BobG

Modified..are you using something special? Any particular brand?

thanks

ModifiedC5

BobG - this one's made by a company called "Redline" out of Canada. I think it sells for like $40 each. I have heard of the electronic ones that are made of LCD and "blacks out" the area like a screen with a switch. That will be especially stealthy as you control when you want it blocked. The motorcycle crowd is wild about that. However, I think they are still in development for performance reliability and longevity. I'm sure that's not cheap either.
Oh BTW, did I mention that I always drive the speed limit and obey all the rules? I also pay all my tolls.

George Cooper

Thanks for the replies. To be clear, my concern here has nothing to do with being able to run red lights with impunity. My daily driver is a bicycle, so I am not too thrilled with the jerks who do that. And, yes, these as*holes kill people. Rather, I am simply opposed as an American to having the government gather information about me without my knowing it, and this new technology is yet another step in that direction. For instance, on an interstate outside of town, there are photo units about every 5 miles for a long stretch. These are said to be for "traffic control." Yeah, right. This newest aspect of Big Brother, under the guise of the benign nanny state that wants to change our daipers for us, will surely get much worse, and I want to opt out whenever possible.

Avanti

Usually, ANYTHING that obscures the plate (or its legibility) is by definition illegal. I've known people required to remove plain, clear covers from AutoZone while some with totally mud covered plates roam freely for weeks at a time. I too know people seriously injured (two in one family in two separate incidences) by redlight runners. Where I live this seem pandemic. I would hope we are not advocating such irresponsibility. However, I also dislike Big Brother watching. Goes to show if people are not self-controlling someone else is more than willing to do it for them.

Avanti

I failed to mention that there is polarizing material available that goes from clear to opaque when an electrical charge is applied. Some may remember the national news story some years ago about the bar that used this material for their unisex restroom door. As I recall it cost about $20K at the time for the door. But, for those serious about not having their plates read I'm sure some material engineers are about who could steer one to sources. Best of luck.

ChasNMe

sorry, off the subject... George, I live in Mt. Pleasant
let me know if you want to cruise around sometime.
99 Pewter Vert

EHS

Quote:

I don't get it, are you advocating running red lights? The license plate photo systems are simply an effort to stem the rising problem of red light running - at a cost to the tax payer I might add. The law abiding tax payer deserves to have the costs of installing these types of systems (I wish there was a way to also address the increased insurance costs...) defrayed by the offenders who caused them to be installed in the first place.

Please tell me where I have gone wrong in my thinking, if your points are valid, I'll forward them to the mother of the dead child recently hit by a red light runner - I am sure hearing them will ease her pain a great deal.

Have a nice day,
Lance

Lance, I'll bring this back on topic and tell you where you have gone wrong in your thinking. There have been many news reports recently regarding this topic, since photo red light tickets are the new darlings for municipal revenue generation, and has nothing to do with "safety" in many cases.

Here are some facts:

1. Lockheed Martin is a vendor of these devices, and in Mesa, AZ, the bulk of the fees (tickets) goes to them on a contractual basis with the municipality. I don't like manufacturers collecting "taxes."

2. Many photo radar sites have reduced yellow light duration, to enhance the revenue collection opportunity. This is a fact, and is being investigated by Congress (Arney from Texas). See the House Majority Leader's website: http://www.freedom.gov, and here's an excerpt if you can' find it:


"If you listen to local politicians, you'll hear of the significant safety benefit provided to the community, and you'll hear indignation at any suggestion that profit is their true motive. Newly uncovered documents from red light camera programs in California and Arizona suggest otherwise. The camera lobby has been hiding the truth about how intersections are being left deliberately mistimed - a dangerous condition-for the sake of profit...

Safety was never the primary consideration. In fact, none of the devices were placed at any of San Diego's top-ten most dangerous intersections. Instead, the documents tell us how the camera operators consciously sought out mistimed intersections as locations for new red light cameras.

Yellow signal time at intersections turns out to be directly related to "red light running." Simply put, when the yellow light is short, more people enter on red. Inadequate yellow time causes a condition where individuals approaching an intersection are unable either to come to a safe stop or proceed safely before the light turns red.

Though dangerous, this condition also turns out to be very profitable. Each time someone ends up in an intersection on red in San Diego, the city collects $271. And $70 of that fine is paid as bounty to the city's private contractor. Combine hefty fines with mistimed signals and you've found the formula for big money. A single camera brought the city $6.8 million in just 18 months...

Cities should be encouraged to use the engineering standards in place before cameras corrupted the system. Red light camera revenue dries up when the intersections are not rigged against the motorist. And when the revenue goes away, so does the true motivation for Big Brother's high-tech speed traps."


Lance, remember, this is a House of Representatives web-site, our representatives speaking, not some kook with an ax to grind -- hopefully they are somewhat well informed.

3. There is no "rising" problem -- the NHTSA didn't even track red light statistics until 2000, it does so only now because the "problem" is caused by municipalities who see this as a source of revenue and have gone against sound traffic engineering practices by playing with the light durations. This also affects pedestrians who get killed by "red light runners" because they also rely on the lights.

4. In Beaverton, OR, the local station KOIN-TV discovered that intersections with red light cameras had three second yellow lights, those without the cameras four second yellows. Hmmm.....

5. In Mesa, AZ, after motorists complained about the yellow light duration at the photo intersections, the city raised them. Camera citations dropped from 1640 in November, to 716 in December and stayed that way through March (734). That's more than half, by simply going from a three second duration to a four second yellow light. "Violations" miraculously dropped, revenues also, and Lockheed Martin pointed out that they (the municipality) couldn't lengthen the yellow duration, contractually speaking. So instead, Lockheed Martin now gets a higher percentage of each ticket, $75 (up from $48).

6. A traffic engineering study in Maryland indicated that simply by increasing the yellow duration by 1.4 seconds, virtually reduced red light running at some Maryland sites.

7. In Australia, their study on red light cameras showed that rear-end collisions increased when drivers slammed on their brakes to avoid running the shortended yellow lights.

I don't like speed traps, and I don't like red light traps either.

Hope this helps. :smash:


[Modified by EHS, 9:45 AM 9/3/2001]

BobG

Modified..thanks for the info. The LCD ones sound quite interesting!! Hmmm...a little flat panel action. The possibilities are endless....it could look like a plate, taste like a plate, but maybe have a couple numbers obscured..Just the ticket to send to Big Brother..

BobG

EHS...great post! .


[Modified by BobG, 7:14 AM 9/3/2001]

mozin

EHS,

Thanks for the enlightening post.:seeya

Tom

EHS

BobG, mozin, thank you for the compliments.

Sorry to get back to you so late...things have been a little disrupted here in New York City the last few days.

Take care.