Red Light Cameras Turned Back On (Houston, Roma: buyer, license, yard)

[TVC15]

Originally Posted by baytownb

I need your help again, see, I have read those stats that ATS and HPD got together on to tell us how great their cameras are over and over again and I don't see where it shows the cause for the accident. Yet you say "due to red light runners" over and over again. Can you share with us the part of the email you must have forgotten to post that tells us that every single one of those accidents was a red light related accident? I didn't see it, and I know you are so fair and even handed that you wouldn't want to say anything that wasn't true or something that was misleading. See, because if there are accidents not related to running a red light included in stats intended to tell us how bad people are running red lights some people might think that would be someone trying to mislead someone. And I know you wouldn't be telling us that those accidents were red light related without actually having the proof in your hand, so please post it so I can see it.

I'll give you a clue...read the title of the spread sheet under the HPD logo.

Man o Man what are trying to pull now? Yes this was overwhelming evidence against everything that you have been saying. If you don't like the files then please contact HPD and get them for yourself...I smell a rat...I am 100% sure you are one of the Kubosh's or are related to them and are trying to play some sleazy traffic ticket attorney game with me. I have provided more then enough data for everyone. I provided solid and official HPD data that blew your argument right off the charts.

[TVC15]

Ok baytownb...I contacted the source that gave me the HPH Excel data and informed him of the game you are trying to play and this was his response...

this information was obtained through a freedom of information act request. It can be shared with anyone who asks. It is also accidents at intersections that had and then didn't have the cameras. Just like the study that they tout that showed all accidents were down, this study shows they are up. What they neglected to tell you is that all accidents overall are down for the last six months. Only the accidents at intersections previously monitored by red light cameras went up.

I had to size the files to fit in order to upload it onto city day. I can't seem to upload the entire spread sheet that will show all of the exact address of the intersections that the accidents occurred at as well as the date and time. If anyone can tell me how to upload a large excel file I am all ears.

[baytownb]

I read it, Like I said, before you even started posting in here. Where does it say what type of crashes these were? It says red light camera intersections under the HPD logo. Where is the breakdown on how many of those were actually caused by someone running a red light vs illegal left turn, failure to yeild, failure to control speed, intoxication etc. Go ahead point it out to me.

You do realize the data showing accidents went down 16% after the election is from the HPD as well right? You do realize that HPD isn't saying that accidents didn't go down 16% after the election, just that they want you to look at a different set of stats that they and ATS came up with.

Originally Posted by TVC15

I'll give you a clue...read the title of the spread sheet under the HPD logo.

Man o Man what are trying to pull now? Yes this was overwhelming evidence against everything that you have been saying. If you don't like the files then please contact HPD and get them for yourself...I smell a rat...I am 100% sure you are one of the Kubosh's or are related to them and are trying to play some sleazy traffic ticket attorney game with me. I have provided more then enough data for everyone. I provided solid and official HPD data that blew your argument right off the charts.

[baytownb]

Nice,
here is the interesting thing about the program in Denton.
The cameras were installed in 2006. People complained the yellow lights were too short so the city lengthened them. Violations dropped so low the city is actually in the red for the program. Because of that Dento put up a new camera system that would issue MORE citations and violations doubled again. Also, there was no trend of reduction in accidents during the camera program.

Red-light program in the red so far | Denton Record Chronicle | News for Denton County, Texas | Local News

Originally Posted by ethanw

Let me grab the popcorns now..

Drivers Stopping Means Red-Light Cameras Don

[TVC15]

Originally Posted by baytownb

I read it, Like I said, before you even started posting in here. Where does it say what type of crashes these were? It says red light camera intersections under the HPD logo. Where is the breakdown on how many of those were actually caused by someone running a red light vs illegal left turn, failure to yeild, failure to control speed, intoxication etc. Go ahead point it out to me.

You do realize the data showing accidents went down 16% after the election is from the HPD as well right? You do realize that HPD isn't saying that accidents didn't go down 16% after the election, just that they want you to look at a different set of stats that they and ATS came up with.

