment you can make for your insurance company. I've even helped one chap win a case because I was a bystander to his fiasco and gave him my footage.
Great video and very informative per usual. I knew St Louis had its fair share of red light cameras, not sure how many are still in operation. One suggestion for a future video is traffic signal based, which you’ve touched on in a few videos. Mainly the flashing yellow arrow turn signals- are they better than the old standard doghouse turn lights? Is there a benefit to the flashing arrow vs a steady yield on green light to turn on, even though it’s the same thing? Just some things to possibly think about or ti start with. Can’t wait for your next video.
I saw some in Amarillo last week, but they looked switched off. Throughout California, there are red cameras that are collecting dust but don't actually work. Deterrence, perhaps?
Instead they should turn a rapid flashing light towards the incoming vehicle, as a warning. Activation uses a predictive algorithm based on speed, car profile size, and average stop times. These could even be used to trigger a different warning for the other direction, on slight delay if the car didn't slow sufficiently to allow a stop before the intersection. The risk of a collisions could be reduced, as this could stop inadvertent red light runners, and warn other oncoming traffic. If safety is the true goal, not revenue generation, this makes sense. (though You could still couple with revenue generation by issuing tickets for violators) This system could even be implemented to reduce rear end collision at a stop light if more sensors were added, and automatically report such potential incidents to a reviewer or dispatch office.
There's absolutely better ways, if the goal is truly about safety. The fact is, RLC's are not about reducing accidents, and solely about generating revenue.
The problem is if the light turns yellow and your going at the speed limit and then someone is doing the same behind you, you risk getting rear ended stopping short.
While I think these are important, and useful, As a software engineer, and a very security minded individual, I think there is a VERY important balance to strike between surveillance like this and what it does.
I think a good way for red light cameras to regain popularity is to decrease the fine or eliminate it, and put points on you license or be required to attend a traffic school or meeting. Fining people is not popular, but addressing the problem is.
Points add cost to your insurance, and traffic school either costs money, costs time, or both. So, in any case those are fines, just of a different type. I think the main issue was then sending out tickets for people running a red light by a tenth of a second or some other absurdly short time, or rolling through a right on red a little too quickly when the intersection's obviously clear... that kinda thing. I don't think many people have too much of a problem with clear violations. It's the edge cases that annoy people.
I used to live in Dubai and if you ran a red light there you received a message inviting you to the local traffic department to view the correlated video. You could either agree to a (rather large) fine or have you car impounded for 10 days. Plus points on your licence.
I’d support cameras if they didn’t come with egregious fines. Makes it seem like a money grab. $20 fine would be better to reinforce good behavior than to punish a mistake
@@kenbrown2808 or the other thing is to keep increasing the price for repeated offenders after say about 180 days of last violation, then it would reset to it's base price of a "first" ticket offender.
Running a red light could get you and/or someone else killed, so I have absolutely no problem with an eye-watering fine - even if it lands on my doorstep. There's a whole discussion to be had about fines being less of a deterrent to the rich, and whether the Swiss or Finnish model of varying the fines based on income addresses that fairly. From personal experience, a 500€ speeding fine in Finland certainly made me a whole lot more cautious in a way that 3 points and £60 in the UK (both for 30km/h or 18mph over, as it happens) never did.
Dashcams are the holy grail here. (responding to first 90 seconds) Even if the other party is poorly or not even filmed, the circumstances of the dashcammer before the incident are recorded and the incident can be pieced together with still photographs taken after the accident.
We do need to make intersections safer from red-light runners. If these systems are smart enough to detect and photograph runners, why not integrate them with the lights, so that the lights don't turn green if there's a runner approaching too fast to stop on a cross street? In that case, you could protect the public and also fine the runner. I do oppose these private-sector operators who install cameras free on spec for a share of the profits from fines on the condition that the cities will shorten the yellow phases. That's highway robbery!
a band I used to be in had rehearsals near the beacon Hill area of Seattle when I left practices I always had to go through an intersection with a red light camera. a fun thing to do was to approach the light at full speed and then slam on my brakes just before I got to the White line. I would get flashed almost every time. this meant that a human being had to look at it and realize that I stopped fully before I made my right turn. I got flashed a lot but I never got a ticket in the mail.
I think red light cameras should be installed and used specifically for those who completely blow the red light going straight or to figure out fault in accidents caused by red light runners. Right turns on red should not require a complete stop, that's B.S. Reasonable speed reduction should be the law.
Red literally means STOP, even for right turns. It's not B.S., it's common sense. Failure to come to a complete stop before turning right on a red should absolutely count as running a red. The problem with using red light cameras in the US is that greedy politicians and PDs use them to generate revenue instead of making intersections safer. That's why they're so goddamn controversial...
@@cameraredeye3115 I think rolling through a stoplight at 2mph to make a right turn can functionally provide the exact same amount of safety with a slight improvement on efficiency. Think of all the stop-starting in line for a right turn vs a slow continuous motion. I don't think it's so cut and dried. For what it's worth, I come to a complete stop every time because I comply with the law. I just wish the law allowed some leeway for slow-moving right turns through red lights and stop signs.
I personally have no issue with red light or speed cameras, A LONG as they're set up properly so that there's a grace amount involved. Red light cameras not so much because I don't run red lights, but with speeding I drive a car that has an analog speedometer so I'd like it to have a little grace in case I drift a kilometer or 5 or so over.
I'm honestly down for speed cameras with a max grace period of 5 MPH over what's posted. The issue comes with the potential to purposefully lower speed limits to piss people off and make them want to drive fast enough to set off the cameras out of spite, then refuse to pay the fine.
@@unknownhours you're right, but that's because most situations are covered by standard intersections. although I must say "concrete is better than gadgets" is based as hell, it really irks me every time I see someone suggest a policy change to curb traffic behavior and I'm like ???? does this mfer have any idea how humans work
Didn't think I'd learn anything new, BUT I ended up learning that I unintentionally fooled a camera at the start of COVID. THAT'S why I never received a ticket... I was under the trigger speed!
^this^. The "goal" is to fleece motorists by shortening the yellow and trapping them with the red. Too many corrupt city officials ruin any possible benefit of the system.
I know it is not right, but I have sped up to get into the intersection before the yellow turns to red. The problem is they must have enhanced their system in my area because it had recently given me an automated speeding ticket in some of those situations.
