Belleislerunner Member Username: Belleislerunner
Post Number: 255 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 198.204.133.208
| Posted on Monday, May 08, 2006 - 5:36 pm: | |
Has the city of Detroit looked into cameras for catching speeders? An article in DC today states that the District now collect over $3 million a month from speeders. Seems like a sure way for Detroit to capitalize on the illegality of those who choose to break the law. Seems like an extra $36 million a year could go a long way in helping Detroit's budget woes. WASHINGTON -- There's a new high for monthly fines from the District's automated speed limit cameras. The Metropolitan Police Department collected a record $3.3 million in March. That raised the 5-year-old program's total revenue to more than $100 million. It's the first time the program has collected more than $3 million in a single month. But a technical glitch may be to blame. Police officials said a few tickets from February may have been processed in March. Police said about 3 million cars and trucks were monitored in March, and just over 2 percent of those vehicles received tickets for speeding. That's down from nearly 30 percent of vehicles that received tickets when the program began in 2001 www.nbc4.com |
Jjw Member Username: Jjw
Post Number: 94 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 68.33.56.156
| Posted on Monday, May 08, 2006 - 5:56 pm: | |
they have them all over baltimore also---big money-maker for the city and also cutting way back on folks deciding to run red lights and banging into someone |
Funkycarrie Member Username: Funkycarrie
Post Number: 209 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 69.208.117.53
| Posted on Monday, May 08, 2006 - 5:59 pm: | |
they could make a fortune.....costs money to make the money though. |
Rrl Member Username: Rrl
Post Number: 478 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 71.213.228.212
| Posted on Monday, May 08, 2006 - 6:22 pm: | |
Heh, the DPD prolly doesn't want them, they'd be the biggest violator of running reds, now verified on film. |
Wilus1mj Member Username: Wilus1mj
Post Number: 61 Registered: 05-2005 Posted From: 216.111.89.3
| Posted on Monday, May 08, 2006 - 6:25 pm: | |
DC has more daily traffic than Detroit, the revenue numbers wouldn't be 3 million/month. |
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed
Post Number: 148 Registered: 02-2006 Posted From: 209.220.229.254
| Posted on Monday, May 08, 2006 - 6:32 pm: | |
I would support red light cameras (that didn't snap the instant the light turned red) but I would not support speeding cameras. Red light running is dangerous in its very essence. Speed is not necessarily dangerous. |
Danindc Member Username: Danindc
Post Number: 1462 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.100.158.10
| Posted on Monday, May 08, 2006 - 6:34 pm: | |
quote:DC has more daily traffic than Detroit, the revenue numbers wouldn't be 3 million/month.
Detroit also doesn't have the idiots from Maryland barreling through its neighborhoods at warp speed. |
Ptero Member Username: Ptero
Post Number: 30 Registered: 12-2005 Posted From: 4.229.60.59
| Posted on Monday, May 08, 2006 - 6:57 pm: | |
There's timing! TV news, ch.4 or 7, just did a story on the five o'clock news about Southgate planning to install cameras for red light runners. Coming soon. |
Johnlodge Member Username: Johnlodge
Post Number: 15 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 69.246.96.250
| Posted on Monday, May 08, 2006 - 7:22 pm: | |
I didn't look further into this, but I had always thought that certain states passed laws allowing tickets to be given solely on video or camera evidence, and Michigan is still not one of them. Which is why those little machines the police put on the side of the road that show you your speed are somewhat of an empty threat. Anybody know the legal facts on this? |
Belleislerunner Member Username: Belleislerunner
Post Number: 256 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 198.204.133.208
| Posted on Monday, May 08, 2006 - 7:23 pm: | |
Dan might be able to clarify but the article focuses on speeders, not so much on red light runners. I'm sure a few cameras on Belle Isle, Jefferson and Woodward would find many who ignore the speed limit. |
Gannon
Member Username: Gannon
Post Number: 5771 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 70.236.198.22
