Live data from Hacker News

Red-light camera grace period goes from 0.1 to 0.3 seconds, Chicago to lose $17M

arstechnica.com

21–30 of 79 posts

Re: Red-light camera grace period goes from 0.1 to 0.3 seconds, Chicago to lose $17M

#21
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If yellow lights all had a fixed duration I would agree with you, but unfortunately the length of yellow lights is variable. Additionally yellow lights have no legal rules behind them. They don't mean "slow down", they are simply an indication that the light will be red soon. You are within your rights to accelerate through a yellow light (assuming you're still under the speed limit).

There needs to be countdown timers on all traffic lights.

If you can see the pedestrian crossing light, they usually have countdowns to yellow at least. I use these a lot to estimate the staleness of a green light.

Many traffic lights in China have countdown timers.

Re: Red-light camera grace period goes from 0.1 to 0.3 seconds, Chicago to lose $17M

#22
post #10

Good. These should be ruled unconstitutional everywhere. Maybe it's just where I live but it seems like law enforcement is more focused on revenue generation.

I'm curious to hear why you think it's unconstitutional. It's unobtrusive surveillance in a public setting, so there's no expectation of privacy. It's punishing people for breaking a public-safety law. In most cases they even have signs alerting you to the presence of an enforcement camera. Now I can definitely see how automated enforcement ripe for abuse when there are revenues to be had, and it's concerning when op…

> I'm curious to hear why you think it's unconstitutional.

Most of these cameras can't demonstrate that the owner of the car was the one driving at the time. In a criminal court that'd be plenty of reasonable doubt, but red light tickets (at least around here) are handled as civil manners that go to collections agencies if unpaid to circumvent that issue.

Re: Red-light camera grace period goes from 0.1 to 0.3 seconds, Chicago to lose $17M

#23
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There needs to be countdown timers on all traffic lights.

Strongly disagree. A reasonable grace period of under a second seems much safer.

Your internet sarcasm is strong.

Re: Red-light camera grace period goes from 0.1 to 0.3 seconds, Chicago to lose $17M

#24
post #9

While I find the camera's themselves to be... undesirable.. Why is there a need for a grace period? The yellow is all the grace period you need. If you speed up for or ignore the yellow with time to stop, you're already breaking the law... Not that I'm a fan of the system at all - just, if you're going to do it, do it ... u know?

If yellow lights all had a fixed duration I would agree with you, but unfortunately the length of yellow lights is variable. Additionally yellow lights have no legal rules behind them. They don't mean "slow down", they are simply an indication that the light will be red soon. You are within your rights to accelerate through a yellow light (assuming you're still under the speed limit).

Yellow legally means "do not enter the intersection if you can safely stop" where I live. Of course that involves a judgement on the part of the driver. The duration of the yellow is generally based on the distance across the intersection and allowing cars to clear from inside the "safe stopping" distance.

Re: Red-light camera grace period goes from 0.1 to 0.3 seconds, Chicago to lose $17M

#25
A big plus of automating tickets is that it's no longer biased. You're not more likely to get a ticket in a poorer, more high crime neighborhood, just because there happen to be more police there. This way, rich white people in the Loop are just as likely to get tickets as poor black people in Woodlawn. To me this democratization seems like a big plus.

Re: Red-light camera grace period goes from 0.1 to 0.3 seconds, Chicago to lose $17M

#26
post #16

The moral hazard that comes from cities using fines for offenses to generate revenue is awful and despicable, and it causes all sorts of injustices, big and small. Red light cameras are a part of this, and they're awful.

> an investigation by the Tribune found that the company’s interactions with Chicago officials were actually corrupt.

Unsurprising given it's Chicago, but this is one of the hazards.

Re: Red-light camera grace period goes from 0.1 to 0.3 seconds, Chicago to lose $17M

#27
post #10

Good. These should be ruled unconstitutional everywhere. Maybe it's just where I live but it seems like law enforcement is more focused on revenue generation.

I'm curious to hear why you think it's unconstitutional. It's unobtrusive surveillance in a public setting, so there's no expectation of privacy. It's punishing people for breaking a public-safety law. In most cases they even have signs alerting you to the presence of an enforcement camera. Now I can definitely see how automated enforcement ripe for abuse when there are revenues to be had, and it's concerning when op…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confrontation_Clause

Re: Red-light camera grace period goes from 0.1 to 0.3 seconds, Chicago to lose $17M

#28
post #16

The moral hazard that comes from cities using fines for offenses to generate revenue is awful and despicable, and it causes all sorts of injustices, big and small. Red light cameras are a part of this, and they're awful.

I agree. I've only ever received one red light violation, and that was because I intentionally rolled through a red light at low speed on a three-way intersection making a right turn.

It was early Sunday morning in clear conditions, with clear visibility in all directions for about a quarter mile, not a car in sight. My trusty crapmobile had been stalling while resting at complete stops, and the destination was my mechanic's place, which was 100ft around the corner. Stopping at that light very well could have meant calling a tow truck to be towed 100ft, and I'd already made it about 25 miles with only minor issues at that point.

Well, I didn't see the red light camera that was newly-installed (let alone any notices for it), so I ended up with a $100 violation for rolling through a red at 5mph, issued via some company the local municipality contracted. You can't really argue context or circumstance with those people, since they're pretty much just call center employees ensuring that the video technically supports the violation. A stop-gap for the imperfect nature of their automation.

Ended up bitterly paying the $100. In retrospect, I wish a cop had stopped me instead, because there's about a 98% chance I would have gotten off.

The perverse aspect of the cameras is that in many states they don't count as moving violations, so that indicates it's not actually about safety but in fact revenue.

Re: Red-light camera grace period goes from 0.1 to 0.3 seconds, Chicago to lose $17M

#29
post #25

A big plus of automating tickets is that it's no longer biased. You're not more likely to get a ticket in a poorer, more high crime neighborhood, just because there happen to be more police there. This way, rich white people in the Loop are just as likely to get tickets as poor black people in Woodlawn. To me this democratization seems like a big plus.

Unless a red light camera is put on every single intersection with a light, there's still a bias in play, a bias based on who uses the intersections where the cameras are placed.

The busiest roads (and thus those most likely to get cameras) are fed by those who are commuting into town to a day job; not by those who live in-town. This immediately creates a bias based on income; the larger the city and the higher the costs of living in the city, the bigger the bias.

Re: Red-light camera grace period goes from 0.1 to 0.3 seconds, Chicago to lose $17M

#30
post #10

Good. These should be ruled unconstitutional everywhere. Maybe it's just where I live but it seems like law enforcement is more focused on revenue generation.

I'm curious to hear why you think it's unconstitutional. It's unobtrusive surveillance in a public setting, so there's no expectation of privacy. It's punishing people for breaking a public-safety law. In most cases they even have signs alerting you to the presence of an enforcement camera. Now I can definitely see how automated enforcement ripe for abuse when there are revenues to be had, and it's concerning when op…

Perhaps not the strongest possible, but I've heard the argument in the past that it violates the confrontation clause of the 6th amendment – that you are unable to face your accuser, since your accuser is simply a timed camera.

OTOH, since you can sue property (for example in asset forfeiture cases), that might not hold any water.

Post reply on HN