My issue with these is that on paper they sound great, catch red-light runners, I mean who wouldn't want that? But when I actually saw them in use, and when I saw them being used I changed my opinion. In Chicago, cities would install them whenever they needed more revenue. Basically, they would say stuff like "oh our budget is going to be short this month, you know what... how about we shorten the yellow light by a second, and that will generate the extra income we need this month". Another problem is people would be so afraid of them that they would ALWAYS stop for the light which means they would go from 60 to 0 in 5 seconds at 20 feet from the light. Which would cause more rear-end crashes, the justification by the cities was that they stopped the most dangerous type of crash, but in the end, they just increased the number of crashes overall which made traffic slower because you had more crashes at the intersections daily. Plus each city would set its own rules so in some cities if you turned right on red, you would get a ticket, in others cities you could turn on red, so it was confusing because each city had different rules, as a result, you would drive down a street passing several cities and each city had a different rule on each red light detector. Plus because the signs were inconsistent, some cities didn't put the "Warning red light detector here" signs on the intersections poles they would instead just put them way back (or behind a tree) so the thing was... you didn't know the rules of each intersection because the rules for each city were posted 800 feet before you got to the light, and then wouldn't put the rules on the actual light you were turning at so you didn't know if turning right on red would give you a ticket or not. So not only were you dealing with rules that varied from city to city, but the lights weren't even clearly labeled and had inconsistent variations (like the yellow lights). As a result, the reason why I and everyone with me really started hating them was that it became more of a game of the cities against its citizens than a tool for safety. Because when you drive down a road where every red light detector has a different rule, and they are all marked inconsistently, and the cities adjust the yellow lights to make more revenue. People panic and are more distracted looking for the detectors, get into more crashes and slow down the streets so much that even if you are one of those people who never run a red in your life (like me), you start to really Really REALLY hate them after a while and you start to think they cause more problems than they are worth. This is why I hate them so much! Plus don't get me started when they break, the lights on them would just start flashing nonstop. It was like a strobe light that lit up the entire intersection every few seconds, not only was that super annoying but it distracted so many people, it would happen a lot when it rained, which in Chicago happened a lot.
In The Netherlands we have red light camera's since the '50s or '60s. The camera's where activated by an airtube connected to the camera. Edit: it was 1966 th-cam.com/video/xOLUcEbpMnk/w-d-xo.html
That's actually a really cool video. Thanks for linking it. Although I did have to turn on translation subtitles since the video is not in English. For anyone wondering, it's a link to an old black and white video showcasing the "new" camera hardware and system.
@@psychedalek Yes. Some red light cameras are installed at intersections with artificially decreased yellow length. Of course running the red light is reasonable in that situation
The issue with RLC is that they are little more than a revenue source in many cases. It is not unheard of for yellow light durations to be reduced (often well below federal guidelines,) in order to maintain the revenue stream. While they proport to reduce fatal crashes, many studies have shown they increase read end collisions; Which while generally less serious to non-Pinto drivers, actually ends up causing more accidents. - When you give a government a way to make money and cry safety at the same time, you end up with a recipe for corruption.
Here in Britain, we always paint them bright yellow (same with speed cameras, most of ours are combi speed and red-light). The reason being that they are alway for safety and not money making.
I feel like they’d be more popular if you had a few seconds of red before you got ticketed, there is a pretty big difference between mistiming a yellow, and blasting right through a red light.
In Missouri, they were deemed illegal due to the violation of Presumption of Innocence. When a red light violation is sent to the registered owner of the vehicle, that specific person is automatically deemed guilty, and they need to prove their own innocence to get out of the ticket (say someone else was driving, and give their information). Almost all cities removed all their red light cameras in the state and had to refund all fines paid. As far as I know, only one city in the state still has red light cameras, Hannibal. But while they still take pictures of the car passing through, and of the license plate, they now also take a picture zoomed in of the driver. The picture processors compare the driver with the picture on the DMV file of the registered owner. If they match, a ticket is issued with points. If the driver is obscured, or the pictures don't match, no ticket is issued.
here the red light cameras will take a picture from the front, showing also the driver; Of course, the ticket will still be sent to the registered owner, but then he can forward it to whoever really drove it
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 78 | คู่เอก "ปกรณ์ vs ฟาบิโอ"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LSOmgl0Th2c/mqdefault.jpg)
99% of the reason they are so hated in the US is because so many of them were installed and operated as a money grab. Politicians saw them as revenue generators so they could cut taxes and win re-election. And a lot of cities and counties illegally shortened yellow lights to make it impossible to safely stop before the red light, hoping to catch more hapless drivers and rake in the cash. (Maryland was notorious for this.) Most of that has been litigated and sorted out now, but it took lawsuits to make cities stop using red light cameras as ATMs and start using them for their intended purpose.
In Europe, traffic camrea's (red light ,speed, average speed,...) are everywhere. I guess it makes a difference when the money goes to the state instead of the local level. While there have been protests against those camera's and they got set on fire several times, the government didn't give in. Currently, everybody is used to them and safety has improved.
Wow very interesting!
I was told that red lights cameras didn't reduce runners, instead it created rear end crashes from people hitting the brakes at a sight of a yellow light
@@preciadoalex123 not sure if that stat is true or not, but even if it is, I still would imagine those types of crashes are far safer overall than T-bone collisions, so they do at least have safety benefits in terms of less serious injury/death
Money grabs or not they don’t falsely ticket people. The evidence is generally irrefutable so those opposed are generally people who run red lights and just don’t want to get caught. I had a nearly new vehicle totaled and was injured by someone running a red light. He hit my driver’s door at an estimated 50 mph.
Rob,
Thank you for allowing me to be a part of your amazing work! This video is 100% accurate and tells the story in a way far better than I have ever seen during countless presentations to government officials. All of us that do this work (now or in the past) do it for safety. Your work is so good and you are so skilled. I never worried if the story would be accurate and it was. I miss night focusing those plate cameras and sometimes getting yelled at about my relatives...
Did you catch photography as a hobby because of that?
@@leonarperro Hello there....great question. I caught the photography "bug" but install CCTV for a job with what I learned there. Taking photos car tags at high speed is a challenge, but fun when it worked!
@@joedillon159 I see, it was the other way around! I can only imagine the challenge to calculate the focus where the car is expected to be at the time of the shot, even considering the different speeds that car might be travelling! Respect!
@@leonarperro The computer system helped in an amazing way. It took the vehicle speed and would vary the trigger of the plate camera by milliseconds to make sure the plate was in the frame. The flash system was one flash could only fire twice before recharge. So Flash Take One took a Scene 1 photo before the car entered the intersection with the scene camera only. Flash Take Two would then take Scene 2 photo AND plate shot at the same time after the car was in the intersection. That gave us more visible angles on the plate since not looking so far down. It all happened in less than a second, compiled the data into protected packages and then reloaded for the next one. Amazing stuff.
@@joedillon159 That's excellent! Thanks for the explanation!
Interesting. Here in Australia we also have 2 induction loops for detection, but one is in front of the stop line, and there's enough of a gap between the stop line and the cross traffic for them to not trigger it. The camera is then triggered by the second loop which can only be triggered by a red-light runner.
Ours also takes 2 photos, to confirm it's a runner and not someone who failed to stop fully before the line.
Here in SA I've noticed that only one loop is used for red light cameras but 2 are used for speed cameras. and both are on the intersection side of the stop line
we also do speed and registration checks, so if your car is unregistered while you are speeding and running a red light, I guarantee that you will be having a garnished wage for a very long time and enough points off to be put on the wall of shame, when it was released in Adelaide there was a few door knocks with "please explain" when they went through at 100kph over the limit through a red light with an unregistered vehicle.
Same here in Germany
Here in the USA the cities use a "potential revenue map" to decide where the red light detectors are put. So if that gives you an idea of why they don't care to do it right now you know.
@@Tindog81476
Source for this claim?
in Baltimore they changed the yellow lights out of nowhere to be way shorter. it was a fun lawsuit years ago. so red light cameras were banned for many years
Same in Illinois and New York, but they weren't banned, the cities just got told that they did it. ;)
Now they're back... and we're at it again with the same corrupt mindsets.
Baltimore, and Maryland for that matter, need to crackdown on stolen; expired and/or illegally registered plates (falsified VA tags) cos those mofos couldn't care less if they get a ticket for a "ghost" plate
Same in virginia
Great video as always!