| Posted on Monday, May 08, 2006 - 8:36 pm: | |
Always centers around positive driver ID...and we don't mandate front license plates. Out west, they will pull you over if you don't have a front plate. If I remember right, that is how that Ann Arbor fellow that murdered those two people in their condo got caught in Utah...got pulled over because of no front plate, and because his trunk was dragging dangerously low...from the weight in the trunk of his stolen car. LA had those camera-ticket machines for running red lights when I lived there...one light always seemed to defy my attempts at counting a rhythm with the 'don't walk' flashing before the yellow...and sure enough a few years later they got caught adjusting the timing of the light change and had to refund a whole shitload of bogus tickets. The City had been working with a private company, and was allowing them a very high percentage of the profits...and they apparently had bent the rules to their favor. Right, as IF the city didn't know about the scheme... |
Digitaldom Member Username: Digitaldom
Post Number: 435 Registered: 08-2004 Posted From: 24.192.148.150
| Posted on Monday, May 08, 2006 - 9:18 pm: | |
People in Detroit Speed and Run red lights more in the city than any other I have been too.. Yeah one problem.. Most of those cars are stolen.. Oops.. Someone is getting a ticket.. That didn't do the crime.. |
Reetz12 Member Username: Reetz12
Post Number: 48 Registered: 09-2005 Posted From: 68.40.172.108
| Posted on Monday, May 08, 2006 - 10:08 pm: | |
I'm not sure if this related, but on the local freeways, what are the solar poles installed about every 1-2 miles for? |
Ro_resident Member Username: Ro_resident
Post Number: 159 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 69.14.126.140
| Posted on Monday, May 08, 2006 - 11:37 pm: | |
There was a push to create enabling legislation to allow red light cameras a few years ago. The push didn't make it very far--the way Michigan's laws are set up, it hard to implement an automated ticketing system and make it stick. As a side note, the traffic sensors were installed by Traffic.com to monitor traffic flows on the area freeways. The sensors imbedded in the pavement were too far apart for the system they use. The new sensors fill in the gaps. http://www.oakpostonline.com/p hpnuke/modules.php?name=News&f ile=article&sid=48 |
Johnlodge Member Username: Johnlodge
Post Number: 19 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 69.246.96.250
| Posted on Tuesday, May 09, 2006 - 1:00 am: | |
"the traffic sensors were installed by Traffic.com to monitor traffic flows on the area freeways." Traffic.com paid to have sensors put in that MDOT uses to monitor and respond to traffic? Is traffic.com a private organization? If not, that's quite a deal. |
Chitaku Member Username: Chitaku
Post Number: 301 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 68.43.107.72
| Posted on Tuesday, May 09, 2006 - 1:44 am: | |
no big brother in Detroit! |
Wolverine Member Username: Wolverine
Post Number: 147 Registered: 04-2004 Posted From: 24.231.201.120
| Posted on Tuesday, May 09, 2006 - 1:56 am: | |
So what is the purpose for the cameras I'm seeing above the stoplights at a couple dozen major SE Michigan intersections? Is it just for traffic monitoring then? |
Paulj Member Username: Paulj
Post Number: 359 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 68.250.41.176
| Posted on Tuesday, May 09, 2006 - 2:43 am: | |
I think it's a good idea, just based on the general attitude towards traffic laws in the city. If nothing else (due to state law on automated traffic ticket machines), the cameras could help identify stolen cars and the general whereabouts that they are being used in, like in Europe. I would go out on a limb and venture a guess that the majority of those stealing vehicles, or using stolen vehicles, run at least as many lights as the law abiding citizens who occasionally make a lapse in judgement and therefore this is a legitamate screening measure. Also, Maybe after being caught on camera x ammount of times, one could at least recieve a letter of warning and a note in their driving file to any potential judge saying 'hey, this person is habitual and doesn't deserve as much leinency'. of course, this requires a functioning police system that pursues stolen cars on more than a 'whoops, we just happened to randomly pull you over today' method. Our current police system realistically can't keep up with the homicide rate, so now we're deep into theory. "Never try to teach a pig a sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig." |
