Texas Legislature bans speed cameras, requires warning signs for red light snappers
Ah, Texas. Home to internet hunting, overhead bananas, and WiFi'ed rest stops, the Lonestar State will set yet another precedent by passing a bill onto the governor that would ban speeding cameras and require warning signs to be posted around red-light cameras. Yes, the same state that wanted transponders in every single car registered in the state is now just one signature away from giving heavy-footed drivers something to cheer about. Both measures "were adopted in the state House by unanimous votes," and along with the speed camera ban comes legislation that will put an end to the ticketing programs run by the cities of Rhome and Marble Falls while prohibiting any other cities from enacting such practices in the future. Of course, it should be noted that the bills wouldn't go into effect until September 1st of this year, so you should probably still utilize your cruise control whilst traveling over this long weekend.[Via Autoblog]
Filed under: Transportation
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Kent @ May 25th 2007 7:37AM
So tell me, what is the reasoning behind banning speed cameras? Is speeding still illegal? And the red-light cameras? Does this mean it is legal to run a red-light as long as there is no sign?
G$ @ May 25th 2007 10:42AM
> And the red-light cameras? Does this mean it is legal to run a red-light as long as there is no sign?
Of course not. What ever gave you that idea?
Kent @ May 25th 2007 10:56AM
If it is illegal to run a red-light, regardless of whether there is a sign - and therefore a camera - then shouldn't you treat all red-lights as though they are equipped with cameras?
Or do we now only think twice about doing something illegal when there is a higher chance we'll get caught?
jason @ May 25th 2007 7:55AM
im from houston and there was a big story on how the red light camera " offenders " were school buses, cop cars, and city workers.... you gotta love it...
BrettB @ May 25th 2007 8:46AM
I live in Dallas and these Red light cameras are killing me. We never even knew they existed. Then one day we got this letter (which I almost threw away, not really being interested in some junkmail from "Safelight." Boy was I pissed when I opened it up and found a ticket for $75. But I paid it and figured that was then end of it. Then yesterday, I got another one in the mail. WTF. This time I'm going to fight it. Both infractions occurred before I even knew such a thing existed. Of course, I'll try to drive safer and I'm not trying to run red lights here. Both times it was obviously very close (so close an officer would never actually pull you over). The problem here is that at the last moment you can actually see the light, it's still yellow, but as you move closer to the light, your vision is cut off by the top of your car (and hopefully you are paying attention to the road, not the light once you've decided to enter the intersection). Yet now there is this robot with a better point of view than you have which gets to decide whether you ran the red light. It should at least be restricted to the same point of view a driver has, which is much more limited. Plus at $75 a pop ($150 after your first 3 offenses), these tickets are way more expensive than they should be.
Anyway, I'm glad to know that soon I'll at least be able to spot these intersections from a distance and be careful.
Thanks Texas Legislature. You got this one right.
zoara @ May 25th 2007 9:01AM
Er, you do realise that the yellow light is there to warn you it's about to turn red, right? If you're heading on through and it turns yellow too late for you to stop, you still get through before it's red. If you see it's yellow and can stop, you should.
At least, that's how it works here in the UK. And don't get me wrong, I run yellows too (here we call people who do that "amber gamblers") but if I got caught jumping a red because I'd run a yellow, I'd put my hands up and accept that I'd done wrong; whether or not I knew this scheme was running.
Your complaint sounds a lot like people in the UK who complain that speed cameras are "unfair" because they're "hidden". If you aren't speeding, you won't get caught. If you are, accept the risk that you could get caught. Same applies to traffic lights - if you're amber gambling you should accept that you're risking running red, and risking getting caught doing it.
BrettB @ May 25th 2007 6:32PM
You can't technically run a yellow. You are allowed to pass through a yellow. Yes, I know it's there to warn me that the light will be turning red, but since different lights have yellows that last different times, it's not always easy to tell where you are going to be when it turns red. I'm not saying I'm not technically guilty of running the red. My complaint is that because of the position of the light with respect to the intersection, at the last moment the light was visible to me in my truck, it was still yellow. I don't think it's fair that a camera with a better position to see when the light changes red should be allowed to ticket me.
To get an idea of the situation, here's the picture of me "running" the red light.
http://picasaweb.google.com/purplestallion/RedLight/photo#5068628915855404578
Galley @ May 25th 2007 9:37AM
You know what they say... "If you can't do the time, don't do the crime".