In my state, Tennessee, they're legal to install; but they're non-enforceable. As in the state deemed it a few years ago that the cameras fall under "The right to face your accuser" law and if you get a red light ticket in the mail you can simply not pay it and face no repercussions for not paying it.
And also certain cities (Knoxville, Oak Ridge, and others) got caught red-handed illegally adjusting the yellow light timers at major intersections with cameras from their recommended time. From around 4 to 7 seconds, down to as little as 1 to 2 seconds as an attempt to boost revenue from the cameras.
I think the cameras set up as revenue systems with excessively short yellow and all-red light durations are the ones that must be addressed. Companies and government agencies pushing for these should be penalized so severely that they wouldn't do this at all.
Plus, and this cannot be overstated, they're citing _THE CAR_ not the driver. (more specifically, the registered owner of the tag.) It's a lot harder to prove who was actually driving, and the courts know it. I've seen figures of 60+% in NC go unpaid. And there's nothing these companies can do about it. (the only one I've ever gotten -- and I wasn't the driver -- was from the 3rd party operator NOT any government or law enforcement agency. So not even the teeth of a parking ticket. And, for the record, the process is 100% automatic - no human involved at all... unless you complain.)
Unfortunately, Oregon ruled on that yellow-light law, after it came up in Beaverton, as being completely legal because there's no law stating a minimum for yellow lights.
@@vc8my "certain" states, not all of them. when you don't regulate, well you should be expecting nightmare clown like behavior.
That is some shady shit in those cities...
1:29 What a small world. A few years ago I was asking Billy about Korean history in the comments section of his videos and it turns out he and Road Guy Rob, another TH-camr in a completely different subject matter yet whom I also enjoy watching and talked to in the comments, happen to know each other.
Yep. I know Billy Go.
10 months late to the party, but I used to watch Billy G for Korean lessons 😁
Cameo is too cool 👍
I watch him too! This was such an unexpected cameo lol
Even though I've been caught by a red light camera (here in Victoria, Australia), I can still absolutely support their use (given how potentially dangerous it can be to blow through a red light, even accidentally like I did). Passing through a light-controlled intersection is a risky manoeuvre at the best of times, so anything to mitigate any potential risks is a good thing.
Im also from the people’s republic of Victoria. Not unsurprisingly the traffic camera capital of the world
They had these in New jersey a while back but got taken out of the amount of lawsuits and false flags. Jersey isnt the best place to drive if u dont know what youre doing. Regardless not being able to stop in time bc of a sudden yellow in front of u, passing the line after the red even though the camera cant see it, not even going pass the red light but pass the line but in the intersection
@@zofferz0 This "sudden yellow" thing is a mystery... lights always turn yellow after green... this should come as no surprise to anyone driving. If the light has been green for a while it's going to turn yellow, that's how it works, drive accordingly.
"accident" is a strange word to apply, even in this context - either you were paying attention to the light sequence or you weren't, but it really does underline how converting an intersection like that to a roundabout would increase driver engagement/awareness.
@@johnarthurkelly the problem is that yellow lights get shorter, after a red light camera is installed
I like how Rob uses BeamNG Drive, to remake a crash, or something. Rob, you are a *Genius* !
Would love for you to come to the UK and do a video on Average Speed Cameras in the UK ! - Amazes me that US is banning new safety systems, while we're getting more and more over the pond!
Ok
U LIKE THAT? Lol those things are horrible as a driver!
@@samuvisser no there not
Speed cameras wouldn't fly in America. My state, NJ, has them banned, as everyone speeds here
Some states have them, and others have them for work zones or city areas. But generally in America people think they're so important they even dislike traffic enforcement. I lost my cousin because of a car crash so I think traffic safety is very important. Speed kills
Rob, I love that a lot of your filming takes place in and around Los Angeles, because I usually have a story or something connected to an intersection or a street that you show, especially in the San Fernando Valley. I was surprised when the first intersection you showed was Victory and De Soto, because I was certain that there were red light cameras there (I thought you were showing that there were none). Actually, I GOT a camera violation literally one stop over, on Victory and Mason once while entering Pierce College. Also, that clip of Magic Mountain Parkway scared me because we all go pretty fast on that street, especially at night. One time I almost hit a Sheriff's patrol car right under that freeway overpass on Magic Mountain PKWY in the clip.
He also showed the infamous stockdale red light intersection in Bakersfield.
I moved to southern California four years ago. Financially a bad choice, but for filming, it's great to have so much transportation to film within 2 hours of where I live.
@@Killersanchez256 when? I'm from Bako, but I must have not recognized it
@@LabFind I Knew a few of the clips looked like Bakersfield for example every scene where hes standing in front of an ARCO ampm or carquest its the one next to the 99 on White ln and Wible. At 5:11 hes at Frugatti's on Coffee Rd by the Westside pkwy. He records the Stockdale intersection at 7:31 and after. Now I feel like a stalker...
@@Killersanchez256 It is...goodness, how did I not catch that- I got a ticket at that intersection
As always: well researched, entertaining presentation. Well done!
Thanks, Jan! This video took about 200 hours to make. So, your compliment means a lot to me.
Did I spot Beamng at 1:58? Also had to click as soon as I saw the upload, these videos are always great
Cannot wait for the policy video. I've never intentionally run a red light, but I've gotten multiple tickets from insanely short yellow lights where I was certain I was safe.
Red light cameras are fine by me, but the problem is of course when you get money involved. When you have private, for-profit companies running the programs, they have to turn a profit. That means tweaking traffic light timings in hopes of getting money. If the cameras were owned & images processed by the municipality that installed them, and you remove the profit factor, I think they'd be better.
That's always baffled me about traffic enforcement cameras in the US (and other countries). Over here they are operated by the police. The municipality owns and maintains them, but the police operate them. All fines are collected by the DOJ and are put into the state coffers. So the proceeds do not go to the police, municipality or province that may own the road that the cameras are on.
This has basically lead to a situation where the cameras are only in locations where enforcement actually makes sense. Though there are no red-light-only cameras here. There are just speed cameras that pull double duty as red light cameras as well. In which case it is completely possible to be issued two tickets if you're dumb enough to speed through a red.
@@fermitupoupon1754 That's a good way of doing it. Makes sure the local municipality / PD can't extort the public in their area.
But they don’t control the light, like he said they just use a sensor to see when it is red, they don’t actually have any control of the intersection.
A new amendment to the constitution should be that no government entity can make money from the fines it levies. This includes private prisons.
Tickets could include mandatory community service if they want to increase the punishment.
Rob in another video suggested something that could reduce the profit incentive. Something along the lines of any money generated from fines for infractions is removed from circulation completely. Like withdrawing a grand from your bank account only to burn the money.
You've missed two important topics from those against RLCs:
1) There are a lot of accusations against municipalities saying they've set the yellow timing too short, therefore generating revenue from those who otherwise wouldn't be in violation.
2) There are accusations that safety studies show panic-stops by drivers suddenly recognizing they're in a RLC intersection causes more accidents, and more injuries, then simple running through accidents.
Those aren't just accusations, they are proven and verified facts.
Those probably will all be covered in the second video which discusses the policies behind the red light camera programs
Some municipalities were required to shorten the yellows by their contract with the camera company. Studies showed that lengthening the yellow did more to reduce collisions than cameras.
Lots of talking bout studies without links itt.
