Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Privacy

Traffic Cameras in D.C. 516

Kappelmeister writes "The Washington Post has an article about red-light-running and speeding cameras all over D.C. that have issued over half a million citations to date. (Police send you a ticket and photographic proof up to a month after the fact.) Though the cameras successfully reduce dangerous driving and boost the city's revenue, a lot of wrongful citations fall through the cracks and give some that guilty-until-proven-innocent feeling. Once again, how far is too far?" I came across this much more informative investigation of D.C.'s traffic cameras a few weeks ago. It's heavy on facts and figures, and hammers home the observation that an extra second of yellow light is at least as good at promoting good behavior, but much less lucrative for the local government and the contracting firm.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Traffic Cameras in D.C.

Comments Filter:
  • by Reziac ( 43301 ) on Sunday May 05, 2002 @10:45AM (#3465485) Homepage Journal
    I can't remember which state it was (might even have been here in California) but in the past year or so, one state's courts found use of such cameras to catch redlight runners unlawful, because using the evidence to issue a fine presumed guilt without proper legal procedures. Maybe someone else can recall or unearth the details.

    Not to mention that they were found to be considerably less than accurate.

  • by antis0c ( 133550 ) on Sunday May 05, 2002 @10:46AM (#3465488)
    I live about 15 minutes from D.C. north in Maryland and we have the same traffic cameras. Same up all over baltimore city. My father works as a Fleet Manager for a contracting company that rents out trucks to do city work for Baltimore city. They get about 10 of those traffic citations a day.

    My father tells me there are only 2 ways to win a case in court contesting the citation. One, you have convince the judge that the license plate on the vechicle in the picture isn't yours, or isn't clear enough to establish 100% that it is indeed your license plate.

    Or two, you have to prove the yellow light you were photographed at wasn't 4 seconds. State law mandates that the yellow lights must be at least 4 seconds long, so if the yellow light was say 3, the light was malfunctioning and you weren't at fault. This of course means you have to go out there with a video camera and get the light being yellow for less than 4 seconds.

    Down near DC they don't seem to use flash photography, I think they use actual video cameras, all the cameras around my place are the security camera style ones. Up in Baltimore City they're flash style, and you can tell when you've gotten caught because they produce a large flash. They also look a little like bird houses on a poll next to the intersection.

    Thats about all I know personally about these, I don't care for them that much, but ever since they put them in, I carefully pick and chose which yellow lights I'm going to try and go through.
  • by donfede ( 6215 ) on Sunday May 05, 2002 @11:05AM (#3465564) Homepage

    The folks at epic, electronic privacy information center [epic.org] have a link on their website to ovservingsurveillance.org [observings...llance.org], a web site that has a map of "big brother" camera installations in DC watching people.

    donfede
  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 05, 2002 @11:06AM (#3465565)
    I was riding with a friend in DC when we came upon one of these signals. They had big signs ahead of the intersection saying something to the effect of "CAMERAS IN USE." Wouldn't you know it, the light went to yellow as we were coming up to the intersection and my friend did the some thing we all do - we gauge our speed, our distance to the white line, and decide "yea or nay" as to whether or not we want to perform "heroic" braking. Well, because I had read about these signals not that long ago, I paid special attention to the length of the yellow and, whereas I can't give you a time down to the tenths of a second, I can tell you that it was VERY short - I'd say between 1.5 and 2 seconds, compared to the usual 4 to 5. The light was red by the time we went through the intersection; I don't know how much time after the light goes red where they send tickets, but I wouldn't be surprised if my friend got one. If so, though, it will have been because in addition to setting up the cameras, they jiggered the light timing so as to make violators out of normal, adequately careful drivers.

    Unfortunately, there are few if any laws covering traffic signal timing. So, if you live where these things are used, I suggest two paths that you can follow. One, see if you can get a city ordinance passed specifying a minimum yellow light time. Two, find out who's in charge of setting these systems up, find the next highest elected official, and tell them that you want this practice stopped or you will do what you can to have him/her removed from office. If you're told to pound sand (and you will be), follow through.

    Time to practice some "sousveillance." First, using a video camera, capture the timing of the rigged signals and capture the timing of several normal, untampered-with signals. Extract timing data from the tape, tabulate it, and send it to your local news outlets (if possible, send it directly to reporters who have covered similar stories in the past). Make sure that the reporter goes after the elected official you spoke to.

