The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

I saw with interest on the news last night that the TPD is using digital cameras for stop light enforcement.

It's a relatively low-tech approach, it involves a lawn chair, an officer, and a digital camera to shoot photos of the license plate.

Cool part is, one of our forum members was interviewed in the story.

Make sure to stop and offer your local officer a frosty cold beer while he/she is sitting in the hot sun. [}:)]

Is it a black & white lawn chair?

I don't remember.  I hope he shows up for lunch today so we can ask more about it.

I missed it, what news station?

Other than AAA condemning Red-Light cameras for widespread abuse, we have a state law that essentially says a vehicle cant be charged with a crime -- you have to cite a driver.

quote:

---

Originally posted by patric

Other than AAA condemning Red-Light cameras for widespread abuse, we have a state law that essentially says a vehicle cant be charged with a crime -- you have to cite a driver.

---

Run through a toll gate and see what happens.......

Not to take pictures of the license plate, but to take the picture of the car driving through the red light - then staple the picture to the ticket issued by the officer in case the driver goes to court.

Actually, the camera idea isn't working that great.  Too many problems using the digital camera.  May need to look at video, but stapling that video to the ticket could be a problem.[;)]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wilbur

Not to take pictures of the license plate, but to take the picture of the car driving through the red light - then staple the picture to the ticket issued by the officer in case the driver goes to court.

Actually, the camera idea isn't working that great.  Too many problems using the digital camera.  May need to look at video, but stapling that video to the ticket could be a problem.[;)]

---

Good luck getting a digital camera to take a picture of a moving object.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wilbur

Not to take pictures of the license plate, but to take the picture of the car driving through the red light - then staple the picture to the ticket issued by the officer in case the driver goes to court.

Actually, the camera idea isn't working that great.  Too many problems using the digital camera.  May need to look at video, but stapling that video to the ticket could be a problem.[;)]

---

Check to see if your camera has a "sports" mode for fast moving objects. A burst mode that takes several snaps at the push of a button which also helps.

Is that so you can get Santa on the bicycle?

Funny they can't also sit and look for suspected illegal aliens driving. They cause many more accidents than red lite runners and are by far the greatest threat to public safety on the roads.[B)]

quote:

---

Originally posted by patric

Other than AAA condemning Red-Light cameras for widespread abuse, we have a state law that essentially says a vehicle cant be charged with a crime -- you have to cite a driver.

---

Yes, but they get around that. There's also places that have automatic red-lite cameras that take the picture and mail it in. No cop is involved. Yet when ya go to court you have a right to face your accuser and a right to cross-examin your accuser, but they have ways around that. It does not apply here, the picture is all the proof that's needed for a conviction. They have your face and your license plate & your nailed. It's been thru the courts and most have up held the automatic cameras as being legal, also the camera company gets a cut of the ticket money too. Some people have said the camers are set too fast and will nail ya when the light is really yellow. Arizona and parts of Iowa use the automatic red lite cameras, and many east coast states use them.[xx(]

Does anyone know if Tulsa still has two intersections on the nations top ten most dangerous intersections list?

This was a statistic compiled by State Farm, I believe. 51st & Memorial and 71st & Memorial were the two with the honors as I recall.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wilbur

Actually, the camera idea isn't working that great.  Too many problems using the digital camera.  May need to look at video, but stapling that video to the ticket could be a problem.[;)]

---

Sounds like you might need to talk them in to upgrading to a DSLR instead of a little point and shoot. It'll do the trick for you guys, I'm sure.

They were number five and six most dangerous intersections in the country on the last list I saw.

Say what you want about red light cameras, but if they can reduce the number of accidents like this.....



http://www.azcentral.com/community/scottsdale/articles/0719abrk-collision0719-ON.html (http://"http://")

I know Scottsdale is using speed cameras, I would have assumed that they were also using intersection cameras as well.

It is a deterrent to run red lights which can cause tragedies like you posted, yet there are still people who are inattentive or just want to shave a minute off their arrival time at their destination who will continue to take the risk.

I sure hate to sound insensitive, but eight people in a Cadillac?

"The five killed were identified as Noelia Robolledo-Sanchez, 36; her husband, Antonio Pedraza-Olivares, 30; their son, Antonio Pedraza-Robolledo, 4; and their nieces, Jennifer Ramirez-Pedraza, 7, and Myra Ramirez-Pedraza, 11."

Wonder if the young 'uns were strapped in?  No doubt there wouldn't have been such mass injury if the fellow hadn't run the red light, but over-crowding a vehicle built for six didn't help either.

Communities with the most experience with these seem to have the most to say:


D.C. Red-Light Cameras Fail to Reduce Accidents

The District's red-light cameras have generated more than 500,000 violations and $32 million in fines over the past six years. City officials credit them with making busy roads safer.