@@chublez plenty of lawsuits have already been won, and the evidence was presented in those lawsuits. I'm not digging through court cases on the internet to appease your disbelief. Go look for it yourself.
The better solution is Roundabouts: no traffic lights needed in most situations. Speeds get sufficiently reduced that accidents are avoided or less severe.
Dashcam Owners Australia would beg to differ.
The roundabout confuses and scares the American
@@notch4president as much as SPUI?
@@PrograError why not a roundabout SPUI?
@@notch4president No they don't. We have plenty of roundabouts here.
My city had red light cameras for awhile, but they were removed after a short time. The next city still used them and one intersection you avoided since even if you stopped before making a right turn, it took a photo. I used to cut through the parking lot of the business at that corner to play it safe when turning right.
In many places, cutting through a parking lot can get you a ticket.
A few reasons why lots of people hate them:
1. No context - they ignore the situation and external factors
2. They seem "out to get you" with unknown yellow light length or a 2 mph rolling stop that never endangered anyone
3. Can increase stress and decrease safety with people overreacting to avoid tickets
When I got my first red light ticket, I understood I deserve the ticket but I was kinda weirded out because I felt like we're in a surveillance state. Obviously nowadays you expect it, but "automate enforcement" is still kinda iffy for me
when I got my first one, my sun visor was blocking my face in the picture so I said it wasn't me :)
"Automated Enforcement" is far better than "the cops pull someone over and shoot them for no reason."
Meh you have no expectation of privacy in public anyway.
@@johnarthurkelly 🙄
@@danieldaniels7571 This seems like a uniquely American thing, with your Constitutional rights regarding prosecution and identifying offenders directly, and such.
The UK defaults to fining (and giving penalty points to) the registered keeper, unless someone else takes responsibility, or you can prove it was definitely not you. This can lead to family or friends taking the fall for you if you have too many penalty points already. 😅
Love the use of BeamNG for some of the simulated crashes!
RLCs were outlawed because they became a tool of revenue generation instead of safety. Cities were reducing yellow light timings and getting lazy with throwing out the questionable "violations". Eventually people became so paranoid they would brake check at the light and cause rear-end crashes. Besides, most people (I would assume) run red lights that cause crashes due to inattention instead of trying to intentionally save time. A well timed intersection should have a few seconds of all red to allow late traffic to clear the intersection.
The problem with the few seconds of all red is that it just encourages red light running because most drivers know that intersections do this, so they know they have a couple more seconds to enter the intersection when it's completely safe. It basically defeats the purpose of red lights because then people start to stop trusting them and stop taking them seriously. It is important to design things to be truthful rather than safe. If red means danger then you have to make it mean danger, don't show red if there is no danger. It's a boy who cried wolf situation and it's the same reason why when a fire alarm goes off, your first reaction is to think "false alarm" and not "evacuate". Making things too safe actually makes them more unsafe because people lose trust in the system and ignore the rules.
@@pwhnckexstflajizdryvombqug9042 Not for nothing but the cameras would still catch inattentive or dangerous drivers. I've seen post-3 seconds of red-light runners. It was amazing and terrifying. They had to be not paying attention for so long they probably didn't even realize they had run a red light.
They are caught when light timing is fair.
@@pwhnckexstflajizdryvombqug9042 Many lights do have a small all-red period for this exact reason. It's only 1-2s so not so much that people notice or want to ignore the light.
I think the people that lock up their brakes after seeing the first flash and still get a ticket because obviously they had the intent to run the red light and then they still ended up in the intersection during a red light
Hahaha the GTA 5 references and use of BeamNG footage is amazing!
Hi
Your videos amaze me, I stumbled upon one about a year ago and I have been hooked ever since! Superb production quality!
My feeling is that by the time you see the sign, you probably already ran the light. Active traffic calming and roundabouts should keep everyone safer.
My feeling is that you shouldn't need to see the sign and you just shouldn't be running any red.
That was my concern with the one in the San Fernando valley. Seventy-five feet seems a bit short.
Great vid Rob. I wish they would do something in Utah about red light runners. I've witnessed dozens of people in the past 6 months who clearly ran the red light or the yellow changed to red right before/after they crossed the white lines. I would've been hit a couple of times if I wasn't paying attention and had just gone after my light turned green.
In the past I would encounter an intersection of 8 lanes of traffic, it was impossible to cross all lanes on green. Too short of a cycle is a problem too.
In CO the fines for red light cameras are essentially optional. If you get a ticket from one of the private companies maintaining the cameras and you don't pay it, they can't do anything to you. They can't report it to the DMV so it doesn't go on your license, they can't send it to collections, and they can't sue you for non-payment unless the original fine notice was officially hand served to you - not delivered in the mail. To compensate, they make the first notice as alarming and intimidating as possible so you don't look too close at the fine print.
My issue is the inconsistent length of time between a yellow and red light. Some places it's 3 seconds, and others it's half a second. You can get burned if you run a red without even knowing!
The biggest issue with red light cameras are the corrupt officials reducing yellow light time, usually below the minimum DOT requirement, in order to increase ticket revenue.
@UCRXo1FQ2gdTs-_OHk_3mkgw They illegally shorten the yellow light specifically to make the cameras generate revenue. There are minimum permitted yellow durations for a reason.
If I recall right, the minimum yellow time in the federal MUTCD is three seconds
The solution I like for accidental red light running is adding a flashing white strobe to the red light when energized. I've seen it most often with a horizontal strobe running through the middle of the red light during the red light phase.
American roads being so large and straight is a major contributor, as well as it being legal to pass the stop line on yellow right up until red.
Smaller/Narrower roads means that traffic lights will be closer to your field of vision, and make it more obvious that it's a junction/intersection requiring caution.
Huge roads ('stroads') like in the US make it feel more like a motorway/freeway, where you can just keep driving at full speed.
The fact that flashing lights, massive red lights, and other crazy signals are needed in addition to the standard red light means that the entire junction/road is poorly designed.
The goal of reducing red light crashes is noble, although in alot of cases, it seems more like the goal is to drive revenue. The example of the red light camera notice is a great example. A 75 foot notice seems to tip into the revenue, but the 800 ft notice seems to tip into the safety. Having clear and open communication on the timing of the yellow to red is also another important factor. There has been more than one large city toying with the timing of the yellow light in an effort to increase 'safety' when objectively it looks like it was to increase revenue. Looking forward to part 2 of the video
on the other side of the coin, your decision whether to stop for a red light shouldn't be based on whether you can get away with running it.
Why does there need to be any notice of the camera at all? What you are saying is that you run reds and crosswalks unless there is a camera.
Also cover cases where cities like Beaverton, OR were intentionally timing the traffic lights wrong at Camera enabled junctions as a source of income to the city.
Beaverton us doing similar shenanigans with their speed cameras.
Beaverton also has the best Japanese supermarket I've ever seen.
@@RoadGuyRob Uwajimaya !
I'm still trying to grasp how running red lights can be such a big problem... I hardly ever see anyone running a red, except maybe if they've just tried to make it through orange.
But this is coming from the Netherlands.
I do see plenty of pedestrians and cyclists crossing at red, but usually only when there's no cars around.
I've seen maybe one guy a year who blatantly runs it, without any ambiguity from a yellow. No crashes from it though
There is an estimated 260,000 crashes a year from red light running in the US. In 2019 143,000 people were seriously injured in red light collisions.