    Practice more sousveillance. Try to capture the license plate numbers of city vehicles and, if at all possible, the license plate numbers of the car or cars driven by aforementioned elected officials. Then, stake out intersections where those cars routinely pass and videotape the cars running red lights. If you really want to blow the lid off the scam, see if you can tape them running the rigged lights. If you can show that the city officials don't get tickets, well...
  • by *xpenguin* ( 306001 ) on Sunday May 05, 2002 @11:07AM (#3465566)
    There's an article on HowStuffWorks [howstuffworks.com] that shows how the Red-light traffic cameras [howstuffworks.com] work.
  • The issue of legality came down to the fact that the company running the system of red light cameras was also controlling the timing of the lights. In fact, the courts found that the contractor was actually shortening the yellow times on lights, as they got something like 70 percent of the fines for each red light violator/victim. This at least was the case in San Diego, CA.

    http://www.kfmb.com/results.php?storyID=3166&is= y

    http://www.kfmb.com/search_results.php?curPage=1 &s Text=red+light

  • by cvd6262 ( 180823 ) on Sunday May 05, 2002 @11:44AM (#3465699)

    Or two, you have to prove the yellow light you were photographed at wasn't 4 seconds. State law mandates that the yellow lights must be at least 4 seconds long, so if the yellow light was say 3, the light was malfunctioning and you weren't at fault. This of course means you have to go out there with a video camera and get the light being yellow for less than 4 seconds.

    I read about these ticketing-lights in a Car & Driver editorial a few months ago. It seems that they are not installed to improve safety, but to generate more income for the state. They cost much less per ticket than a patrol car and policeman would.

    The problem is that many states use the four-second-yellow-light rule regardless of speed limit. If I'm driving 25MPH, it's likely that I will have sufficient time to decide whether to safely stop or continue through the light. However, at 55MPH (eg on an expressway), four seconds is not enough time for a driver to decided whether or not they should stop (safely) or run the light.

    If states were honestly interested in improving public safety at traffic lights, they would study the situation and vary yellow-light duration based on speed limit (and weather conditions).

  • San Diego Scameras (Score:5, Informative)

    by John Jorsett ( 171560 ) on Sunday May 05, 2002 @11:52AM (#3465719)
    San Diego had its red light cameras shut down when some attorneys established in a civil lawsuit that Lockheed Martin had deliberately misplaced the sensors, causing many drivers to be ticketed unfairly. LM got around $70 per ticket, so they had a large incentive to make sure as many were issued as possible. (How'd you like to have cops get a percentage of every ticket or fine they wrote?) This business was so profitable for LM that they installed and maintained the cameras at their expense in return for their cut. The city and other governmental agencies got the rest of the $271 tickets, so they were ecstatic. San Diego got millions of dollars a year from these devices before they were shut off.

    The trial brought out many other interesting revelations. For example, each ticket was supposed to be issued by a sworn police officer, who had to review the 'evidence' and sign off on it. Turns out that a spate of tickets were issued when the officer was on vacation. Testimony revealed that the officer frequently just signed a bunch of blank forms and let LM fill them in. Another interesting aspect is that LM fiercely resisted having their hardware and software examined by the plaintiffs. In fact, they threatened the law firm with a suit if they persisted in pressing for discovery of those items. People who have fought their red light tickets in court and who wanted the design details and calibration records for the camera that photographed them were routinely refused this information, even though it's vital to a defense. Another interesting fact revealed at trial was that the cameras were NOT placed at 'the most dangerous intersections' as the city had been contending all along, but at intersections whose yellow light intervals were revealed to be set far shorter than state guidelines. As has been discussed here in other posts, the yellow light duration is a major factor in whether a light will be run or not.

    These cameras, at least as operated in San Diego, are a scam. They ticket innocent people, are unexaminable for a defense, and are just a way for the city to rake in big money.

    Here's the web site operated by the attorneys who got these cameras shut down: Red Light Lawyers [redlightlawyers.com]
  • by PSC ( 107496 ) on Sunday May 05, 2002 @11:54AM (#3465728)
    wouldn't the picture show just a long blur of your car

    In Germany, we have this kind of cameras (both for speeding and at traffic lights) for over a decade and unfortunately, they work pretty much as designed. Even in excess of 120 mph, the picture will be clear enough to identify your face.