But a Washington Post analysis of crash statistics shows that the number of accidents has gone up at intersections with the cameras. The increase is the same or worse than at traffic signals without the devices.

Three outside traffic specialists independently reviewed the data and said they were surprised by the results. Their conclusion: The cameras do not appear to be making any difference in preventing injuries or collisions.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/03/AR2005100301844.html



2007 Virginia DOT Report Shows Red Light Cameras Increase Accidents

A new Virginia Department of Transportation study shows accidents increased by nearly a third where red light cameras were used.

VTRC report coverThe Virginia Transportation Research Council today released a report expanding upon earlier research into the safety effects of red light cameras in Virginia. The new study, funded by the Virginia Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration, provided a city-by-city assessment that showed significant increases in the number of injuries and accidents at intersections employing photo enforcement.

The change in the frequency of injury accidents varied widely among jurisdictions -- down 5 percent in one but up between 6 and 89 percent in all others. Even within a jurisdiction some intersections fared better than others. In Fairfax County, for example, the total number of crashes increased at every intersection with a camera, except for one -- Route 50 and Fair Ridge. VDOT increased the duration of the yellow light from 4 seconds to 5.5 seconds on August 12, 1998. Research by the Texas Transportation Institute confirmed that longer yellows yield significant accident reductions. Overall, the data in the VTRC report painted a grim picture consistent with prior, independent investigations.
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/18/1844.asp



Are Cameras at Traffic Signals the Answer to Dangerous Intersections, or Part of the Problem?

As red-light traffic cameras spring up at intersections across the country, critics are raising questions about whether the devices actually deter red-light running, or are just a way for local authorities to make a quick buck.

Proponents say the cameras make roads safer by deterring red-light runners from breaking the rules, but detractors say dangerous intersections are the result of engineering deficiencies and the cameras are just a way to increase revenue on the backs of unsuspecting drivers.

"Red-light cameras just reward cities for bad engineering," said Eric Skrum, spokesman for the National Motorists Association, a motorist advocacy group that has been arguing against the use of red-light cameras nationwide.

The group contends that the best remedies for dangerous intersections are engineering improvements like longer yellow lights and shielding signals to prevent glare and make the lights more visible as the sun sets.

According to the group's Web site, the organization believes that "with properly posted speed limits and properly installed traffic-control devices, there is no need for camera-based traffic law enforcement devices."
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=292547&page=1

Big Brother's march continues on...

quote:

---

Originally posted by sauerkraut

Funny they can't also sit and look for suspected illegal aliens driving. They cause many more accidents than red lite runners and are by far the greatest threat to public safety on the roads.[B)]

---

Would certainly be interested to see stats to support that claim.

And just how does one tell if someone is an illegal alien by appearance?

quote:

---

Originally posted by sauerkraut

quote:

---

Originally posted by patric

Other than AAA condemning Red-Light cameras for widespread abuse, we have a state law that essentially says a vehicle cant be charged with a crime -- you have to cite a driver.

---

Yes, but they get around that. There's also places that have automatic red-lite cameras that take the picture and mail it in. No cop is involved. Yet when ya go to court you have a right to face your accuser and a right to cross-examin your accuser, but they have ways around that. It does not apply here, the picture is all the proof that's needed for a conviction. They have your face and your license plate & your nailed. It's been thru the courts and most have up held the automatic cameras as being legal, also the camera company gets a cut of the ticket money too. Some people have said the camers are set too fast and will nail ya when the light is really yellow. Arizona and parts of Iowa use the automatic red lite cameras, and many east coast states use them.[xx(]

---

Camera enforcement is not allowed in Oklahoma.  Yet.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wilbur

quote:

---

Originally posted by sauerkraut

Funny they can't also sit and look for suspected illegal aliens driving. They cause many more accidents than red lite runners and are by far the greatest threat to public safety on the roads.[B)]

---

Would certainly be interested to see stats to support that claim.

And just how does one tell if someone is an illegal alien by appearance?

---

Well, according to Reverand Orta, you guys were going to brutalize ALL Hispanic looking people in your over-zealous quest to deport them all.

/sarc

Here's an RFQ for traffic signal cameras and recorders:

COT Purchasing (http://"http://204.62.23.97/Spec/07-401%20Traffic%20Signal%20Cameras%20and%20Video%20Detectors.doc")

Here's one for surveilance trailers:

COT Purchasing (http://"http://204.62.23.97/Spec/07-400%20Surveillance%20Trailer%20spec-7-13-2007%20addendum%201.doc")

Sounds like the City is getting ready to go higher tech afterall.

The City uses intersection cameras to control the traffic signal computer, not for traffic violations.