OMG You can't be that ignorant. The data was complied from accidents that occurred at red light camera intersections...that is where the data came from. Go and verify it with HPD. I have done enough work with you. No one but you is grasping at straws in an attempted to divert attention from the facts. Do the work yourself...I did an excellent job! Sorry the data hurt you so bad but when you dealing with a snake that will do anything to earn credibility...then I had not choice but to pull out the big guns and shoot you down!
OMG You can't be that ignorant. The data was complied from accidents that occurred at red light camera intersections...that is where the data came from. Go and verify it with HPD. I have done enough work with you. No one but you is grasping at straws in an attempted to divert attention from the facts. Do the work yourself...I did an excellent job! The truth hurts when it busts your lie wide open. You are an untruthful person with sneaky ulterior motives that will do anything...I had no choice but to pull out the big guns and shoot you down! You only told a snippet of the story...I filled in the holes for you. Like the man said in his response to me... anyone can get the information.

[baytownb]

Yes, happened at red light camera locations, we are on the same page. Where we go off the tracks is when you repeatedly fail to acknowledge that there are several types of accidents. Not every accident is because someone ran a red light. you do realize those aren't the only kinds of accidents out there right? You do realize that just because it was at a red light camera LOCATION doesn't mean it was a RED LIGHT VIOLATION ACCIDENT You do grasp that concept right?

If you want to talk about red light related accidents It would be reasonable to discuss how many accidents were CAUSED BY RUNNING A RED LIGHT. If you are going to make the argument that there are more accidents caused by someone running a red light because the cameras were voted out wouldn't it be prudent to talk about how many of those total accidents were actually caused by running a red light? A reasonable person would think so, but no, you think actually wanting to talk about accidents that were caused by red light running is somehow a trick! LOL, I mean it is just absolutely absurd, I mean you have put put some doosies out there, but to actually claim that wanting to talk about accidents that were caused by red light runners in a discussion on hwo effective cameras are on cutting down on accidents caused by red light runners is dirty pool. It's very amusing, but tiring. It's like the special olympics of debate.

I have no doubt you think you did an excellent job. Like I said, I really am not posting for you anymore, but I hope you continue to make these arguments, it really does illustrate how the mind of someone that thinks that lowering the penalty for a crime gets you less of that criminal activity works. Please, continue.

Originally Posted by TVC15

OMG You can't be that ignorant. The data was complied from accidents that occurred at red light camera intersections...that is where the data came from. Go and verify it with HPD. I have done enough work with you. No one but you is grasping at straws in an attempted to divert attention from the facts. Do the work yourself...I did an excellent job!

[TVC15]

Originally Posted by baytownb

Yes, happened at red light camera locations, we are on the same page. Where we go off the tracks is when you repeatedly fail to acknowledge that there are several types of accidents. Not every accident is because someone ran a red light. you do realize those aren't the only kinds of accidents out there right? You do realize that just because it was at a red light camera LOCATION doesn't mean it was a RED LIGHT VIOLATION ACCIDENT You do grasp that concept right?

If you want to talk about red light related accidents It would be reasonable to discuss how many accidents were CAUSED BY RUNNING A RED LIGHT. If you are going to make the argument that there are more accidents caused by someone running a red light because the cameras were voted out wouldn't it be prudent to talk about how many of those total accidents were actually caused by running a red light? A reasonable person would think so, but no, you think actually wanting to talk about accidents that were caused by red light running is somehow a trick! LOL, I mean it is just absolutely absurd, I mean you have put put some doosies out there, but to actually claim that wanting to talk about accidents that were caused by red light runners in a discussion on hwo effective cameras are on cutting down on accidents caused by red light runners is dirty pool. It's very amusing, but tiring. It's like the special olympics of debate.

I have no doubt you think you did an excellent job. Like I said, I really am not posting for you anymore, but I hope you continue to make these arguments, it really does illustrate how the mind of someone that thinks that lowering the penalty for a crime gets you less of that criminal activity works. Please, continue.

Thanks I will. I will always stand up to those who don't represent the truth on a very serious matter.

If I can get the excel files posted then you can look up each and every accident case # and see what the cause of the accident was. Hopefully that will shut you up once and for all. The funny thing is you are trying to shave off some of the 634 accidents that was an increase of 350% when the cameras were turned off by claiming they were not all from red light runners.

