Longer yellow light = fewer red light tickets
By Matt Artz
Monday, November 7th, 2011 at 4:56 pm in Uncategorized.
The graphic below is a follow-up on a story we had in March about how Fremont’s most ticketed red light camera intersection churned out a lot fewer tickets after Caltrans increased yellow light times. The intersection is Mission and Mohave, and Caltrans extended the yellow light from 4.3 to 5 seconds last November.
Click on the photo to enlarge.
[You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.]
November 7th, 2011 at 8:50 pm
Collision rates stayed the same?
November 7th, 2011 at 9:48 pm
Let’s credit Jay Beeber for producing the nice graphic. Jay is the citizen activist who virtually single handedly brought the fraud of these cameras to the attention to the Los Angeles Police Commission with the result of L.A. getting out of the camera business.
November 7th, 2011 at 9:51 pm
There is no significant rebound effect, once again debunking that myth. Collision rates cannot effectively be measured in such a short period of time. In addition, one of the major factors affecting collision rates is the avg. daily traffic. Many proponents of cameras often cite fewer collisions in the last few years without acknowledging that the downturn in the economy and the high price of gas has meant fewer vehicles.
November 7th, 2011 at 10:04 pm
Credit Jay Beeber for producing the chart. Jay is the citizen activist who virtually single handedly brought the fraud of the cameras to the attention of the Los Angeles Police Commission with the result that L.A. is now out of the camera business
November 7th, 2011 at 10:07 pm
One year is not sufficient time to evaluate collision rates. One thing police and proponents of cameras do is to cite a reduction in collision rates in recent years and crediting the cameras. They usually do not acknowledge the reduction in collisions nationally which is largely due to reduced vehicular traffic…most likely due to poor economy (fewer driving to work) and the high price of gas.
November 8th, 2011 at 2:25 pm
Let me add that of the few citations now being issued, roughly 2 out of 3 are issued to right-turners. One-third go to those turning left or going straight. The people of California through their legislature have voted overwhelmingly that the $480 fine for a rolling right turn is not appropriate. The Governor vetoed the legislation because the finance director pointed out the millions in lost revenue if the fine were cut in half. Safety is not the reason we have the cameras.
November 9th, 2011 at 8:18 am
Two other excellent news stories about the cameras were published during the last week.
Both KTVU and the Almanac newspaper published stories about the fake tickets (street name: Snitch Tickets) that many cities send out to fool registered owners into revealing the identity of the person driving the vehicle. The publication of the stories is significant, because until now, the police have managed to keep a lid on publicity about this sneaky – but legal – practice.
The way to recognize one of the fakes is that it will not have the name and address of the local branch of the Superior Court on it. Instead, it will direct you to contact something with a generic name like the Traffic Violations Bureau – which will manned either by camera company personnel, or by the local police. (If you contact the “Bureau” it’s all over for you – kiss $550 goodbye.)
If you receive one of the fake tickets, the correct response is… no response. Do not respond to a fake ticket. Do not contact the police by phone, by mail, or by computer. Don’t go to a cop holiday party, get drunk, and start babbling. But DO show the fake ticket to your trusted friends, to educate them, so that they won’t fall for one of the fakes.
May 18th, 2012 at 11:28 am
May 18 2012 Letter to the Ed updates discussion on this topic –
http://www.insidebayarea.com/ci_20638286/may-18-letters-editor?IADID=Search-www.insidebayarea.com-www.insidebayarea.com
Because BANG appears to, in the name of efficiency, sweep this (and all other hosted content) under the carpet in time, here’s a cut-n-paste;
May 18 letters to the editor
Letters from our readers
Oakland Tribune
© Copyright 2011, Bay Area News Group
Fremont nabs speeders with yellow-light trick
At Mowry Avenue and Farwell Drive in Fremont is a red-light camera. It captures more straight-through violations than any other camera in Fremont because it has a short yellow light. Here is how it has been shortened.
The city has measured the prevailing speed of traffic at 45 mph, but has set the minimum yellow light time for a speed of 40 mph. While legal, this allows the city to shave one-half second from the yellow light.
Studies show that shortening a yellow light by one-half second actually doubles the number of violations.
Adding back that half-second will reduce citations from 2,000 per year to about 1,000. This is the stated goal of the cameras — namely, to reduce red-light running. This is exactly what happened when the yellow light at Mission Boulevard and Mohave Drive in Fremont was extended in 2010. The move is so effective and so easy.
This legal trick costs motorists about $400,000 each year in unnecessary fines. The city pockets about $130,000 of this money. That is why the change is not made.
Roger Jones
Fremont
May 20th, 2012 at 8:15 pm
And, another update – on the same topic.
No need for a cut and paste since *this* particular newspaper will retain their archives for many years to come . . ..
http://www.tricityvoice.com/articlefiledisplay.php?issue=2012-05-18&file=How+to+trap+motorists+++TCV.txt
May 20th, 2012 at 8:22 pm
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/37/3796.asp
But, Bill H and Anu N BOTH know better . . . . .
May 23rd, 2012 at 7:25 pm
But… VinnieB KNOWS his ASS from a hole in the ground?
Isn’t it time to change the CalGuys diaper!
http://www.probaseballforsanjose.com/