With the old system, a magnetic loop was buried in the street in each lane to detect cars at the intersection, which told the signal's computer that, eventually, this lane needs a green light.  The problem was, when that loop broke, you tore up the street to fix.

The new cameras are mounted on the signal pole and 'see' a car waiting at the traffic signal and tells the computer it will need a green light.  When the camera breaks, you climb the pole and put on a new camera and send the old one in for repair.  No tearing up the street.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wilbur

The City uses intersection cameras to control the traffic signal computer, not for traffic violations.

---

I think public works calls them video detectors rather than cameras because the don't actually provide an image.  They're programmable.  You can set the logic to 'look' at two areas.  When both change, there's probably a car waiting at the intersection.  But when only one changes, it may be a shadow from nearby trees.  That is supposed to reduce false triggering.  One of the intersections along Riverside had problems with shadows causing false trips.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ed W

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wilbur

The City uses intersection cameras to control the traffic signal computer, not for traffic violations.

---

I think public works calls them video detectors rather than cameras because the don't actually provide an image.  They're programmable.  You can set the logic to 'look' at two areas.  When both change, there's probably a car waiting at the intersection.  But when only one changes, it may be a shadow from nearby trees.  That is supposed to reduce false triggering.  One of the intersections along Riverside had problems with shadows causing false trips.

---

I think you're close.  It has something to do with the number of pixels that change in a small area of what the camera sees.

quote:

---

Originally posted by sauerkraut

Funny they can't also sit and look for suspected illegal aliens driving. They cause many more accidents than red lite runners and are by far the greatest threat to public safety on the roads.[B)]

---

That's a red herring, and not provable. I think we have a lot more problems with home grown white trash and gang banger wannabes than illegal immigrants. You should probably find some new FOX news talking points.

I am sick of the white trash morons who terrorize our streets. If these cameras help, then good. Maybe I can get all the white idiot people to slow down for the illegal Mexicans walking through my neighborhood.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wilbur

quote:

---

Originally posted by sauerkraut

Funny they can't also sit and look for suspected illegal aliens driving. They cause many more accidents than red lite runners and are by far the greatest threat to public safety on the roads.[B)]

---

Would certainly be interested to see stats to support that claim.

And just how does one tell if someone is an illegal alien by appearance?

---

After an accident it's easy to find out if they are illegal, they offten flee, and the victim is stuck with the damage and medical bills. I would think profiling would help. The cops must know the signs of an illegal alien driving and what to look for and what raises a red flag, but for PC reasons it can't be mentioned. Everyone has a profile ... it all depands on what you want to focus on, criminals, illegals, drug runners, average Joes..

quote:

---

Originally posted by tulsascoot

quote:

---

Originally posted by sauerkraut

Funny they can't also sit and look for suspected illegal aliens driving. They cause many more accidents than red lite runners and are by far the greatest threat to public safety on the roads.[B)]

---

That's a red herring, and not provable. I think we have a lot more problems with home grown white trash and gang banger wannabes than illegal immigrants. You should probably find some new FOX news talking points.

I am sick of the white trash morons who terrorize our streets. If these cameras help, then good. Maybe I can get all the white idiot people to slow down for the illegal Mexicans walking through my neighborhood.

---

Huh are you for real? you think it's a good idea to let illegals drive with no understanding of the language, road signs, or traffic laws & No drivers license, no insurance and when they cause a major accident it's tuff rocks to who-ever they hit. The victim is stuck with the bills. The illegal alien flees and a week latter is back driving. The only good idea would be to deport them as law enforcement comes across them. A cop stops a car with a busted tail light finds out the driver is illegal- Goodbye! He's gone! That's why car insurance is so high in Texas and California. Someone has to pay for all the accidents unlicensed & uninsured illegals do.

>Not to take pictures of the license plate, but >to take the picture of the car driving through >the red light - then staple the picture to the >ticket issued by the officer.....

If I were the one caught in this little racket, I would be more than happy to take a photo of a One Hundred Dollar Bill (or whatever the fine is, staple THAT to the ticket and mail it back in.  
After all if I going to pay fines, I want the benefit of "personal contact!"

I think I know where this is going:

http://www.snopes.com/autos/law/handcuff.asp

quote:

---

Originally posted by sauerkraut

quote:

---

Originally posted by patric

Other than AAA condemning Red-Light cameras for widespread abuse, we have a state law that essentially says a vehicle cant be charged with a crime -- you have to cite a driver.

