• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Abolish Traffic Enforcement Cameras

Abolish Traffic Enforcement Cameras

  • All cameras should be abolished

    Votes: 37 46.8%

  • Abolish red light cameras only

    Votes: 5 6.3%

  • Abolish speeding cameras only

    Votes: 4 5.1%

  • Abolish other types of cameras only (specify)

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Allow all cameras to remain in use

    Votes: 22 27.8%

  • Other (specify)

    Votes: 11 13.9%
  • Total voters
    79
Rocketman said:
one can't always predict that someone 8-10 cars in front of you is going to stop hanging you out to dry in an intersection that is changing. I have fought 3 camera tickets in court and won all three.
Click to expand...

How many days and how many hours did it take to get them dismissed?
 
joko104 said:
How many days and how many hours did it take to get them dismissed?
Click to expand...

2 of them were handled over email, the 3rd one required the initial court date and a scheduled trial date. One video of the intersection and it was dismissed.
 
Rocketman said:
I doubt it, I have paid them before but 3 times I shouldn't have and didn't
Click to expand...

Do you ever consider not running the red lights?

I got one years back, became more attentive and haven't had one since.
 
year2late said:
Do you ever consider not running the red lights?

I got one years back, became more attentive and haven't had one since.
Click to expand...

as stated in my post above, in larger cities, they do not plan for cars going through in the green light only to have some dumbass 10 cars up hold up traffic trying to turn across traffic thus stopping people in the intersection until it changes. You are helpless in larger towns with heavy traffic when that happens as you can't back out of the intersection.

IF the ticket happens to be in a state that does not work with my state I just ignore the ticket and toss them.
 
Rocketman said:
as stated in my post above, in larger cities, they do not plan for cars going through in the green light only to have some dumbass 10 cars up hold up traffic trying to turn across traffic thus stopping people in the intersection until it changes. You are helpless in larger towns with heavy traffic when that happens as you can't back out of the intersection.

IF the ticket happens to be in a state that does not work with my state I just ignore the ticket and toss them.
Click to expand...

I have driven extensively in SF, LA, San Diego, and to a lesser extent in DC. I don't seem to have an issue in any of those cities in regards to red lights and running them.

When I see the little "gotchya" flash....it is usually someone who was tailgating behind someone else to make sure they get through - and they get caught
 
joko104 said:
Your response is correct. Of itself, running a redlight doesn't potentially endanger anyone.
Click to expand...

Running a red light doesn't potentially endanger anyone?

jiFfM.jpg


Why should anyone take anything you say about this matter seriously when you make such an egregious comment? You have just denied basic reality, sir. You are spreading anti-safety propaganda that does not deserve to be respected. But it does deserve to be called out. Because your attitudes are precisely what enable road rage and dangerous driving, which cost thousands of American lives every year.

I strongly question whether you value the sanctity of human life. I strongly question whether you show basic respect towards your fellow humans.

Watch this video.



Anybody who watches that video from start to finish and says, with a straight face, that egregious instances of red light running are not inherently dangerous, is either trolling or pathologically lying.
 
year2late said:
I have driven extensively in SF, LA, San Diego, and to a lesser extent in DC. I don't seem to have an issue in any of those cities in regards to red lights and running them.

When I see the little "gotchya" flash....it is usually someone who was tailgating behind someone else to make sure they get through - and they get caught
Click to expand...

I drive 70k plus miles per year, you? I have been to 46 states this year, you?
 
joko104 said:
They assert that all "T-bone" accidents are from people running traffic lights.
Click to expand...

Again, you lie. Not one single statistic has EVER claimed that 100.00% of all T-bone collisions are caused by red light runners.
 
Rocketman said:
I drive 70k plus miles per year, you? I have been to 46 states this year, you?
Click to expand...

Exceptionally weak counterargument. The volume of driving that you do does not excuse you in any way from following the law. In fact, I would contend that with that much experience under your belt, you should be a nearly flawless driver.
 
Phys251 said:
Exceptionally weak counterargument. The volume of driving that you do does not excuse you in any way from following the law. In fact, I would contend that with that much experience under your belt, you should be a nearly flawless driver.
Click to expand...

yeah I can prevent a car 10 units in front of me from stopping, what an asinine comment
 
Rocketman said:
yeah I can prevent a car 10 units in front of me from stopping, what an asinine comment
Click to expand...

What the heck does "10 units in front of me" even mean? Ten feet? Ten meters? Ten yards?
 
Rocketman said:
I drive 70k plus miles per year, you? I have been to 46 states this year, you?
Click to expand...