    That said, the automated speeding control has inaccuracies in the single-digit percent level, especially when the radar device wasn't properly aligned with the lanes, as the ADAC (German version of AAA) found out.

    And at least in Germany, it is illegal to muck with your number plates in order to avoid being identified. If the police catches you, you will be screwed. Seriously.

    The best way to avoid being photographed is, of course, to stick with the speed limit. (Which IMHO is easier in Germany than for example in Illinois with its suppressive speed limits.)

    And this [autobahnpolizei.de] is my favorite traffic sign :-)

    (The sign invalidates speed limit, interdiction of overtaking etc. Best viewed on the Autobahn!)
  • by Kamel Jockey ( 409856 ) on Sunday May 05, 2002 @11:55AM (#3465733) Homepage

    You really should think before you post.

    This [weeklystandard.com] is one of many examples of emergency vehicles actually getting tickets. Should I read the article to you as well if you can't find the information in it?

  • by DietFluffy ( 150048 ) on Sunday May 05, 2002 @11:56AM (#3465737)
    A judge in Hawaii recently ruled that traffic tickets issued from traffic cameras are unconstitutional.

    http://www.thehawaiichannel.com/hon/news/stories/n ews-139403920020411-160413.html [thehawaiichannel.com]

    I live in SF, California, and the lawyer friends that I've spoken to regarding these tickets all told me that the judges here will cancel all tickets that are challenged. So if you get one of these around here, challenge the ticket and the judge will tear it up for you!

  • by Raunchola ( 129755 ) on Sunday May 05, 2002 @12:01PM (#3465755)
    Here's a link [snopes2.com] about the handcuff story, for those interested.
  • by EvilStein ( 414640 ) <spamNO@SPAMpbp.net> on Sunday May 05, 2002 @12:45PM (#3465897)
    Link is here [news10.net]....

    And here's the text...
    Red light camera tickets have temporarily been suspended throughout Sacramento county. On Tuesday, Sacramento County District Attorney Jan Scully announced the break, which will remain in place until the system can be reviewed.

    The hiatus in the use of the devices was called because of a possible timing discrepancy in the cameras. Under current law, drivers are given 0.20 of a second after a traffic signal turns red before the camera takes a picture.

    Some questions have arisen about whether or not the cameras are actually set correctly to provide the delay. The manual for the cameras specifies that delays of more than 0.15 of a second but less than 0.20 can be rounded to the higher number, meaning that some motorists may have been cited while still within the allowable limit.

    The questions about the timing of when the photos will cause hundreds of red light violations to be dismissed. This is the second time there has been a mass dismissal of red light cases. In 1999, it was ruled that drivers were not properly notified of the existence of the cameras, forcing more than a thousand tickets to be thrown out.
  • Re:/. Knee Jerking (Score:5, Informative)

    by cmorriss ( 471077 ) on Sunday May 05, 2002 @01:01PM (#3465947)
    Obviously you didn't read the detailed investigation [weeklystandard.com] that clearly presented a mountain of evidence against your arguments for cameras at red lights. Here's summary, but I suggest you read the whole thing.

    (3) The cameras are nothing more than a money making scheme.

    The article pretty much proves this point through unambiguous data. The cameras are not placed at the most accident prone red lights. Just to drive this point home, MOST of the worst accident lights in the cities with red light cameras were not chosen for the location of the cameras. They're placed at the intersections with the shortest yellow lights and most volume. Many of the lights they're placed at don't have any accident problems at all!

    Most importantly, the reason these cameras are there is to reduce accidents. Is it working? NO!!! Read the article. All CREDIBLE studies done on this have conlcuded that the cameras at least do nothing and often increase accidents. Mainly rear end accidents because people slam on their brakes to avoid getting a ticket. In fact, at many of these intersections, the rear end accidents have doubled or more.

    Intuition says these cameras should help save lives, but the statistics don't lie. This red light camera business is simply a Bad Thing in its current form. Maybe red light cameras could be used in certain places, in certain ways for good, but that's not what's going on now.

If you want to put yourself on the map, publish your own map.

Working...