Challenge every Red Light Camera Ticket!

On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 08:24:42 -0400, Geoff
> puked:

>
>
>Full_Name wrote:
>
>> Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 01:09:30 -0400
>> From: Full_Name >
>> Reply-To:
>> Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.chrysler, alt.autos.ford, alt.autos.gm,
>> alt.law-enforcement
>> Subject: Challenge every Red Light Camera Ticket!
>>
>> On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 02:19:37 GMT, BTR1701 >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >In article >, Threeducks
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> You must not live in an area with high traffic volumes. Simply
>> >> "redesigning" intersections isn't going to stop red light runners.
>> >
>> >Depends on the redesign.
>> >
>> >If you redesign it so that one road passes under or over the other and
>> >you eliminate the need for the signal entirely... well, I'd bet that
>> >would lower the number of red-light runners to zero.
>>
>> That would totally eliminate all left turn accidents as well.
>> Round-abouts minimize the severity of the inevitable accidents.
>> They're even starting to now bring them to this continent.
>>
>
>We've started to get them in Metro Detroit.
>
>I don't understand why they're supposed to be all that great. For one
>thing, it virtually assures that everyone reaching the intersection
>*has* to stop. Not so with a traditional intersection, where people who
>are traveling at the correct speed can sail through green light after
>green light.
>
>The intersection near my home where they've implemented this is a
>relatively low-traffic-volume spot. I imagine it would be absolutely
>miserable in higher-traffic-volume places.
>
>Bridges with ramps just intuitively seem better to me.
>

Bridges cost a fortune and don't work everywhere. They've been
plugging them in Davie, Florida, and they work great. It's a yield
sign, and you can pretty much just blow through the intersection if
your timing's right. It takes some getting used to, but once you do
they're great.
--
lab~rat >:-)
Do you want polite or do you want sincere?

On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 08:24:42 -0400, Geoff
> puked:

>
>
>Full_Name wrote:
>
>> Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 01:09:30 -0400
>> From: Full_Name >
>> Reply-To:
>> Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.chrysler, alt.autos.ford, alt.autos.gm,
>> alt.law-enforcement
>> Subject: Challenge every Red Light Camera Ticket!
>>
>> On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 02:19:37 GMT, BTR1701 >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >In article >, Threeducks
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> You must not live in an area with high traffic volumes. Simply
>> >> "redesigning" intersections isn't going to stop red light runners.
>> >
>> >Depends on the redesign.
>> >
>> >If you redesign it so that one road passes under or over the other and
>> >you eliminate the need for the signal entirely... well, I'd bet that
>> >would lower the number of red-light runners to zero.
>>
>> That would totally eliminate all left turn accidents as well.
>> Round-abouts minimize the severity of the inevitable accidents.
>> They're even starting to now bring them to this continent.
>>
>
>We've started to get them in Metro Detroit.
>
>I don't understand why they're supposed to be all that great. For one
>thing, it virtually assures that everyone reaching the intersection
>*has* to stop. Not so with a traditional intersection, where people who
>are traveling at the correct speed can sail through green light after
>green light.
>
>The intersection near my home where they've implemented this is a
>relatively low-traffic-volume spot. I imagine it would be absolutely
>miserable in higher-traffic-volume places.
>
>Bridges with ramps just intuitively seem better to me.
>

Bridges cost a fortune and don't work everywhere. They've been
plugging them in Davie, Florida, and they work great. It's a yield
sign, and you can pretty much just blow through the intersection if
your timing's right. It takes some getting used to, but once you do
they're great.
--
lab~rat >:-)
Do you want polite or do you want sincere?