Posted by Ben Kaufman on February 22, 2007, 9:52 am
>On Feb 21, 6:57 pm, Calgary
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >While we're on the subject, I'd like to know how the RLC differentiates
>> >between legal movements against a red light (specifically right turns on
>> >red) from illegal movements. Anyone?
>>
>> How about the direction of the car.
>To answer both: The second photo. The first one shows the vehicle
>behind the intersection line when the light has turned red. The second
>is shot after the car has proceeded through sufficiently to show that
>it was going straight, not making a ROR. The photos are time-stamped
>to show the proper sequence.
Whoa, that would be an awful lot of data to sift through at the end of the day.
Ben
Posted by Ben Kaufman on February 22, 2007, 10:01 am
wrote:
>>The issue of red-light cams has come up in Florida. An article in
>>today's paper doesn't seem to indicate that there's any method to
>>prove that the light was actually red when the car went through the
>>intersection - such as a second photo showing your vehicle in the
>>intersection and the light.
>Some do:
>http://video.tinypic.com/player.php?v bj6vn
That's cool. It will even delay giving a green light for the other traffic when
it believes that a violation may be about to occur.
Ben
Posted by k_flynn@lycos.com on February 22, 2007, 10:53 am
On Feb 22, 7:52 am, Ben Kaufman <spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-
doll...@pobox.com> wrote:
> >On Feb 21, 6:57 pm, Calgary
> >> wrote:
> >> >While we're on the subject, I'd like to know how the RLC differentiates
> >> >between legal movements against a red light (specifically right turns on
> >> >red) from illegal movements. Anyone?
> >> How about the direction of the car.
> >To answer both: The second photo. The first one shows the vehicle
> >behind the intersection line when the light has turned red. The second
> >is shot after the car has proceeded through sufficiently to show that
> >it was going straight, not making a ROR. The photos are time-stamped
> >to show the proper sequence.
> Whoa, that would be an awful lot of data to sift through at the end of the day.
You're kidding, right? It's not much data at all. There's no sifting
at the end of the day. It's generated at the time, and it's two
photos. My $100 digital camera time-stamps everything I shoot too.
Posted by Spline on February 22, 2007, 1:47 pm
>Forgive me for being a little confused, I grew up behind the "Iron
>Curtain", but is this the so called "Free World"?
>http://www.theregister.com/2005/11/15/vehicle_movement_database/
Sorry Borka, there's no such thing as a "free world"
except in the minds of the gulible. Many countries
try to convince the citizens that they live in
*freedom* and *liberty*, and there are always
some silly people that believe their government's
propaganda.
Posted by Bill on February 22, 2007, 2:50 pm
> @h3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
>> The issue of red-light cams has come up in Florida. An article in
>> today's paper doesn't seem to indicate that there's any method to
>> prove that the light was actually red when the car went through the
>> intersection - such as a second photo showing your vehicle in the
>> intersection and the light.
>>
>> In states where these systems are in place, do they include any such
>> evidence to verify the red light or is it simply assumed that the
>> system is perfect, that the photo of your plate was taken properly and
>> that of course you were in violation?
>>
> Oh stop whining you big baby. If these RLC are so faulty, then why have i
> NEVER been nabbed by one?? In any city i lived in?? Just obey the law and
> don't run red lights and you won't have any problem.
I received a red light camera ticket in the mail yesterday. The car was in
the shop at the time, so obviously I wasn't the driver. But the city
ordinance makes me financially responsible as the owner, regardless. I'll
probably get the $75 out of the repair shop, but even if I do I have to
waste the time. And if they won't pay, I'm screwed.
Now tell me this is about safety and not revenue.
- B
XML Sitemap
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >While we're on the subject, I'd like to know how the RLC differentiates
>> >between legal movements against a red light (specifically right turns on
>> >red) from illegal movements. Anyone?
>>
>> How about the direction of the car.
>To answer both: The second photo. The first one shows the vehicle
>behind the intersection line when the light has turned red. The second
>is shot after the car has proceeded through sufficiently to show that
>it was going straight, not making a ROR. The photos are time-stamped
>to show the proper sequence.