I dated a guy for a few months that was on the road a lot. He racked up speeding tickets like crazy. When every I was in the car with him he was a careful lawful driver. I asked him what the difference was. He said when he was with me, he was never in a hurry. When he was working, fast driving meant money through sales. It was worth it to him to pay the tickets and the increased insurance and continue his current profitable habits.
 
year2late said:
I dated a guy for a few months that was on the road a lot. He racked up speeding tickets like crazy. When every I was in the car with him he was a careful lawful driver. I asked him what the difference was. He said when he was with me, he was never in a hurry. When he was working, fast driving meant money through sales. It was worth it to him to pay the tickets and the increased insurance and continue his current profitable habits.
Click to expand...

I bought an Escort Redline, haven't had a ticket in 3 years now.

Escort%20Redline.jpg
 
joko104 said:
It varies from state to state I suppose. She's a special case, so to speak, or so it seems.

Did you FEEL like a felon while doing 160? :lol:

When I was doing 140, it felt great but also was scary - scary at the prospect of getting caught. Yes, now speeding more than 20 over is treated like you are worse than a serial burglar or assailant. But it also is up to the officer's discretion whether or not to do anything about it.
Click to expand...

I felt like an idiot when we were going that fast but it was fun. Very few cars on the freeway and you just fly past them like they aren't even moving... :lol:

There are people who buy vintage cars to avoid those black boxes. I do think requiring all cars to have the ability to shut them down is going to be required for all new cars soon, and many already have it whether you know it or not.
Click to expand...

Yep. It is going to happen. Going old school is a way around that, I suppose, but I bet that to get registration they will start requiring proof of a black box on your '56 Bel Air.

I do that alot myself!
Click to expand...

My problem is my overly large ego... what is your problem?
 
Bodhisattva said:
I thought the term was "10 lengths"... how would anybody know what "units" means?
Click to expand...

GM calls them sales units, so does Ford, Chrysler, etc. you are forgiven
 
Rocketman said:
GM calls them sales units, so does Ford, Chrysler, etc. you are forgiven
Click to expand...

I thought you were talking about distances... my bad. Yes, I know that the cars are referred to as units.
 
Phys251 said:
Running a red light doesn't potentially endanger anyone?

jiFfM.jpg


Why should anyone take anything you say about this matter seriously when you make such an egregious comment? You have just denied basic reality, sir. You are spreading anti-safety propaganda that does not deserve to be respected. But it does deserve to be called out. Because your attitudes are precisely what enable road rage and dangerous driving, which cost thousands of American lives every year.

I strongly question whether you value the sanctity of human life. I strongly question whether you show basic respect towards your fellow humans.

Watch this video.



Anybody who watches that video from start to finish and says, with a straight face, that egregious instances of red light running are not inherently dangerous, is either trolling or pathologically lying.
Click to expand...


No, you are wrong. Of itself, running a redlight endangers no one. Running a redlight is dangerous when it endangers people. The videos you present no more prove your point than if I put of videos of criminals who are breathing, claiming it proves that breathing endangers people.

Not one accident in those videos would have been avoided by a redlight camera. Zero. Some even show vehicles plowing into the back of other vehicles, having nothing to do with traffic lights whatsoever.

But, of course, you added the word "egregious" and then tried to attach that word to me. In short, your message lacks any intellectual integrity. I gave my own specific example of knowing running a redlight and commonly doing so as most people around here do.

Of THE main intersection this city, it is impossible for a person who has just entered the intersection for a left turn (which is 90% of the traffic from that direction) to make it fully thru the light before it turns red unless they are driving like a GT1 race car.

Of itself, running a redlight or stop sign endangers no one, nor does speeding, nor does firing a gun, nor does anything else that isn't done in a manner to endanger someone, whether legal or not. What is legal or not does not in any manner define what does and does not endanger people.

But I know why you now are raging and flaming me. Because you don't want to answer the question of how can anyone avoid with certainty avoid being in an intersection when a light turns red given they can not control cars ahead of them and it illegal to just stop at a green light to wait for it to cycle so you are then the first car to go.

You don't have an answer, do you? Nor to any of the other false charges by robo-computer cameras that don't exist with live police officers.
 
joko104 said:
No, you are wrong. Of itself, running a redlight endangers no one. Running a redlight is dangerous when it endangers people. The videos you present no more prove your point than if I put of videos of criminals who are breathing, claiming it proves that breathing endangers people.

Not one accident in those videos would have been avoided by a redlight camera. Zero. Some even show vehicles plowing into the back of other vehicles, having nothing to do with traffic lights whatsoever.

But, of course, you added the word "egregious" and then tried to attach that word to me. In short, your message lacks any intellectual integrity. I gave my own specific example of knowing running a redlight and commonly doing so as most people around here do.

Of THE main intersection this city, it is impossible for a person who has just entered the intersection for a left turn (which is 90% of the traffic from that direction) to make it fully thru the light before it turns red unless they are driving like a GT1 race car.