Rayonic @ May 25th 2007 9:42AM
Running yellows is safer than slamming on your brakes at the last moment, especially if there's rain/snow/ice on the ground.
My main concern, though, is getting stuck in the middle of an intersection whilst trying to turn left. Very often the light will turn red before you have a chance to go. This is legal, but how would a camera pick up such nuances? Or how about when you pull forward past the stop line to let an ambulance through?
Sheik @ May 25th 2007 2:10PM
From what I've heard, two pictures are taken. One prior to the light changing and one taken of the offending car. HPD has stated that each and every ticket is then looked over by an officer to determine whether or not it deserves a ticket. I can't say one way or the other as to how well it works, but that's what I've heard on the subject.
Another side note, you can get a parking ticket without the officer knowing if you or someone else parked it there, so I'm not really bothered by that part of it.
I am far from a fan of these things. But I see them no worse than the speeding tickets I could get if I decided to do 80 instead of 70. At least with the cameras I know where they are. :shrug:
Don Wilson @ May 25th 2007 9:47AM
I live in Dallas, where they're extremely prominent, and I think they're far more likely to cause more accidents than they prevent, see as how I have to speed through it to avoid being wrongly photographed and ticketed.
EdC @ May 25th 2007 9:52AM
The red light cameras are very common in the north Dallas suburbs and anyone who says they don't know about them is living under a rock. However, there are studies that seem to indicate that accidents increase when the cameras are in use, so many people are asking that the yellow lights be lengthened to give people more time to slow down before the light turns red. As it is now, people slam on their brakes when they see the yellow (to avoid the $75 ticket) and get rear-ended. The reason they get rear-ended is because Dallas drivers typically follow each other far too closely and God forbid that drivers be asked to change their behavior and adopt safer driving habits.
William Thrash IV @ May 25th 2007 10:40AM
YOU ARE SO RIGHT!!!
I moved here just about 3 years ago. On top of following too close, they NEVER use turn signals.
matt @ May 25th 2007 9:55AM
Personally, I don't have sympathy for people when they get speeding tickets, but I take issue with the speed cameras - not having one in my area, this is somewhat conjecture... but what if someone else is driving your car? If I loan it out to a friend, and they are speeding, does that ticket still get sent to me? An officer, on the other hand, stops the car, and gets the license from the driver... a critical part of the process, IMHO.
Doctor Suarez @ May 25th 2007 9:57AM
We have a few of these intersections in LA and there are a host of problems with them.
For one, the cameras are INCREDIBLY aggressive. At Wilshire and Sepulveda, at night, you can see that the flashes fire twice at essentially every light interval. People here are bad drivers, but they're not THAT bad. That many flashes as people pass through (legally) are bound to cause panic, anxiety, and a sudden drop in situational awareness as the driver looks back to ponder what just happened.
Also, it's been documented that the companies that run the cameras receive financial incentives on every citation issued, which creates the mother of all conflicts of interest.
william thrash @ May 25th 2007 10:11AM
I live in Dallas. Look into the "speeding" laws in Texas.
There is no such thing as "speeding" in the state of Texas.
The signs that post a limit, those are considered safe suggestions for travel in the state of Texas.
Simply put, you get pulled over for doing 5 to 10 mph over the limit, you have a pretty darn good case for going into court and explaining that the speed of (let's say) 45 mph on Belt Line in the suggested speed limit of 35 mph was warranted because conditions were optimal for driving (i.e. sun shining, dry roads, minimal traffic).
I know it sounds ludicris but I have heard it time and again from lawyers here in Texas.
As far as red light cameras go. The City of Garland reports that they'll receive $1 MILLION dollars plus, in ticket revenue this first year because of red light cameras. Any study I've read from the department of transportation reports there is NO significant reduction in red light runner accidents.
But hey...you work to pay taxes and tickets, not put money into savings
bryan @ May 25th 2007 12:00PM
The statement "There is no such thing as 'speeding' in the state of Texas" isn't entirely true.
The Texas Transportation Code Chapter 545 section 545.352 states "A speed in excess of the limits established by Subsection (b) or under another provision of this subchapter is prima facie evidence that the speed is not reasonable and prudent and that the speed is unlawful."
Any lawyer that suggests clear driving conditions is a passable reason to speed is probably questionable.