As a fellow Dutchman, i have ran a red accidentally. It happens, especially if its not at a clear crossing in the middle of a city street
@@Old_Ladies even in a very big country with an unimaginable amount of car miles driven each year, that's still a shockingly high number.
Maybe, because of stroads with dumb (timed) lights on every block.
At quiet times, a modern, properly designed light in the Netherlands will turn green by the time you slowed to cornering speed. Less annoyance about useless STOP lights.
The past few years I’ve seen a massive increase in Red Light AND Speed Camera combos in Sydney! 😳 Speed through a Green light, you’re done for speeding. Speed through a Red light, you’re doubly done!
I got involved in getting rid of the cameras in Houston. I knew from visiting other communities how dangerous they are, and how they are too tempting for government employees. I also knew the vendor company was a bunch of crooks because they had been one of our resellers at a company I had represented. They were known for “buying” the business, so everyone knew they would be bribing officials.
Here’s how it all goes wrong. The cameras are first put in the most problematic intersections. They start generating massive fees, and the city officials are ecstatic. And so are the vendors who get a percentage. Of course, many people get more careful and the money tapers off. Now the fun begins. The goal is no longer safety, it’s income.
Why engineer an intersection to reduce violations which costs money, when you can put up a camera and MAKE money? Violations are down? What could get the income back up? Reduce the timing on the yellow, or make other changes, to increase violations.
All of these were actually happening around the country. Drivers were being induced to break the law with purposefully rigged traffic engineering in order to fill the coffers at city hall. Serious injuries and fatalities were happening at higher rates, and while you can blame any individual accident on the violators, the rates were telling the true story. Examination of designs at high fee producing intersections were showing obvious problems and variations from engineering standards (mostly light timing problems).
One study, paid for by the City of Houston, showed the cameras were not improving safety so the mayor paid the Professor from Rice University to “fix” the study. IOW, Mayor White bribed a college professor to change the results because he wanted that money to pay for programs to make his record look good because he wanted to run for governor.
It was all just shameful. This is why the character of politicians should matter more than how good they make you “feel” or how well the “own” the other side.
Great comment. We had similar issues up in Chicagoland. Maybe the solution would've been using the cameras temporarily. Once the problem is fixed, then take them down. But we all know that temporary government programs usually end up being permanent.
I'm not sure how uniform this is, but when they had red light cameras in College Station, they ticketed the owner of the vehicle rather than a driver, and there was no appeals process, because it was all handled by the vendor.
@@River-zo6ve That was the way both of the two big vendors operated in Texas and several other states. A friend’s mom, who was like a second mom to me, went back and forth over one of the photos because it wasn’t her, it wasn’t a type of car she had ever owned, and it clearly was not her license number. They sold the debt to a collection agency eventually. Crazy.
My in-laws were visiting from out-of-state several years ago when they got a ticket from a red light camera. The pictures/video clearly showed the car ahead of theirs running the red light, but their car with their license plate never entered the intersection. They called the number on the ticket to ask if they could get someone to manually review it, because it would be obvious to any honest and rational person that they did not run the red light, but they were told the only way to dispute it was to show up to court and argue their case. Their only other option was to check the guilty box on the ticket and mail it back with their fine payment. Since taking time off of work to travel 800 miles to dispute a $150 fine is not very cost effective, they just paid it.
Your videos are always hilarious and educational. Another great one! Thanks for doing it.
Over here in Switzerland, the cameras use LIDAR-scanners. Terribly expensive but very versatile, with no fixed infrastructure except a power cord needed.
This way, semi-mobile enforcement is possible, with cameras moving around every few months. Makes it very effective.
The best solution for most intersections is to replace traffic lights with roundabouts.
Works well here in the UK. Roundabouts aren't perfect, accidents still happen, but at lower speeds. Less people get hurt.
@@stuartjohnston1086 exactly, they won't solve all crashes but they can prevent a fair number of them.
Not necessarily. Roundabouts require more land use, are less forgiving to pedestrians especially those with a limited sight abilities and can create issues for development. Peds are less likely to cross them to get to a store so you often see them as a barrier to continued commercial growth. They also 'equal weight' all approaches which isn't necessarily a good thing if you have uneven volumes of traffic approaching. They are very good as transitions between more rural environments into more urban ones to signify to drivers that they are entering a new environment.
@@jayjackson5705 that's why I said most intersections not all intersections. In the US we use very few roundabouts instead opting for traffic lights everywhere.
There are times when traffic lights are superior to roundabouts, however in many cases they are not.
@@bolt5564 you are absolutely correct. Sorry, a lot of people feel that roundabouts are this panacea or magic intersection and choosing them as an option still requires nuance.
An extremely easy way to reduce the red light crashes without having the problems and all of the costs associated with red light cameras is to set up less expensive digital cameras to record the intersection from all directions and have them record to hard drives in the unit that stores the images. Then, when a collision occurs at the intersection have a tech go to the intersection and download the digital recordings from all of the cameras and use the recordings to decide who did what. That stops people getting upset at the red light cameras while bringing attention to the incidents involving a collision and properly assigning fault
As a traffic reporter in Dallas, I pranked my listeners on one April Fool's Day by announcing that TxDOT would be installing spike strips (the kind they had at drive-in movies) at intersections that would activate on red and retract on green. I said that new signs would be going up reading "Severe Tire Damage on Red". Emergency vehicles would retract the spikes remotely.
As ridiculous as the spike strips may sound, I would think that's the only thing that would completely stop red light running. I loved this video but I was hoping some stats would be presented at the end to show if there was any sort of measurable reduction in this type of violation before and after installation of a camera; I suspect not. And if not maybe spike strips should be considered :)
LOL! That's hilarious. How did they take that? Were the drivers enthusiastic or apprehensive?
I wonder if these would make people slow down: jovet.net/files/images/Sign_SevereTireDamageOnRed1.png
My answer to reduce fed light crashes is to feplace the signal light intersection with Roundabouts. The City of Carmei, Indiana, is in an ongoing program of doing this, and it works. Accident rates have reduced, gasoline is conserved, and the few accidents that remain are not producing injuries. They save money because they cost less to maintain. Roundabouts are a win-win fix to traffic intersection problems
I think the only part you missed is the danger that they pose from driver's reactions to them. Many drivers would notice the cameras too late to safely stop and would slam on their brakes, causing the person behind them to rear-end them.
But yeah, the primary reason they're hated so much is because of their primary use as a fundraiser. Red light cameras probably attract a fair amount of vandalism to themselves, too.
Where I live there is a red light traffic light and no one now would dare go through a yellow light.
Red light cameras are very common here in Northern Virginia, and we love them. They’ve dramatically reduced red light running.
*runs a red
“Oh no, now ppl will know I’m a bad driver”
*Votes to get rid of them
1:25 Am I the only one who recognized Billy G as that TH-camr who teaches Korean 👀
I used to think these were BS and that all tickets should be served by a police officer, but my mind has changed on the matter. A) If the presence of cameras result in drivers being more mindful of red lights, then already they're a success. B) In the US, far too many encounters between motorists and traffic cops escalate badly. For traffic violations, maybe it is best to let machines handle them and reduce bad situations between cops and civilians.
seems to me that a good majority of the argument is, there is no way to argue these tickets. you cant put a camera under oath unlike a police officer. another problem is that these companies have been on record to using some very legal questionable methods for getting their evidence like shortening the yellow light. plus they make money off of this. whether the traffic violation is valid or not, these companies make their $$ regardless of whether its legit. thats not to say its a bad system i just don't think it was deployed properly yet what that new way of using it has yet to be determined. me personally i would remove the monetization aspect and make it more immediate and localized to the scene and remove the ticket part and thus making it more about safety
Bingo. You cannot cross-examine your accuser; a camera. Due process is violated. Just as affidavits are hearsay, you cannot cross-examine an affidavit.