Of itself, running a redlight or stop sign endangers no one, nor does speeding, nor does firing a gun, nor does anything else that isn't done in a manner to endanger someone, whether legal or not. What is legal or not does not in any manner define what does and does not endanger people.

But I know why you now are raging and flaming me. Because you don't want to answer the question of how can anyone avoid with certainty avoid being in an intersection when a light turns red given they can not control cars ahead of them and it illegal to just stop at a green light to wait for it to cycle so you are then the first car to go.

You don't have an answer, do you? Nor to any of the other false charges by robo-computer cameras that don't exist with live police officers.
Click to expand...
Running a red light is highly dangerous, but much less so if you know for sure that no one is going to enter the intersection when you do.

As demonstrated by that video, some persons either didn't notice the red, or knowingly ignored it - and as a result, they hit cars entering the intersection on a green. Or missing them slightly, in a few cases.


Now, the example you give, of "running" a red light by being in the intersection when it turns red....So far as I know, the law in Pennsylvania is that if you're in the intersection when the light turns red, you are NOT running a red light. They have thick white lines denoting the edges of the intersection, and as I understand it, if you're behind one of those when the light turns red, you shouldn't keep going or you've technically run a red light.
 
Rocketman said:
I bought an Escort Redline, haven't had a ticket in 3 years now.

Escort%20Redline.jpg
Click to expand...

So by implication you have no desire to follow the rules of the load. Now we know why you are so dead set against the camera's.

Well.....time to get off the wahhhhhhhhambulance. You reap what you sow.
 
year2late said:
So by implication you have no desire to follow the rules of the load. Now we know why you are so dead set against the camera's.

Well.....time to get off the wahhhhhhhhambulance. You reap what you sow.
Click to expand...

Not all people live to be submissive to the rules as their purpose and defining feature of their lives. Others, such as you indicate is your view in your messages, "desire to follow the rules." Not in my life has my desires been about following rules. I find it hard to believe anyone would put "desire" in the context of "following the rules." But to each his/her own I suppose.

The best way to never break any rules is to not exist at all, isn't it? Indeed, the perfect existence is non-existence.

I used to wonder why there is so little freedom in the world. I know the answer. Most people are terrified of freedom and terrified of being an adult. They cry for their momma like a child all their lives. Since there is no mommy and daddy to care for and protect them, they make government their surrogate parents.
 
Last edited:
joko104 said:
No, you are wrong. Of itself, running a redlight endangers no one. Running a redlight is dangerous when it endangers people. The videos you present no more prove your point than if I put of videos of criminals who are breathing, claiming it proves that breathing endangers people.

Not one accident in those videos would have been avoided by a redlight camera. Zero. Some even show vehicles plowing into the back of other vehicles, having nothing to do with traffic lights whatsoever.

But, of course, you added the word "egregious" and then tried to attach that word to me. In short, your message lacks any intellectual integrity. I gave my own specific example of knowing running a redlight and commonly doing so as most people around here do.

Of THE main intersection this city, it is impossible for a person who has just entered the intersection for a left turn (which is 90% of the traffic from that direction) to make it fully thru the light before it turns red unless they are driving like a GT1 race car.

Of itself, running a redlight or stop sign endangers no one, nor does speeding, nor does firing a gun, nor does anything else that isn't done in a manner to endanger someone, whether legal or not. What is legal or not does not in any manner define what does and does not endanger people.

But I know why you now are raging and flaming me. Because you don't want to answer the question of how can anyone avoid with certainty avoid being in an intersection when a light turns red given they can not control cars ahead of them and it illegal to just stop at a green light to wait for it to cycle so you are then the first car to go.

You don't have an answer, do you? Nor to any of the other false charges by robo-computer cameras that don't exist with live police officers.
Click to expand...

​
 
joko104 said:
Not all people live to be submissive to the rules as their purpose and defining feature of their lives. Others, such as you indicate is your view in your messages, "desire to follow the rules." Not in my life has my desires been about following rules. I find it hard to believe anyone would put "desire" in the context of "following the rules." But to each his/her own I suppose.

The best way to never break any rules is to not exist at all, isn't it? Indeed, the perfect existence is non-existence.
Click to expand...

Good Lord.

You get a license to drive by showing you have knowledge of the rules and you take a behind the wheel test to show your ability to follow the rules. If you do not intend to follow the rules of the road, why even get a license?

Luckily most people follow the rules of the road so - it is not utter chaos out there. But those that do cause a lot of physical and property damage.

I myself have had 3 major accidents (cars severely damaged and totaled - with bodily injury) All happened because of people not following basic rules of the road/driving rules).

What in the hell does following rules of the road have to do with being submissive?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom