red light camera - how to beat it

so has anyone used the spray and any feedback???, I see it advertised in the car mags all the time and have been thinking about it...you can also go to the local police or sheriff to see the actual video before you decide to fight it.

I have made it a habit in larger intersections to look for the cameras surrounding the lights, and also the signs that HAVE to be posted that its photo enforced...

 

Top gear tried it with a TVR Tuscan, you have to be going like 180

 

In Oregon, they can't get you if you are not the registered owner. They mail the ticket to the registered owner, and if the registered owner wasn't driving there is a box to check. Some municipalities are more aggressive than others on this point, but if you (the registered owner) can prove that you weren't driving, you're set.

Do most systems get a shot of the rear plate as well?

 

as long as I don't get a ticket, then I'm fine with driving 180

 

There is a legal deficiency in the redlight photo ticketing process. Essentially, the evidence produced is hearsay. That's because the officer testifying didn't witness the event or take the picture. Rather, a picture is produced by a 3rd party company, which you can subpoena to appear. However, the Courts don't seem willing to enforce their own evidentiary rules. As a lawyer, I am shocked that judges take this attitude. They've likely been advised by the traffic commissioners that they should just find drivers guilty even if they use this defense. It is insulting. The Courts, Politicians and Police are just being lazy.

So, the question is just how far you wish to take it. You will likely be found guilty by the traffic court judge. You can appeal. You will likely lose that appeal. You would then appeal to the State's Supreme Court, which may or may not be granted certiorari (Supreme Courts can choose which matters they accept to hear, and the case must assert reversible error). I suspect you would likely have some amicus curiae briefs in support of your argument from Civil Rights organizations and possibly other law-based bodies, too.

This angle is being pursued in CA, IIRC. It is expensive, and I'm not sure what the likelihood of success is. However, it remains true that our civil and legal rights are being assaulted by the Politicians, Courts and Police.

Good Luck,

CW

 

a majority of my instructors are against the red light cams. For the same reason and some have mentioned. "What if I let my friend borrow the car?" It happened to me when I let my brother borrow my Rx-7. Another point would be to decifer who was already in the intersection when the light changed. By law in texas at least, it's against the law only if you've passed the designated line after the light has turned red. I'm curious to see what san antonio will do. You're starting to see more and more of the cameras around.

 

Couple of other issues with red-light cameras:

1) there have supposedly been increases in rear-end accidents at intersections (people slamming on brakes abruptly) with red-light cameras - so municipalities are trading one kind of accident for another

2) intersections that have been targetted with red-light cameras, those that have a higher-rate of red-light running, are also correlated with shorter yellow-light times, so a better solution would be to add 2 seconds to the yellow-light time to reduce red-light running - but this doesn't have the revenue potential

 

The article I referenced from the Washington Post cited a study that showed that increasing the yellow interval by about 2 seconds drastically reduced the number of red light runners and accidents. If the intent is to improve traffic safety, it seems obvious what should be done......

-R

 

I saw a person do that a few months and then get ticketed by a police officer sitting on the corner. I asked a friend of mine who is police officer about it and he said that you should not enter an intersection to turn unless that you do so safely and make the turn before your light turns red. Once that light is red, you can get a ticket for either running a red light and/or blocking an intersection. I just wait behind the white line and then go into the intersection only when I can see I can make the turn before the light changes red. Not a big deal since most intersections on heavily trafficked roadways also have timed left turn green arrows.

As for getting picked up by the red light cameras, it depends what the trigger for the snapshot is.

 

Ummm, register the car in your wife's name then??

 

Oooor, you folks could just stop at the light, like you're supposed to.

 

no.

you know when you approach an intersection how there are the little circles cut into the pavement? those are coils of wire, and as a car passes over them they create a current (physics - a magnet passing through a coil) usually this current tells the traffic computer to change the light because cars are waiting. but if you tap into this, with a redlight camera lets say, then if the computer displays "red" and a current in excess of some voltage that is deemed to be equivalent of a car passing over the coil at sufficient speed, then it takes a picture.

the solution, dont drive a car with metal components that are sufficiently close to the ground. which pretty much narrows us down to your neighbor's kid's big wheel

 

those things are called inductors ;-)

 

Gilles27,

I don't think anyone's advising drivers to run red lights. The OP didn't ask for sarcastic commentary, either.

I'm perplexed why you don't care that your legal system doesn't care enough to actually go through the REQUIRED motions. It's the City's choice to hire for-profit companies to install and operate these systems. They should at least be required to provide proper evidence. Perhaps it will reduce the profit margins, but that's not my concern in this post.

It has been stated elsewhere that these systems are used in a predatory manner. In other words, the systems are set up not so much to reduce redlight running as they are to create a situation which results in more tickets. As opposed to lengthening the yellow count, which has been shown to reduce red-light running, they have actually shortened the count, thus catching some people unaware, and simultaneously creating the aforementioned unintended consequence of increasing rear-end collisions at these monitored intersections.

Each month, where I live, the City actually posts the number of red-light violations issued at some cameras, so they do count the number of violations. If they wanted to reduce the number of red-light runners, it would be an easy experiment to lengthen the count and see the effect. However, there is a disincentive to doing this: it reduces revenue to the operator and the City.

You want us to stop at red lights. I do, too. But, I feel that these systems were installed more to generate revenue from citizens than to protect them from red-light runners and collisions.

CW

 

I will say that the cameras in Scottsdale do seem to be set up on pretty major streets that could be very dangerous if a light is run.

On the other hand, their spying on the freeway is a little beyond what I want, but I think the threshold is up to 74 in a 65. Imagine these things on the damn freeway, sheesh.

 

Don't know...until they get cought, we'll never know.

People take these things down all the time... just never where I live.

Camera's torched, run over, shot, destroyed, repeatedly vandalized!
Multiple headline query -
http://www.thenewspaper.com/rlc/related.asp?S=6


...the people have spoken.

 

While vandalizing these cameras would likely have serious legal consequences, and I wouldn't recommend finding out, I'd have to think that even placing a picture 6 inches in front of the lens could be construed as "obstruction of justice"!

CW

 

you are wrong!!

 

Doesnt work with digital cameras---there is NO flash!!!!

 

You can run red light cameras all day if you know how. There is a certain speed that will not take a picture. If you are going at or below that speed --no picture. Also most cameras at a intersection will only do a lane or 2. So if you know which lane is set up----drive in the other lane...

 

285,

Which part is wrong?

CW

 

I had understood the same about the new digital cameras. However, how rapidly is this technology making it into the field? What %age of redlight cameras are digital? I would assume that any cameras being installed in the future will be the newer, digital model, but they'll have to go back and retrofit the older ones already in place.

CW

 

And, I understand your point about the narrow field of view of the camera. I guess, what I don't understand is how the vehicle's speed trips the camera. So, are you telling us that we can creep through red lights all day long with impunity as long as we're below a predetermined speed? Does that not defeat the purpose, though?

CW

 

wow, I guess I've been lucky. There were a couple of times I was waiting for the ticket to come in the mail, but it never came.

 

The part about installers setting it up for free.