What amuses me mildly about this is the portion using the orange line busway in the San Fernando Valley, is that those cameras malfunction so often. They’re “famous” for taking pictures every single cycle. No car there? Time to take a picture. Cars all stopped on red? Time to take a picture. Every single intersection for weeks it happen, then suddenly it’s fixed. Give it time and it starts happening again. Once and a while the same busway, by Canoga and Vanowen would take pictures on the green. Although I’m fairly sure absolutely nobody is getting tickets for these oddities.
Strange having it on a trigger speed, in Western Australia there is a dedicated loop detector just past the white line that will trigger the camera.
Actually that's a bit outdated, they USED to - the new systems I believe use radar as they are also speed cameras!
Same here in Germany, they used to be loops and film, too (even in 2012 still in some places!), but now almost everything is LIDAR and, of course, digital. How they process these pictures depends on each state in Germany, some have punished police personnel, some have an own bureau running this task.
We had a few red light cameras here in Oakland, but they were way too expensive. The company that ran them tried to break the city budget, so we got rid of them. Similar thing happened to parking enforcement
In my opinion, if red light cameras are to be used, they should be overseen by an authority that doesn't stand to make money from them. The manufacturer should only get a flat fee for use, or just money from installing/repairing/replacement of components. Getting a fee per-violation is just ripe for abuse.
Even before a red-light camera goes up, an engineering solution should be considered
and also reduce where the money goes so cities dont go installing them as much... put the fines in a state fund for drivers safety instead of policing for profit like many places do
Drivers certainly slow down when PHOTO ENFORCED is posted. I think this is because they can't get away with minor infractions as easily when the human confrontation elements are removed (cops don't want to engage or escalate a situation unless absolutely needed)
As someone who drives in LA, it is 100% plausible to me that the bus ran the light.
the red light count down timers feel like a good idea. gives you the ability to judge if you can make it.
Or if you should speed up to make it and stop paying attention to your surroundings because you're watching the timer...
This wouldn't work for big American roads, and isn't a good idea for other place's roads. A timer to green might be nice, but a timer to red is asking for trouble.
@@AndrooUK literally use the cross walk timers to determine if i need to slow down for the light when im in phoenix. Would rather start slowing down 2 seconds sooner for a smoother less G load on passengers.
Great video, Rob, but I disagree with your last statement. I think some organizations' goal is ticket revenue, not reducing crashes.
Same like with hidden speed cameras. Hidden in the sense that there is no published map of their locations (at least not here in New York City). The rule here used to be 1/4 mile from the school and on the road the school is located on. Then they changed it to a 1/4 mile radius from the school. So even though there might not be a school where you're driving, the next thing you know is you get a ticket for 'speeding' on a road that was designed for a higher limit but has its max knocked down.
We all have a goal to reduce red-light crashes. But yes, like Marty McFly ("Back to the Future II"), some wonder if there's any harm "making a few bucks on the side."
One major problem with RLCs is so many are installed at intersections where the yellow duration is too short. This is particularly true with protected left turns with a yellow arrow. The guidelines from the Institute of Transportation Engineers have been updated in the last few years but very few cities have adopted them. The short timing puts some people in the Dilemma Zone where they do not have enough time to stop safely and comfortably, but also not enough time to enter the intersection before the red. This results in the majority of violations happening just tenths of a second into the red. These are not the drivers causing T-bone accidents, but are the drivers unfairly carrying the financial burden of the program. I challenged my former city of Santa Clarita on this. I was successful in that the city ended the program. Now I'm working to keep them from coming back to Phoenix.
Do US stop lights do an emergency switch to red when they detect someone running them? I have seen it used on a priority light in New Zealand and thought pretty cool tech.
The technology exists but it's not used much yet
That would turn red lights into green lights and green lights into red lights
Typically is there is an "all red clearance" after each yellow where every light is red, usually for a half second. If a vehicle is predicted to run a red light, this all red time is extended. If the next light already turned green it stays green, then it's too late
There's a side-effect from mailing out the violations, too: some people will accept them as the price of driving.
Winston Sterzal made a video a few years ago about why so many drivers in China are so bad: the Chinese authorities, faced with a huge increase of people driving, went straight to automated violations, that is, speed cameras and red light cameras. So people simply get fined a few weeks later and there thus isn't enough incentive to change their behaviour. But in countries like the US, it's not that uncommon for police to stop people with traffic violations and that is a much bigger inconvenience than a fine in the mail to be paid.
Automated popup barriers to physically stop red light runners
Or even better, use solid concrete blocks as barrier.
That or solid steel bollards that pop up when the light is red, and make them square and not rounded. Of course they would have to be made so that if an emergency vehicle is detected, such as an ambulance, police, or fire truck, they could quickly retract back in to let them through.
@@Darknecros7 If drivers run a red light, their cars deserves to be destroyed, even if they run light by accident.
@@automation7295 But what about the driver and passengers? Do they deserve to potentially die over something so minor as running a red?
@@cameraredeye3115 Does the driver deserve to potentially die for running a red? Yes.
Does the passengers also deserve it. Yes obviously they're with the driver.
I was unreasonably happy to see BeamNG in this. Great video as always Rob!
I support red light cameras and speed cameras, however govts often do a disservice by not acting on the data they provide.
If you set up one of them, and notice there's a lot of speeding or red light running, then you have a good amount of evidence that there is an issue here. The road is too wide thus encourages speeding, or something with the shape of the road is leading to more speeding or red light running than normal.
If so, do something about it, redesign the road to make speeding and red running very hard or impossible (you can use the money from the camera for that). If your govt doesn't do anything, just leaves the cameras up, then yeah, they are now just making money off of an issue they are aware of and refuse to fix.
Speeding is preventable, there's plenty of evidence and case studies showing proper street designs lead to fewer crashes and speedings, so local govts have no excuse.
yep. to the government, it's a source of income, not a solution to a problem.
I mean sure, but then you hit exactly the same problems. How many people do you really think there are who oppose red light cameras, but would be fine with the sorts of measures you mention? In a western democracy, a failing government is a reflection on the electorate and not much more.
@@macsound That's why normally the money doesn't go to the ones operating the camera's. So the camera operators don't have the incentive to fine as much people as possible.
But if you have private companies running the camera's and they have to make their investment back. That's just asking for problems...
In memphis these kinds of crashes are incredibly common so much so that drivers often wait a second or so because so many ppl enjoy running lights out here.
So why do some states have horizontal traffic lights and others have vertical traffic lights
And why do some states have yellow traffic lights and other black/ dark grey ones, and why Louisiana has green ones
In my city they wanted to remove the red light cameras BUT some how the city owed so much money to the private company that ran them, the city was held hostage and now pays the company 90% of revenue from red light tickets. BIG SCAM.
here's an idea: reduce speed and reduce traffic lights so that red light running isn't as lethal.
problem with this is whoever is going to run the red light won't follow the speed law. it will just annoy drivers who follow the law.
