Red Light Cameras Turned Back On (Houston, Baytown: legally, centers, license plate) - Texas (TX) - Page 13 - City-Data Forum

desertsun41 · 07-09-2011, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TXRyan23

Geez man, If your life is so miserable in the U.S. then move to Canada ! You whine like a school girl and I thought I was bad..

Whine? So you are pro govt control? I strongly suggest you move to Cuba where you might find life real peachy!!!

jasonamd · 07-09-2011, 05:37 PM

The most common argument on various sites seem to be that there is no way a photo can prove a red light is run. And yeah, that's probably correct. But as many people have stated and few seem to believe, the cameras don't take photos. They take video and the video is reviewed before a photo (with a link to the video) is sent out in the mail. The flash when the camera is run is to make sure there is a clear picture of the license plate. One of the news sites here had a bunch of clips of footage from red light cameras at one time but it seems to be gone. However, seems there is a compliation of some footage on YouTube. You can also search for "Houston red light cameras" and find more:

YouTube - ‪Houston Cameras‬&rlm;

Here's one from someone that got caught....showing that you are indeed provided video of your violation:

YouTube - ‪Red Light Camera Ticket - Houston‬&rlm;

baytownb · 07-09-2011, 05:51 PM

Good points, I haven't seen those arguments as the most common, and it wouldn't be a good one if someone tries to use it, but yes it is true that the camera anticipates you will run the light based on your speed as you pass an induction loop sensor in the ground and it flashes you as you approach the intersection to get the plate picture. When you hit the second set of sensors it determines you crossed the stop line and take another photo. The video is on a constant loop constantly videotaping the intersection and the video is time stamped when it detects a violation.

Problem with this set up is that the deliberate red light runners, the ones that will intentionally run a light long after it is red, take advantage of a blind spot in the system. If you come to a complete stop before you run the red light it will not flash or issue you a notice of violation. I have seen it happen several times. Especially if there is a vehicle stopped behind the vehicle that runs the light. It interferes with the loop and the camera thinks it is the same vehicle. Same thing with right on reds from the right lane when you can also go straight in that lane. If you stop but go straight through the red light instead of turning right it will not flash or issue a citation. I also confirmed this with some cop friends of mine. In Baytown they ticketed cops in cop cars and they had to prove they were on a priority 1 call or they had to pay. They learned quick how to use the blind spot in the system to not get a ticket.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jasonamd

The most common argument on various sites seem to be that there is no way a photo can prove a red light is run. And yeah, that's probably correct. But as many people have stated and few seem to believe, the cameras don't take photos. They take video and the video is reviewed before a photo (with a link to the video) is sent out in the mail. The flash when the camera is run is to make sure there is a clear picture of the license plate. One of the news sites here had a bunch of clips of footage from red light cameras at one time but it seems to be gone. However, seems there is a compliation of some footage on YouTube. You can also search for "Houston red light cameras" and find more:

YouTube - ‪Houston Cameras‬&rlm;

Here's one from someone that got caught....showing that you are indeed provided video of your violation:

YouTube - ‪Red Light Camera Ticket - Houston‬&rlm;

jasonamd · 07-09-2011, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baytownb

Good points, I haven't seen those arguments as the most common, and it wouldn't be a good one if someone tries to use it, but yes it is true that the camera anticipates you will run the light based on your speed as you pass an induction loop sensor in the ground and it flashes you as you approach the intersection to get the plate picture. When you hit the second set of sensors it determines you crossed the stop line and take another photo. The video is on a constant loop constantly videotaping the intersection and the video is time stamped when it detects a violation.

Problem with this set up is that the deliberate red light runners, the ones that will intentionally run a light long after it is red, take advantage of a blind spot in the system. If you come to a complete stop before you run the red light it will not flash or issue you a notice of violation. I have seen it happen several times. Especially if there is a vehicle stopped behind the vehicle that runs the light. It interferes with the loop and the camera thinks it is the same vehicle. Same thing with right on reds from the right lane when you can also go straight in that lane. If you stop but go straight through the red light instead of turning right it will not flash or issue a citation. I also confirmed this with some cop friends of mine. In Baytown they ticketed cops in cop cars and they had to prove they were on a priority 1 call or they had to pay. They learned quick how to use the blind spot in the system to not get a ticket.

Maybe I shouldn't have said "most common" but it is a common complaint I see anywhere people are talking about the cameras...about how a photo can't prove they actually entered the intersection on red. A friend was even ready to fight a red light camera ticket insisting he entered the intersection on yellow but once he realized there was a video he could watch, he just paid the ticket.

Wasn't aware of the problem you mentioned, but I guess it makes sense that the issue exists based on how the cameras operate.

TVC15 · 07-09-2011, 08:43 PM

Even though baytownb has an answer for everything in trying to show that the cameras are bad and flawed. Maybe the cops you are talking about are the ones that speed up to a red light with their lights flashing...then stop and sound their siren a few times and when the cop has everyones attention then he drives right through the red light...I have seen this at least 100 times in my 44 years in Houston. As soon as the cop gets trough the red light then he turns off his flashing lights and drives on as if nothing really urgent is going on.

No matter how baytownb or his bloated attorney buddy want to try and convince you that the cameras are a scam or that they don't catch all of the red light runners. Keep in mind the sheer numbers of people that the cameras did catch.

That is a good compilation that you posted of what it looks like on a daily basis in Houston.

TVC15 · 07-09-2011, 08:45 PM

Here is a video from the company describing how their cameras work

YouTube - ‪ATSRoadSafety's Channel‬&rlm;

jasonamd · 07-09-2011, 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baytownb

League City;
Total Accidents up 20%, rear end accidents up 68%, city refunds over 1700 illegal tickets due to a short yellow light.

The short yellow was most likely short long before the red light cameras. At the time TXDOT had control over all the signals on the highways in the city and they had to be called in to adjust it. If I recall correctly, the light was short by something like .3 seconds. Also, accident statistics don't do a whole lot of good in a city that is growing so fast it has pretty much doubled in population in the last 7 or so years.

baytownb · 07-09-2011, 09:16 PM

Of course it was, that's how they decide where to put the cameras, where they can take care of engineering deficiencies to get the most revenue. Funny thing is, after they extended the yellow and violations dropped nearly 50% they attributed the decrease to the cameras, not the longer yellow light. The cameras haven't been up there for 7 years.

I find it interesting that there are so many camera videos showing red light running crashes and violations. Why didn't the cameras stop them?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jasonamd

The short yellow was most likely short long before the red light cameras. At the time TXDOT had control over all the signals on the highways in the city and they had to be called in to adjust it. If I recall correctly, the light was short by something like .3 seconds. Also, accident statistics don't do a whole lot of good in a city that is growing so fast it has pretty much doubled in population in the last 7 or so years.

baytownb · 07-09-2011, 09:19 PM

Cleveland didn't have a huge population boom the same month the cameras went up and they had more accidents in one month of cameras being up than they did in the year before the cameras went up.

ethanw · 07-09-2011, 09:30 PM

Im am totally agains cameras for other reasons. If all the money were going to the state an maybe use part of that money on some kind of "safety" programs I will be perfectly happy. Reality is that aholes run red lights no matter what, photo cameras or not... My concern is when they shorten the yellow light to get more folks in trouble, and that's a very un-safe practice, supposedly legal. I am still trying to understand how the cameras lower the number of accidents?
My wife's car got rear ended by a Ford that run very fast to get out the dangerous zone so he won't get a photo ticket, and he said it himself....
And again being against the camera have nothing to do with my driving style. That's one thing that I am religious about, no running red lights or stop signs. NEVER