Arno @ May 25th 2007 10:17AM
Please let them bring this to NY! They are sneaky here and get me more times than not.
TrafficGeek @ May 25th 2007 11:29AM
In the US the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Device (the bible of traffic operation in the US) requires these signs to be install at all location in another 6 year, unless they're paid for using Fed Aide then it needs to have them NOW.
These things don't prevent all accidents, but they shift them away from the more serious T-Bone accident to the relatively less sever rear-enders.
Locations have been know to leave crappy yellow time and ends up with a lot of 'contestable' tickets. Red is still red, but the lights are supposed to be timed so that the Driver stands a chance to stop in time without getting clobbered from behind or needing to hit 110mph to make it pass the light.
The signs are an important part of the installation, most of the cities are more interested in reducing safety then issuing citation (I'm not speaking to the contractors or the city council/mayors out there). The signs help to warn drivers in advance so hopefully it 'wakes them up' to pay attention.
Did you know a lot of agencies have the signs and camera housing installed but rotate the cameras around? Sorta Russian Roulette method of operation.
BadVermin @ May 25th 2007 11:34AM
For those of you who don't follow the news, it has been shown time and time again that they reduced the amount of time the light normally stayed yellow to increase profits.
It's all about money, not safety.
Dave @ May 25th 2007 12:29PM
Because with one of those cameras you have to give tickets to *ALL* of the speeders, not just the poor, black and hispanic drivers.
EDomain @ May 25th 2007 12:43PM
God bless Texas!
I hope this is a trend, because we have them in Chicago too. Pain in the ass is what they are, and yes, as one poster said, it is all about money, not safety. I am tired of the State of Illinois dipping its hands into my pocket every chance it gets. We already have to give the state an interest free loan in the form of purchasing an "I-Pass" for the tollways. Basically we pre-pay $40 to the government for the right to travel on the tollways and not wait in buumper to bumper toll booth traffic.
I realize I am ranting, but I am sick and tired of the government using increasingly intrusive ways to take the money I work for.
eh... I need to relax and stop--- I'm moving to tahiti, screw it!
o0adam0o @ May 25th 2007 12:50PM
Austin TX right here!
Bring on the warning signs. Or u can always just switch lanes after u skip a red light...some cams only take pics of the lane u were in.
Rick Lyon @ May 25th 2007 12:51PM
I think the warning signs will discourage people from running the red lights and save more lives than ticketing someone 3 months later.
daustin627 @ May 25th 2007 1:32PM
One problem with using these cameras is that people have an out for fighting the ticket. You have the right to face your accuser. That's why if you go to court and the officer doesnt show up, you get off. Well in this case, you're caught by a camera. If everyone went to court to fight a camera ticket, they'd get off because A) they werent caught by an officer, and B) they're not going to take the camera down for every ticket.
A.M. @ May 25th 2007 2:43PM
"another precedent?" California had banned speed cameras for +10 years, we've also had the same law concerning the signage of red light cameras.
KC @ May 25th 2007 4:59PM
I welcome the idea of red light cameras. I've seen so many near misses at junctions because of idiots trying to beat the lights. Ever had a family member or friend involved/killed in an accident at a traffic junction? When you do, you'll really want one at every light.
chris dallas @ May 25th 2007 9:57PM
I live in Plano outside of Dallas. Texas has the highest fatality rate of any country in the US, and within Texas Dallas takes the lead. The reason is mainly poor enforcement and education. So any state following Texas will only lead to more death and destruction. Texas should jump at any opportunity to decrease its 4000 people per year death rate. Drivers in Texas don't signal, don't speed, and all those in Texas think its this way everywhere -- its not. All 49 other states do more to prevent fatalities
Orpheus @ May 27th 2007 8:29AM
Hicks.
Texan @ Jun 19th 2007 9:32AM
asshole
Ryan Singer @ Jun 21st 2007 10:52AM
We have had them for years here, and I haven't gotten a ticket once. You know why? I DON'T BREAK THE LAW!
It's a simple enough concept. If you don't speed, you can't get caught for speeding... If you don't run a red light, you're not going to get caught for it. If you're in so much of a hurry that you can't afford to wait at a traffic light, then you should plan ahead and leave a little earlier. Don't put my life, and the lives of others at risk because you're unwilling to use some foresight.
I honestly hope these cameras don't get banned in my city. Let the morons get their tickets. It wouldn't be a "cash cow" if people would obey the rules.