Good idea though
@@AixRush I mean, pull a Netherlands and create roads that don't make you feel safe doing those unsafe speeds. Make the roads tighter, with kerbs right next to the lanes, lot's of trees making the space feel narrow. Subconsciously enforce the speed limits.
Stupid idea... so reduce the efficiency of travel for an entire city to reduce damage in the rare event of a collision. No, you time intersections better (few seconds of all red phase) and invest in car safety technology by crash testing / airbags etc... which is both being done right now.
@@AixRush reducing speed isn't so simple as just putting a lower number on the sign, but actually changing the design of the road.
American roads are unreasonably wide, which means people feel comfortable driving very fast. Exceeding the speed limit is often subconscious because drive at what speed feels comfortable, not necessarily whats legal.
The solution is to narrow roads, maybe add a protected bike lane or street parking, which makes you much more hesitant to drive fast, reducing speeds and the danger of accidents.
@@Leuel48Fan if you're worried about the efficiency and safety of travel for an entire city, then you shouldn't want cars on the road at all. Cars are one of the most inefficient and dangerous forms of transport that exist.
In reality, you should support high quality public transport to get as many cars off the road as possible and make cities more walkable so that people aren't required to drive everywhere. This also has the side benefit of being better for the environment.
Having dashboard cameras installed on your vehicle (front and back) is the best investment you can make for your insurance company. I've even helped one chap win a case because I was a bystander to his fiasco and gave him my footage.
1:25 your mistake here was not asking him in Korean
Great video and very informative per usual. I knew St Louis had its fair share of red light cameras, not sure how many are still in operation.
One suggestion for a future video is traffic signal based, which you’ve touched on in a few videos. Mainly the flashing yellow arrow turn signals- are they better than the old standard doghouse turn lights? Is there a benefit to the flashing arrow vs a steady yield on green light to turn on, even though it’s the same thing? Just some things to possibly think about or ti start with.
Can’t wait for your next video.
Texas banned red light cameras? Someone needs to remind San Antonio then because they still have them in use
Same thing in Humble. Particularly along 1960
I saw some in Amarillo last week, but they looked switched off.
Throughout California, there are red cameras that are collecting dust but don't actually work. Deterrence, perhaps?
"How do red light cameras work!?"
"Uhhh I don't know?"
🤣🤣🤣😂
Instead they should turn a rapid flashing light towards the incoming vehicle, as a warning. Activation uses a predictive algorithm based on speed, car profile size, and average stop times.
These could even be used to trigger a different warning for the other direction, on slight delay if the car didn't slow sufficiently to allow a stop before the intersection.
The risk of a collisions could be reduced, as this could stop inadvertent red light runners, and warn other oncoming traffic.
If safety is the true goal, not revenue generation, this makes sense.
(though You could still couple with revenue generation by issuing tickets for violators)
This system could even be implemented to reduce rear end collision at a stop light if more sensors were added, and automatically report such potential incidents to a reviewer or dispatch office.
There's absolutely better ways, if the goal is truly about safety. The fact is, RLC's are not about reducing accidents, and solely about generating revenue.
It is all about revenue generation. At least in America.
We should replace red light cameras... with red light snipers! Like Squid Game!
Or replace red light cameras with RPG, so running a red light will be your car being blown up.
Okay, but only if I'm allowed to DRIVE like these guys... th-cam.com/video/9klzZsVw-cQ/w-d-xo.html
The problem is if the light turns yellow and your going at the speed limit and then someone is doing the same behind you, you risk getting rear ended stopping short.
LOL so using your brakes ever is dangerous now. How is that going work if everyone does it?
@@fallenshallrise LOL ever see a multicar pileup on a highway? oops!!
While I think these are important, and useful, As a software engineer, and a very security minded individual, I think there is a VERY important balance to strike between surveillance like this and what it does.
ALPRs are far, far worse than red light cameras. By orders of magnitude. There's no comparison.
I think a good way for red light cameras to regain popularity is to decrease the fine or eliminate it, and put points on you license or be required to attend a traffic school or meeting. Fining people is not popular, but addressing the problem is.
Points add cost to your insurance, and traffic school either costs money, costs time, or both. So, in any case those are fines, just of a different type.
I think the main issue was then sending out tickets for people running a red light by a tenth of a second or some other absurdly short time, or rolling through a right on red a little too quickly when the intersection's obviously clear... that kinda thing. I don't think many people have too much of a problem with clear violations. It's the edge cases that annoy people.
I used to live in Dubai and if you ran a red light there you received a message inviting you to the local traffic department to view the correlated video. You could either agree to a (rather large) fine or have you car impounded for 10 days. Plus points on your licence.
lets also mention shortening yellow lights to profit
The GO Billy cameo is crazy hahahha
I’d support cameras if they didn’t come with egregious fines. Makes it seem like a money grab. $20 fine would be better to reinforce good behavior than to punish a mistake
small fine = legal for a price.
@@kenbrown2808 or the other thing is to keep increasing the price for repeated offenders after say about 180 days of last violation, then it would reset to it's base price of a "first" ticket offender.
@@hernanhernandez6567 I think fines already increase for repeat offenders?
$100 for the first violation is not egregious...
Running a red light could get you and/or someone else killed, so I have absolutely no problem with an eye-watering fine - even if it lands on my doorstep.
There's a whole discussion to be had about fines being less of a deterrent to the rich, and whether the Swiss or Finnish model of varying the fines based on income addresses that fairly. From personal experience, a 500€ speeding fine in Finland certainly made me a whole lot more cautious in a way that 3 points and £60 in the UK (both for 30km/h or 18mph over, as it happens) never did.
Dashcams are the holy grail here. (responding to first 90 seconds) Even if the other party is poorly or not even filmed, the circumstances of the dashcammer before the incident are recorded and the incident can be pieced together with still photographs taken after the accident.
We do need to make intersections safer from red-light runners. If these systems are smart enough to detect and photograph runners, why not integrate them with the lights, so that the lights don't turn green if there's a runner approaching too fast to stop on a cross street? In that case, you could protect the public and also fine the runner. I do oppose these private-sector operators who install cameras free on spec for a share of the profits from fines on the condition that the cities will shorten the yellow phases. That's highway robbery!
These systems do exist, but they are expensive to install. Iteris is one vendor that has a solution they were piloting in Florida.
Ahh a fellow Bakersfield resident! I saw Stockdale/Coffee, and White Lane/Wible Road in this video.
Living in a town where the driving style is close to anarchy, I sure wish my town had red light cameras.
I think it's more the way America decides to dole out fines. It's a flat amount for everyone, which does not punish equitably.
ㅋㅋㅋㅋ Billy here
a band I used to be in had rehearsals near the beacon Hill area of Seattle when I left practices I always had to go through an intersection with a red light camera.
a fun thing to do was to approach the light at full speed and then slam on my brakes just before I got to the White line. I would get flashed almost every time. this meant that a human being had to look at it and realize that I stopped fully before I made my right turn.
I got flashed a lot but I never got a ticket in the mail.
When I do that, I also flip off the camera if I remember to.
I think red light cameras should be installed and used specifically for those who completely blow the red light going straight or to figure out fault in accidents caused by red light runners. Right turns on red should not require a complete stop, that's B.S. Reasonable speed reduction should be the law.
