It's Official...

[custosnox]

Nope it takes a picture of the driver too, depending on where you are.  That's why there's cameras located on 4 different areas of the intersection, to take pics at different angles.  I don't know how it's set up in Tulsa so maybe here they don't take a pic of the driver.  I used to date a cop and I remember him telling me that if your past the indicator line when it's yellow it will not take your picture also something to do with a certain speed.  It's only when you past the indicator line after the light turns red then it will take your picture.  So if your taking a left turn and your like me and go past the indicator line before red it will not take picture, yes I creep closer whenever making a left instead of staying behind the white line unless it's a protected left turn.  You'll see the camera flash when someone actually is running the red light, that means it's red before they crossed the indicator line. 

Careful now, cops around here are known for writing tickets for running a YELLOW light (still trying to figure out how they get away with this, and wouldn't have beleived it if I hadn't seen the actual ticket), and being in the intersection when the light turns red can get you a ticket as well.  As far as being past the white line, I'm not sure 90% of the drivers here realize your supposed to stop behind it.

[Hoss]

According to the Mayor's Action Line folks, the cameras at Tulsa intersections are there only for the purpose of counting cars.

Someplace on the city's website, you can see the data for every intersection in the city (that has 'cameras').

For cheap-o hamburgers, also try:

Claudes - 3834 South Peoria, in Brookside
Brownies - west side of Harvard, just south of 21st street
Weber's Root Beer - 3817 South Peoria, also in Brookside

And it's only at certain intersections that these cameras are located.  Not all of them have them.

[sgrizzle]

I don't know how it's set up in Tulsa so maybe here they don't take a pic of the driver. 

As mentioned above, Tulsa's has no "enforcement" cameras. The closest they ever had was Wilbur in a lawn chair with a Nikon. (I'm not kidding)

[TURobY]

Careful now, cops around here are known for writing tickets for running a YELLOW light...

It's true. I got one for making a turn on a yellow protected arrow.

[Oil Capital]

They take pictures of both in many places. One to catch the car's plate, the other to identify the driver so you can't weasel out of the ticket. Not that I think red light cameras are anything but wrong-headed and unsafe, as I've previously posted (with evidence for that position).

Outfitting more of our lights with the reverse indications that allow police officers to successfully ticket red light runners and having officers actually ticket for such dangerous behavior rather than focusing primarily on speed enforcement would probably cut down significantly on red light running. Officers are capable of making an on the spot decision as to whether a minor red light infraction was in fact the safest course of action, as it sometimes is.

We also need to fix the lights that don't have any all red interval. That's also unsafe.

Quote from an article about Houston's red-light cameras:

"Citations sent to motorists will include three photographs. One photograph will show the vehicle, another will show the license plate number and another will show the vehicle in the intersection while the light is red.

The cameras will not take a photograph of the driver."

Quote from an article about the red light system in Everett Washington:

"Because the cameras cannot legally take images of a driver's face, violations are treated similarly to parking tickets, not moving violations that are placed on a driver's record. The ticket will be mailed to a car's registered owner after the video is reviewed by the company and an Everett police officer."

Quote from an article about Illinois red-light cameras:

"Illinois law prohibits red-light cameras from capturing images of a driver's face, which is why all cameras in the state capture only pictures and video of a vehicle's rear."

I think it's safe to say that most systems do NOT take photos of the driver.  In part this is to avoid challenges based on privacy concerns.  And this is why the tickets do not count against your driving record or insurance.  They are treated the same as a parking ticket.  The owner of the vehicle is responsible, not matter who is driving.

[patric]

Quote from an article about Houston's red-light cameras:

"Citations sent to motorists will include three photographs. One photograph will show the vehicle, another will show the license plate number and another will show the vehicle in the intersection while the light is red.

The cameras will not take a photograph of the driver."

Quote from an article about the red light system in Everett Washington:

"Because the cameras cannot legally take images of a driver's face, violations are treated similarly to parking tickets, not moving violations that are placed on a driver's record. The ticket will be mailed to a car's registered owner after the video is reviewed by the company and an Everett police officer."

Quote from an article about Illinois red-light cameras:

"Illinois law prohibits red-light cameras from capturing images of a driver's face, which is why all cameras in the state capture only pictures and video of a vehicle's rear."

I think it's safe to say that most systems do NOT take photos of the driver.  In part this is to avoid challenges based on privacy concerns.  And this is why the tickets do not count against your driving record or insurance.  They are treated the same as a parking ticket.  The owner of the vehicle is responsible, not matter who is driving.

Red-light and speed cameras are illegal in Oklahoma because state law says in essence a vehicle can not be charged with a crime, only a person.
The cameras used in Tulsa intersections are the "machine eyes" of the traffic signal controller.

"Traffic enforcement" cameras are solely for revenue, and a number of cities that installed them had to remove them because of huge increases in rear-end collisions and other liability suits.
Even AAA has reversed their earlier endorsement of them.

http://www.motorists.org/photoenforce/home/studies/
http://www.lubbockonline.com/stories/021508/loc_247128772.shtml
http://www.wdsu.com/news/19202586/detail.html

In some instances, "Traffic cameras are so effective at preventing dangerous driving that cops the nation over are scrambling to get rid of them to restore revenues gathered from issuing tickets."
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2008/03/cities-removing/

[custosnox]

Red-light and speed cameras are illegal in Oklahoma because state law says in essence a vehicle can not be charged with a crime, only a person.

If this is so, then how do they write parking tickets? Or for running a toll?

[Hoss]

If this is so, then how do they write parking tickets? Or for running a toll?

'Red light and speed cameras'

Running a toll is different.  I've seen what those photos look like.  High-clarity of the rear-end of the vehicle with a focus on the tag.  Unless you have your face pressed up to the rear glass (highly unlikely) then the photos won't show.

[custosnox]

'Red light and speed cameras'

Running a toll is different.  I've seen what those photos look like.  High-clarity of the rear-end of the vehicle with a focus on the tag.  Unless you have your face pressed up to the rear glass (highly unlikely) then the photos won't show.

I'm refering to Patric saying that a vehicle can't be charnged a crime and cannot be ticketed.

[cannon_fodder]

Receiving a ticket is not a crime, it is considered a civil fine.  You can have a civil judgment or a fine against people or things.  Companies, real property, even cash (State of Oklahoma v. $44,123).  So why not cars?

Now, if you ignore the fine you can be held to be in contempt of a court order to pay.  You are not arrest because of your traffic tickets, you are arrested because you failed to respond to a lawfully issued court appearance (or otherwise dispose of the issue - ie. pay the fine). 

Hence - a car can be fined by a camera.  But not given something beyond a civil penalty.  I'm guessing a moving violation that would effect insurance is considered over the line (plus it would lead to more challenges of the tickets and not increase revenues safety).

[Conan71]

Sheesh, talk about thread drift...