• pateraangus avatar pateraangus Posted: 6/28/2012 11:16am PDT

    The people that complain the most about red light cameras, are the one's running the red light. I sat at one traffic light when no less then three car's ran the red light. They were doing the posted speed limit of 45 mph. Then you get the excuses. That wasn't me driving the car, ok who was driving ? "I don't remember". This is a win, win for the state. Another company installs, and fixes the cameras. They split the ticket fee with the state or county, and the idiot who ran the light get's the ticket, and hopefully learns a lesson, don't run a red light

  • fb_100002090720671 avatar St Pete Posted: 8/10/2011 7:59am PDT

    It should be mentioned that the NCSR is funded by ATS, a red light camera company. They do have an agenda. Also, red light running accounts for less than 2% of fatalities in this country. These resources should be used to fight impaired driving(drunk/drugged) which is more than 25 times more deadly than red light running.

  • richard avatar Richard Posted: 8/10/2011 8:31am PDT

    Thanks for pointing out the link between NCSR and ATS -- that's well worth noting. However, even if red-light accidents account for only 2% of fatalities, that's still over 650 deaths (based on 2010 stats), which is a sizable number. I don't think anyone would want to see red-light awareness shorted in favor of impaired driving campaigns (for drunk/drugged/distracted drivers). Frankly, I'd rather see support for BOTH increase.

  • fb_1510606196 avatar Carl Posted: 8/10/2011 11:50am PDT

    As a former accident investigator, I don't feel too bad when a careless driver ruins his own vehicle or life in a common single vehicle crash (off road and/or overturn).
    The red light runners, on the other hand, usually take out one or more innocent passengers, bikers or walkers.