Red literally means STOP, even for right turns. It's not B.S., it's common sense. Failure to come to a complete stop before turning right on a red should absolutely count as running a red.
The problem with using red light cameras in the US is that greedy politicians and PDs use them to generate revenue instead of making intersections safer. That's why they're so goddamn controversial...
@@cameraredeye3115 I think rolling through a stoplight at 2mph to make a right turn can functionally provide the exact same amount of safety with a slight improvement on efficiency. Think of all the stop-starting in line for a right turn vs a slow continuous motion. I don't think it's so cut and dried. For what it's worth, I come to a complete stop every time because I comply with the law. I just wish the law allowed some leeway for slow-moving right turns through red lights and stop signs.
don't forget, right-turn on red where a sign prohibits is a red-light running ticket.
I personally have no issue with red light or speed cameras, A LONG as they're set up properly so that there's a grace amount involved. Red light cameras not so much because I don't run red lights, but with speeding I drive a car that has an analog speedometer so I'd like it to have a little grace in case I drift a kilometer or 5 or so over.
I'm honestly down for speed cameras with a max grace period of 5 MPH over what's posted. The issue comes with the potential to purposefully lower speed limits to piss people off and make them want to drive fast enough to set off the cameras out of spite, then refuse to pay the fine.
We should just build roundabouts. Concrete is better than gadgets.
Roundabouts don't work in every situation
@@blitzn00dle50 Perhaps, but we certainly build intersections in every situation.
@@unknownhours you're right, but that's because most situations are covered by standard intersections. although I must say "concrete is better than gadgets" is based as hell, it really irks me every time I see someone suggest a policy change to curb traffic behavior and I'm like ???? does this mfer have any idea how humans work
Didn't think I'd learn anything new, BUT I ended up learning that I unintentionally fooled a camera at the start of COVID. THAT'S why I never received a ticket... I was under the trigger speed!
Red light cameras aren't about reducing accidents, and are nothing but automated revenue generators.
^this^. The "goal" is to fleece motorists by shortening the yellow and trapping them with the red. Too many corrupt city officials ruin any possible benefit of the system.
I know it is not right, but I have sped up to get into the intersection before the yellow turns to red. The problem is they must have enhanced their system in my area because it had recently given me an automated speeding ticket in some of those situations.
My issue with these is that on paper they sound great, catch red-light runners, I mean who wouldn't want that? But when I actually saw them in use, and when I saw them being used I changed my opinion. In Chicago, cities would install them whenever they needed more revenue. Basically, they would say stuff like "oh our budget is going to be short this month, you know what... how about we shorten the yellow light by a second, and that will generate the extra income we need this month". Another problem is people would be so afraid of them that they would ALWAYS stop for the light which means they would go from 60 to 0 in 5 seconds at 20 feet from the light. Which would cause more rear-end crashes, the justification by the cities was that they stopped the most dangerous type of crash, but in the end, they just increased the number of crashes overall which made traffic slower because you had more crashes at the intersections daily. Plus each city would set its own rules so in some cities if you turned right on red, you would get a ticket, in others cities you could turn on red, so it was confusing because each city had different rules, as a result, you would drive down a street passing several cities and each city had a different rule on each red light detector. Plus because the signs were inconsistent, some cities didn't put the "Warning red light detector here" signs on the intersections poles they would instead just put them way back (or behind a tree) so the thing was... you didn't know the rules of each intersection because the rules for each city were posted 800 feet before you got to the light, and then wouldn't put the rules on the actual light you were turning at so you didn't know if turning right on red would give you a ticket or not. So not only were you dealing with rules that varied from city to city, but the lights weren't even clearly labeled and had inconsistent variations (like the yellow lights). As a result, the reason why I and everyone with me really started hating them was that it became more of a game of the cities against its citizens than a tool for safety. Because when you drive down a road where every red light detector has a different rule, and they are all marked inconsistently, and the cities adjust the yellow lights to make more revenue. People panic and are more distracted looking for the detectors, get into more crashes and slow down the streets so much that even if you are one of those people who never run a red in your life (like me), you start to really Really REALLY hate them after a while and you start to think they cause more problems than they are worth. This is why I hate them so much! Plus don't get me started when they break, the lights on them would just start flashing nonstop. It was like a strobe light that lit up the entire intersection every few seconds, not only was that super annoying but it distracted so many people, it would happen a lot when it rained, which in Chicago happened a lot.
In The Netherlands we have red light camera's since the '50s or '60s. The camera's where activated by an airtube connected to the camera.
Edit: it was 1966 th-cam.com/video/xOLUcEbpMnk/w-d-xo.html
That's actually a really cool video. Thanks for linking it. Although I did have to turn on translation subtitles since the video is not in English.
For anyone wondering, it's a link to an old black and white video showcasing the "new" camera hardware and system.
@@ReimasTiger thanks!
Red light cameras “hoping to reduce crashes and save lives” aka money generating machines
For real! I got one red light ticket for making a right turn without coming to a full stop. Cost me $400. Right then I installed tinted plate covers.
@@AirpIanes I mean you did break the law and you got fined for it, that is what they're there to do
So what you're saying is, there are valid times when you can run a red?
@@psychedalek Did I say that? Or did I simply point out they are only setup in the first place to generate revenue?
@@psychedalek Yes. Some red light cameras are installed at intersections with artificially decreased yellow length. Of course running the red light is reasonable in that situation
I am 100% for red light cameras on rail intersections.
why? you afraid a car running them will take out a train LOL?
We've moved on from redlight cameras to license-plate scanners that I find far more prone to potential abuse.
Technology is neither good nor evil. It's how we use it:
th-cam.com/video/Y2MuKi_QOk4/w-d-xo.html
The issue with RLC is that they are little more than a revenue source in many cases. It is not unheard of for yellow light durations to be reduced (often well below federal guidelines,) in order to maintain the revenue stream. While they proport to reduce fatal crashes, many studies have shown they increase read end collisions; Which while generally less serious to non-Pinto drivers, actually ends up causing more accidents.
-
When you give a government a way to make money and cry safety at the same time, you end up with a recipe for corruption.
Here in Britain, we always paint them bright yellow (same with speed cameras, most of ours are combi speed and red-light). The reason being that they are alway for safety and not money making.
They also have to be put in a prominent location.
This isn't true of bus lane cameras, yellow box cameras and other ANPR cameras.
"Police (unless you're here to riot, in which case, Pizza)" That should be on a T-shirt.
I feel like they’d be more popular if you had a few seconds of red before you got ticketed, there is a pretty big difference between mistiming a yellow, and blasting right through a red light.
In Missouri, they were deemed illegal due to the violation of Presumption of Innocence. When a red light violation is sent to the registered owner of the vehicle, that specific person is automatically deemed guilty, and they need to prove their own innocence to get out of the ticket (say someone else was driving, and give their information).
Almost all cities removed all their red light cameras in the state and had to refund all fines paid.
As far as I know, only one city in the state still has red light cameras, Hannibal. But while they still take pictures of the car passing through, and of the license plate, they now also take a picture zoomed in of the driver. The picture processors compare the driver with the picture on the DMV file of the registered owner. If they match, a ticket is issued with points. If the driver is obscured, or the pictures don't match, no ticket is issued.
here the red light cameras will take a picture from the front, showing also the driver; Of course, the ticket will still be sent to the registered owner, but then he can forward it to whoever really drove it