---

Yes, but they get around that. There's also places that have automatic red-lite cameras that take the picture and mail it in. No cop is involved. Yet when ya go to court you have a right to face your accuser and a right to cross-examin your accuser, but they have ways around that. It does not apply here, the picture is all the proof that's needed for a conviction. They have your face and your license plate & your nailed. It's been thru the courts and most have up held the automatic cameras as being legal, also the camera company gets a cut of the ticket money too. Some people have said the camers are set too fast and will nail ya when the light is really yellow. Arizona and parts of Iowa use the automatic red lite cameras, and many east coast states use them.[xx(]

---

Have you ever been to traffic court in Tulsa? You are guilty when you walk in the door. A few years ago, I had to go in for multiple infractions (a very long story) and the judge was the most arrogant, self-absorbed, disrespectful person I had ever seen. The judge told people to shut up; Told people to plead guilty and just pay the fine; Explanations were cut off mid-sentence and people were told they were wasting the court's time.

It was merely a collections process. Cruel - at least in my mind - was that even those who fought back and were found not guilty, had to pay court fines, other fees, and lawyer fees. The message is: If a cop stops you for a traffic violation - just pay the fine - you're gonna lose anyway. It is part of the fund-raising monster the system has created.

And people wonder why so many people are afraid of the police and why they freak out when they're stopped.

quote:

---

Originally posted by restored2x

quote:

---

Originally posted by sauerkraut

quote:

---

Originally posted by patric

Other than AAA condemning Red-Light cameras for widespread abuse, we have a state law that essentially says a vehicle cant be charged with a crime -- you have to cite a driver.

---

Yes, but they get around that. There's also places that have automatic red-lite cameras that take the picture and mail it in. No cop is involved. Yet when ya go to court you have a right to face your accuser and a right to cross-examin your accuser, but they have ways around that. It does not apply here, the picture is all the proof that's needed for a conviction. They have your face and your license plate & your nailed. It's been thru the courts and most have up held the automatic cameras as being legal, also the camera company gets a cut of the ticket money too. Some people have said the camers are set too fast and will nail ya when the light is really yellow. Arizona and parts of Iowa use the automatic red lite cameras, and many east coast states use them.[xx(]

---

Have you ever been to traffic court in Tulsa? You are guilty when you walk in the door. A few years ago, I had to go in for multiple infractions (a very long story) and the judge was the most arrogant, self-absorbed, disrespectful person I had ever seen. The judge told people to shut up; Told people to plead guilty and just pay the fine; Explanations were cut off mid-sentence and people were told they were wasting the court's time.

It was merely a collections process. Cruel - at least in my mind - was that even those who fought back and were found not guilty, had to pay court fines, other fees, and lawyer fees. The message is: If a cop stops you for a traffic violation - just pay the fine - you're gonna lose anyway. It is part of the fund-raising monster the system has created.

And people wonder why so many people are afraid of the police and why they freak out when they're stopped.

---

Cheer-up. Traffic court is the same all over. Your guilty and the cops word is worth more than yours and your wintesses combined. That's true in all the places I have lived. From Texas to Michigan to Ohio & Oklahoma and Nebraska. Ohio used to have a crooked town that ran speed traps that was just closed down. here's the web site of it..www.newromesucks.com

quote:

---

Originally posted by sauerkraut

quote:

---

Originally posted by tulsascoot

quote:

---

Originally posted by sauerkraut

Funny they can't also sit and look for suspected illegal aliens driving. They cause many more accidents than red lite runners and are by far the greatest threat to public safety on the roads.[B)]

---

That's a red herring, and not provable. I think we have a lot more problems with home grown white trash and gang banger wannabes than illegal immigrants. You should probably find some new FOX news talking points.

I am sick of the white trash morons who terrorize our streets. If these cameras help, then good. Maybe I can get all the white idiot people to slow down for the illegal Mexicans walking through my neighborhood.

---

Huh are you for real? you think it's a good idea to let illegals drive with no understanding of the language, road signs, or traffic laws & No drivers license, no insurance and when they cause a major accident it's tuff rocks to who-ever they hit. The victim is stuck with the bills. The illegal alien flees and a week latter is back driving. The only good idea would be to deport them as law enforcement comes across them. A cop stops a car with a busted tail light finds out the driver is illegal- Goodbye! He's gone! That's why car insurance is so high in Texas and California. Someone has to pay for all the accidents unlicensed & uninsured illegals do.

---

I don't approve of the illegals, but I have equal concerns about the legal residents with no insurance and licenses. I don't want to get hit by white trash either, unless it's my family, of course. Wait, no, I don't want them driving either.

I think the illegal thing is always blown out of proportion as a media scare tactic.

And we don't live in Texas.

If you think the illegal thing is blown out of proportion spend a morning and afternoon in traffic court....

"They cause many more accidents than red lite runners and are by far the greatest threat to public safety on the roads."

I thought you were referring to TPD.