Let’s Hear It for San Francisco’s Effective Red Light Cameras

Things have been getting better accident-wise in San Francisco ever since City Attorney Dennis Herrera won a victory back on ought four.¬†There’s so many of these boxes around town that people more or less think that they’re everywhere.

And that affects behavior (red light violations are way down), and that saves lives.

To review, entering an intersection on a yellow is legal in CA, but entering on a red is not. The way you can tell is the double flash of light after you do the wrong thing. Maybe you’ll never get a ticket in the mail (for various reasons) but you’ll know you done wrong and you might just straighten up and fly right later on.

One of the cameras on Geary. Semper Paratus:

Hai, Cheezu! Click to expand.

$355 is nothing to sneeze at, of course.

Stay safe!

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

3 Responses to “Let’s Hear It for San Francisco’s Effective Red Light Cameras”

  1. Tony says:

    Actually no, they don’t work very well at all:

    http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/08/red_light_camer.html

    Sure, they work really well as revenue generators, since courts never throw out a camera (or any other machine generated) ticket, but they are making us less safe, as well as less able to defend ourselves in court.

  2. sfcitizen says:

    I don’t care about revenue generation.

    Are you saying all these cities are wrong?
    http://www.stopredlightrunning.com/html/research.htm

    Courts throw out machine generated tickets every day.

    You got your right angle crashes and your rear-enders. Net net, red light cams are a winner in SF.

  3. Talia says:

    Citizen,

    Yeah. I am saying those cities are wrong!

    I’ll take the work of a professor in the field over the propaganda spouted by a shill site like stopREDlightRUNNING.com. If a site with a name like that is not biased, nothing is! Of course the ‘studies’ they site are going to ‘show’ that camera’s work. It’s a huge revenue stream for the city and they will go to ANY length to show that it works.

    Tony is right. This is nothing more than a hidden, abusive tax against motorists. The police have absolutely no business being involved in fund raising / tax collecting (outside of due process of law in catching those who cheat on their taxes). Rather than stealing from the people, the police ought to be out there keeping us safe (really safe; I’m not talking about safe from the evil spectre of someone going a tiny bit faster when the light turns yellow… hold me… I’m scared). If they would spend that money on stopping real crime rather than on cameras, the city would be better off. Better yet, why don’t they use that camera money to solve the huge number of unsolved murders that happen in SF every year, instead of paying for Gavin Newsom’s dry cleaning bill.

    San Fransisco is a city of graft. And the target: the people. Look out Chicago, SF is competing for most corrupt city in the USA. And if you try to tell me that you never speed up on a (now shorter) yellow light, or always come to a COMPLETE stop before making a right turn at a red, you don’t drive or are either a 75 year old grandma with a depth perception problem, or an outright liar.

    So, Citizen, you may be all for this unfair, immoral, unethical tax against the people, but rest assured that sooner or later they’ll find a way to enforce something against you, and lighten the load in your wallet. The rest of us will be too broke to speak out against it on your behalf.

    Take that to the bank Comrade, ur… uh Citizen!