Jerome81 Member Username: Jerome81
Post Number: 987 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 64.142.86.133
| Posted on Tuesday, May 09, 2006 - 2:46 am: | |
Maybe red light cameras, NeVER speed cameras. Other cities have shortened yellows to increase red light running revenue. The thing that gets me is they say they do it in the name of "safety". Well, you wanna know what's actually safer than installing red light cameras? Longer yellows and longer overlap of red lights (before the other direction switches to green). But that doesn't generate millions now does it? |
Paulj Member Username: Paulj
Post Number: 360 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 68.250.41.176
| Posted on Tuesday, May 09, 2006 - 2:52 am: | |
agreed there. lengthen yellows, and no speed cameras. but deliberate red-light-runners deserve all the attention we can give them. Says this experinced, urban motorcyclist, anyways. |
Ptero Member Username: Ptero
Post Number: 31 Registered: 12-2005 Posted From: 4.229.36.52
| Posted on Tuesday, May 09, 2006 - 8:55 am: | |
Wolverine, at least some of the cameras at intersections are for monitoring traffic flow and adjusting timings. This FastTrac system has resulted in better flow and less backups on Rochester road for one. |
Gannon
Member Username: Gannon
Post Number: 5772 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 70.236.198.22
| Posted on Tuesday, May 09, 2006 - 9:50 am: | |
Yeah, that Roch Road system was the first in the Metro area, I think. They went on and on when the system was installed on how it was ONLY for traffic flow control. When it was first switched on, it wasn't calibrated very well, and the fine folks who have to suffer that road every day went berserk waiting in ONE LONG LINE from I-75 all the way north to M-59...for about a week. A year or so later, an Oakland Press article boasted how many perps they've caught using this camera system that was only supposed to monitor traffic flow...story told about dangerous dope smokers and overt sexual encounters the monitor cops had noticed. Yeah, I want cameras at every corner...that'd just be peachy keen. Hell, after that Roch Road debacle I thought for a while about driving around town with a photo-copied picture of an Uzi taped to my dashboard...but thought better of it. The Oakland County system IS part of Big Brother...thanks Ptero for cheering it on!! Heh. |
Susanarosa Member Username: Susanarosa
Post Number: 820 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 208.39.170.90
| Posted on Tuesday, May 09, 2006 - 9:56 am: | |
Traffic.com is a private organization that receives grants for this type of stuff. I don't know if they received a grant for this one though. I dated the guy that helped create the software/technology. Asshole. |
Ptero Member Username: Ptero
Post Number: 32 Registered: 12-2005 Posted From: 4.229.66.98
| Posted on Tuesday, May 09, 2006 - 5:52 pm: | |
heh, only cheering on the assistance to better flow, once they 'tuned it'... It sure WAS bad at first. Agreed, the Big Brother part hugely sux. |
Ro_resident Member Username: Ro_resident
Post Number: 160 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 69.14.126.140
| Posted on Tuesday, May 09, 2006 - 9:34 pm: | |
The Autoscope cameras at intersections in Oakland County are not surveillance cameras, per se. When the system was installed, video images were processed in the field. No images were transmitted to the Traffic Operations Center in Troy/Waterford. It was not technically possible for "monitor cops" to report on suspicious activities to the police. The CCTV cameras aka 'Jam Cams' on the freeways are slightly different. The operators have the ability to control the pan and zoom of some cameras. You can see the images on the MDOT and RCOC web sites. http://metrocommute.com/cgi-bi n/metro/video/detroit/mdot.htm l This is not to discount privacy issues. It is possible to monitor traffic using cell phones. You don't even have to be engaged in a conversation as a cell phone announces its presence (when on) as it moves from cell to cell. Commercial telematics products could potentially record your every move, and you pay for it. Remember to check your TOS, even the fine print! |