OK lets play your game...and I'll be generous and only pretend that 317 of those accidents be due to red light runners....that is still a 175% increase! No matter how you want to slice and dice it...when the red light cameras were turned off the number of red light runners and accidents increased substantially. Any reasonable minded person can surely see that.


Lets keep it simple and to the facts.


The facts are:

People run red lights everyday in Houston. Some result in major crashes some result in death.
Red light cameras video tape red light runners with excellent technology.
Red light runners are fined...OK so not all of them pay. You can also say this about parking meters tickets, toll booth violations, moving violations etc...You will always have those losers that don't pay. It is not unique just for the red light camera violations.
The millions of dollars that the city of Houston profits from the fines go towards very good causes in Houston.
Bad driving behaviors are reduced by the presence of red light cameras. I have posted more then enough supporting evidence to prove this...actually it is just plain common sence and the data overwheleming backs it up.

So tell me again why any of the above is a bad thing? Show everybody again how you will grasp at straws in order to divert from these facts.

[baytownb]

You forgot to use an emoticon to punctuate your argument, you are slipping. If you can get that data broken down by accident type please share it, I would love to see it. Can't wait.

Originally Posted by TVC15

Thanks I will. I will always stand up to those who don't represent the truth on a very serious matter.

If I can get the excel files posted then you can look up each and every accident case # and see what the cause of the accident was. Hopefully that will shut you up once and for all.

[baytownb]

Good news for the safety of drivers in Tempe AZ, more cameras are coming down! This comes after the State of AZ banned putting photo enforcement cameras on state highways and more initiatives are filed to ban the revenue cameras in Washington state and Ohio;


Traffic cameras on Arizona freeways went dark last year. Now it's lights out in Tempe, too.
Controversy over the state's speed cameras prompted the Department of Public Safety to discontinue the enforcement on freeways last summer.
Public criticism of traffic cameras centered on whether governments supported the enforcement because it made streets and freeways safer, or because citations provided a revenue boost.
Despite DPS shutting down cameras, several Valley cities including Tempe, Mesa and Chandler chose to continue the enforcement.
But last week, the Tempe council voted 4-3 not to renew the city's contract with traffic-camera provider Redflex Traffic Systems.
All Tempe cameras will be turned off at midnight July 19. Anyone who receives a ticket between now and then still must pay it.
Mayor Hugh Hallman and council members Robin Arredondo-Savage and Joel Navarro voted to temporarily renew the contract, while Shana Ellis, Corey Woods, Onnie Shekerjian and Mark Mitchell voted against the renewal.
Tempe staff had recommended the council extend the contract, which was due to expire July 18, for three months. The total cost of the contract during the proposed renewal period was not to exceed $200,000.
Tempe has stated that all costs related to the contract are paid with revenue from traffic-violation fines. The contract was originally approved in 2007 for a three-year term with two, one-year renewal options. A one-year renewal approved last year expires next week.
At last Thursday's meeting, Hallman proposed extending the contract until August 19. The one-month extension could give lawyers for Tempe and Redflex sufficient time to "try and resolve some controversies," he said.
Last December,Redflex sued Tempe, alleging the city violated its contract with the company by not sharing a portion of the fees paid by drivers who go to traffic school in lieu of paying a citation.
At the meeting, Ellis explained her "no" vote.
"I don't believe in extending a contract to a company that is currently suing us over that contract," she said, adding that her vote should not be misconstrued as a statement for or against traffic cameras.
One council member took a stance against the enforcement.
"I do have a philosophical issue with photo radar," Woods said. "But on top of that, I've got some other philosophical concerns with the marketing this company engages in."
Woods told the Tempe Republic on Monday,that he voted no on the renewal because he has yet to be provided sufficient statistical data showing traffic cameras decrease vehicle accidents. He also criticized Redflex marketing videos, which show accidents involving red-light runners, for being "sensationalistic."
No other council members explained their vote.
On Monday, Redflex Public Information Director Tom Herrmann said the company declined to comment on its contract with Tempe.
Tempe released a statement Monday saying that Tempe City Attorney Andrew Ching is still in negotiations with Redflex to resolve the lawsuit. The council could consider a proposal for a new photo-enforcement contract at a future meeting, said City Manager Charlie Meyer in the release.
Redflex owns the cameras on Tempe streets and can remove the equipment anytime after the contract expires.



