This post was contributed by a community member. The views expressed here are the author's own.

Health & Fitness

RED LIGHT CAMERA FRAUD EXPOSED (Part 1)

RED LIGHT CAMERA FRAUD - THE REAL FACTS

(SEE ALSO: #FINNLINE on YouTube)

1) THE CAMERAS DO NOT CONTRIBUTE TO SAFETY. 
Red Light Camera companies DO NOT WANT YOU TO KNOW THE TRUTH of what the studies supporting cameras are really measuring.  It's not the effectiveness of the camera that is being measured, it is the effectiveness of the awareness programs (or scare tactics which accompanies the cameras) that causes driver behavior modification.  (As if we didn't already know "fear" was an effective deterrent?)   PROOF #1: It is this "fear" that also causes an increase in rear end collisions in surrounding areas where Red Light Cameras are installed.   PROOF #2: Improved safety statistics at intersections without cameras proves the cameras do not help drivers make safer decisions. PROOF #3: Cameras do not begin to operate until after a violation has occurred.

SIMPLY STATED: The cameras do not contribute to safety because the cameras do not provide drivers with critical information needed to help them make that life and death decision to stop or go. 

2) CAMERAS PROFIT BY PERPETUATING A SAFETY FLAW: (Civil rights argument #1)  
Camera companies know that fixing the flaw in our safety system (for >$5.00 in paint) will put them out of business.  This is because their profits come from law abiding citizens who do not purposely run red lights (They are simply guessing wrong at the yellow).  (If it's really all about safety, then why are you forcing us to guess?)

3) IDENTIFYING THE SAFETY FLAW: Forcing drivers to guess at the critical stop or go decision point..  

The law fails to give drivers the information that is necessary and reasonable to make safer decisions.  

Find out what's happening in Babylon Villagewith free, real-time updates from Patch.

·         THE LAWS OF CALCULUS DICTATE: An equation containing only variables is unsolvable.  The driver’s decision to stop or go at the onset of the yellow light is a formula that is unsolvable because it has no constants.  For several reasons (Including “Time flies when you’re having fun”) the human perception of time must always be considered a variable.  Pure time solutions (such as yellow lights) violate the first law of calculus.

·         THE LAWS OF PHYSICS DICTATE: The information of both TIME and DISTANCE are required for drivers to make responsible decisions at yellow traffic lights.  Traffic intersection designs do not give drivers the necessary “safe stopping distance” information needed to make safer choices.  The FinnLine solves this issue.

Find out what's happening in Babylon Villagewith free, real-time updates from Patch.

Because yellow lights are all timed differently and because drivers must guess how much time *and distance* is necessary to either stop or go safely: Americans are all HELPLESS to obey the law!

4) GUESSING IS NOT A SAFETY POLICY (GUESSING IS GAMBLING)
 
Guessing at traffic signals is Russian roulette repackaged as a for profit shell game.  Using Red Light Camera as a pretense for safety, the house rigs the game and rakes in HUGE profits.

5) RED LIGHT CAMERAS USE ENTRAPMENT: (Civil rights argument #2  Beat the child until they learn to make better guesses?) 

Entrapment (When a law enforcement agent induces a person to commit a criminal offense that the person would have otherwise been unlikely to commit) is an illegal method of law enforcement.  

Though the crime is not considered a "criminal offense" Red light cameras are still entrapping victims because the people accused of running red lights are helpless to obey the law. They are induced into a high stakes guessing game that they are otherwise unwilling to play.

A FAIR ANALOGY: Red Light Cameras are like a parent who forces a child to guess of the number that the parent is thinking of and when the child guesses wrong, the parent beats the child.   The flaw in this psychology is to think that beating the child will help them become better guessers.

Of course the profit motive behind Red Light Camera companies dictates that they don’t care if the children become better guessers (Only that they keep getting the beating).

6)  THE FINNLINE SOLUTION to the flaw is only $5.00 in paint:  
The FinnLine solves the problem and eliminates guessing: By extending the no passing line which immediately precedes the stop line (See header photo), the length of the stop line (FinnLine) may now indicate the safe stopping distance required for the heaviest vehicle rated to be on the road at the speed limit.  

WHEN THE LIGHT TURNS YELLOW: EITHER a) your front wheel is in the paint (You do not have a safe stopping distance so you’re in the GO ZONE) and you are required to travel through the light (safely).  OR b) your front wheel has not reached the paint then you immediately know you're in the STOP ZONE. You (and everyone behind you) know immediately that you are required to stop and you know that you have a safe stopping distance in front of you.

·         The FinnLine increases driver awareness and confidence that they are making safer decisions.

·         The Finnline has the potential to eliminate rear end collisions and racing through intersections (Two of the leading causes of death and injury).

·         The FinnLine only costs $5.00 in paint and does not pad your safety budget with extraneous payrolls and profit margins for outsourced executives or foreign nationals.


(Notes: All drivers know that stopping for emergencies is always allowed therefore, the Finnline is not an excuse for tailgating.  Additional indicators (like signs) can be installed for low visibility conditions.)

7) ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS: (debunked)

Currently, the U.S. Government is spending millions studying how to build expensive high tech computer systems and algorithms that can out guess humans (1).  Can you imagine anything more ludicrous than GUESSING SQUARED?   The idea is to extend the duration of the green light until it’s safe to show the yellow.  It sounds good but it has a debilitating flaw.  If the green is extended too long then the logic is thrown out the window and the yellow light is displayed even if the most dangerous of scenarios exist. (2).  This only portends pouring more money down the drain of study.

Source1: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/intersection/resources/techsum/fhwasa09008/

Source 2: http://www.ltrc.lsu.edu/TRB_82/TRB2003-000285.pdf  (see pg 2 Dilemma Zone Protection)

The really sad news is that the D.O.T. and the FHWA already acknowledge the fact that the financial condition of many states and municipalities across the country have forced them to cut traffic safety budgets so drastically that they can no longer afford traffic engineers who are responsible for keeping traffic lights synchronized.

DEVIL IN THE DETAILS: It’s sad that the same people, who are reporting how municipalities are unable to afford to maintain the equipment they already own, are also authorizing spending millions of dollars in federal money to study the effectiveness of the most expensive solutions conceivable.  The irony is that these same people fail to connect the dots of the futility to market billion dollar flawed solutions to municipalities with empty pockets.

8) ONE MUST WONDER:  What does a common sense $5.00 solution (with a perfect track record of achieving 100% success) need to prevail?  If there is hope for this country is this:  An idea does not need to include making a killing to rape cheat and plunder the American public (for the financial gain of a few cronies) to deserve the serious attention of our law makers.


WHERE ARE YOU ON THIS SUBJECT?

If you are a supporter of red light cameras, does this argument cause you to think twice?

If you are an opponent of red light cameras, would you like us to show you what you can do about it?

 If you are a judge, can you ever again convict anyone of Red Light Camera citations and think to call yourself an American?  Or do you want to know more so that you can issue a ruling that forces government to investigate the effectiveness of the FinnLine?

 If you are an elected official of a city with Red Light Cameras, do you think your constituents will not hold you accountable for being on the wrong side of this argument at the next election?

PLEASE HELP:

Help make PATCH.COM a household name in news, help protect civil liberty and save lives in the process:


VISIT OUR WEBSITE AND SEND US AN EMAIL:

CivilLiberty101.com

DON'T FORGET TO VOTE:

If you like this post please click "RECOMMENDED"



We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here

The views expressed in this post are the author's own. Want to post on Patch?