Read more: Tempe traffic cameras to turn off next week

[TVC15]

Originally Posted by baytownb

Good news for the safety of drivers in Tempe AZ, more cameras are coming down! This comes after the State of AZ banned putting photo enforcement cameras on state highways and more initiatives are filed to ban the revenue cameras in Washington state and Ohio;


Traffic cameras on Arizona freeways went dark last year. Now it's lights out in Tempe, too.
Controversy over the state's speed cameras prompted the Department of Public Safety to discontinue the enforcement on freeways last summer.
Public criticism of traffic cameras centered on whether governments supported the enforcement because it made streets and freeways safer, or because citations provided a revenue boost.
Despite DPS shutting down cameras, several Valley cities including Tempe, Mesa and Chandler chose to continue the enforcement.
But last week, the Tempe council voted 4-3 not to renew the city's contract with traffic-camera provider Redflex Traffic Systems.
All Tempe cameras will be turned off at midnight July 19. Anyone who receives a ticket between now and then still must pay it.
Mayor Hugh Hallman and council members Robin Arredondo-Savage and Joel Navarro voted to temporarily renew the contract, while Shana Ellis, Corey Woods, Onnie Shekerjian and Mark Mitchell voted against the renewal.
Tempe staff had recommended the council extend the contract, which was due to expire July 18, for three months. The total cost of the contract during the proposed renewal period was not to exceed $200,000.
Tempe has stated that all costs related to the contract are paid with revenue from traffic-violation fines. The contract was originally approved in 2007 for a three-year term with two, one-year renewal options. A one-year renewal approved last year expires next week.
At last Thursday's meeting, Hallman proposed extending the contract until August 19. The one-month extension could give lawyers for Tempe and Redflex sufficient time to "try and resolve some controversies," he said.
Last December,Redflex sued Tempe, alleging the city violated its contract with the company by not sharing a portion of the fees paid by drivers who go to traffic school in lieu of paying a citation.
At the meeting, Ellis explained her "no" vote.
"I don't believe in extending a contract to a company that is currently suing us over that contract," she said, adding that her vote should not be misconstrued as a statement for or against traffic cameras.
One council member took a stance against the enforcement.
"I do have a philosophical issue with photo radar," Woods said. "But on top of that, I've got some other philosophical concerns with the marketing this company engages in."
Woods told the Tempe Republic on Monday,that he voted no on the renewal because he has yet to be provided sufficient statistical data showing traffic cameras decrease vehicle accidents. He also criticized Redflex marketing videos, which show accidents involving red-light runners, for being "sensationalistic."
No other council members explained their vote.
On Monday, Redflex Public Information Director Tom Herrmann said the company declined to comment on its contract with Tempe.
Tempe released a statement Monday saying that Tempe City Attorney Andrew Ching is still in negotiations with Redflex to resolve the lawsuit. The council could consider a proposal for a new photo-enforcement contract at a future meeting, said City Manager Charlie Meyer in the release.
Redflex owns the cameras on Tempe streets and can remove the equipment anytime after the contract expires.



Read more: Tempe traffic cameras to turn off next week

I also think the photo enforcement cameras should come down...it's faulty technology. Don't be fooled by the hype..these are not the same cameras that Houston uses.


However this is the type of hype that the Kubosh's and baytownb use to brainwash people. There is a word for it and salesmen use it to persuade buyers. It is called group persuasion or social proof. It feeds into behavior that people display when they see everyone else doing it...then they think that they should follow along and it to. Hey everbody else is doing it so why aren't we? ...old sales trick and widely used by lawyers and salesmen. baytownb has been using it all throughout this post
5 Persuasion Tactics for One to One Selling

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_proof


That's why sleazy Kubosh wants to have them taken down...videos don't lie...so he looses out on all that money. With the HPD data that I posted you see with the cameras on that is 268 cases he won't be getting but with the cameras off...wow his case load potential increases to a whopping 634 cases! That is why he hates the cameras so much...watch the video I posted...he did not have one single qualm about the red light camera technology...not one word about the actually cameras and the technology...donesnt that seem strange? You can see him using social proof tatics in that video as well.