More on Traffic Cameras

On Sunday we offer you more information about the proposed use of cameras to assist in traffic enforcement. There are two Dayton, Ohio videos you can see. One was provided by Redflex Traffic Systems. The other one is on Snopes, which is one of my favorite Web sites.

I’ll be away this week, so I won’t be able to post your comments for awhile. Feel free to leave them, though and I’ll post them when I return on Nov. 27.

11 thoughts on “More on Traffic Cameras

  1. Well, I guess thats one yes vote for camera’s. Weather its for revenue or safety. You caught a car running a red light and a jaywalker.

  2. I am all for slowing people down in interesections and have witnessed 2 accidents related to people “beating the ligt”. My only concern is that the owner of the vehicle is cited for the violation although they might not have been the driver. I have read that in other cities, courts have found the owner guilty when it can be proven that they were not in the vehicle. It seems that our rights are not protected when cameras are used. If Bremerton can craft the law to throw out cases when it can be proven that the owner was not the driver, I will be 100% behind their effort. If it turns out that a clause with this situation is not included, I will be 200% in the fight to oppose the traffic cameras!

  3. After living many years in Europe I moved to Bremerton almost 12 years ago. When I arrived peopled seemed to be driving quite sanely, but something has happened in the past few years and I have witnessed many people running red lights. It is so frequent now that I hesitate if I am first to enter the intersection without being absolutely positive that someone isn’t going to come barreling through on a red light. So far I have been fortunate that no one has hoked in irritation at my cautious uptake. Apparently yellow lights do not what mean what I was taught in Driver’ Ed. in High School. Are people even taught how to drive in school anymore? I spent many years on highways and streets with the Germans who drive very fast, but are quite observant of the rules. That may be because many of their cities have cameras at their intersections. I heard about one German city public official who was photographed running a red light — the photo showed him and his passenger. Unfortunately for him the passenger was a woman who was not his wife. Perhaps cameras would also cut down on cheating or, at least, cheaters who run red lights? If the tickets from these cameras become a source of revenue for the city, it will probably diminish with time as people learn it hurts to disobey laws, but if not then we know we have much to do in the way of training and education. Until then we will reap the profit from the arrogance of those who believe laws and rules do not apply to them.

  4. Why shouldn’t the registered owner of the car be held accountable for the car, no matter who is driving?
    A car, by the very nature of its size and speed can be a ‘weapon’ in the hands of a drunk/impaired, reckless driver.
    Unless the car was stolen, it was loaned or rented out and the owner has to be responsible for the driver driving his/her car. It is up to the owner/s to ensure other drivers on the road are safe from an impaired driver of his/her car.

  5. If it’s safety related I would have no problem with it only if they can prove it would make the intersections safer (ie: statistics) and if they exhausted all other options (ie: lower the speed limit, make the yellow longer). To implement the program to get revenue is just flat out wrong.
    The county lowered the speed limit on a few of the roads down in Port Orchard, maybe it’s time for Bremerton to take it upon itself and do the same. They followed Bainbridge in putting the 20 mph signs with times on them for school zones, how many children have been hit lately(statistics).
    Lets try other options first before our Police Officers become referred to as replay officals instead of crime fighters like they signed up for.

  6. “…Lets try other options first before our Police Officers become referred to as replay officials instead of crime fighters like they signed up for.”
    Actually I think the Police Officers would spend far less time as “replay officials” if the camera’s are in place.
    The fact is seeing a police car on the highway immediately has an affect on the drivers…and seeing/knowing camera’s are in place could be another deterrent.
    The revenue is secondary.
    What is the objection to the revenue helping pay for the camera’s and more officers?
    How is the camera system any different than speeding, getting pulled over and ticketed?
    The ticket is revenue… why is the speeding ticket okay and the camera ticket is not?

  7. Revenue is secondary? Revenue shouldn’t be a consideration. Why are we always finding ways to fine people for their mistakes. Police Officers should be out there being a deterrent to crimes, not looking at video to see if someone made a victimless mistake.

    The camera didn’t help the car making the left turn in the video did it, maybe lowering the speed limit would have given the one car more time to stop, or with a longer yellow the other car would have seen the car wasn’t going to stop and thus would not have started his turn. (school zones years ago was 25 mph but was lowered to 20 to shorten the stopping distance.)

  8. Oh, please.
    Crime usually begins with small stuff and escalates.
    It seems to me the driver who runs red lights, makes illegal turns without problems becomes emboldened to push it further, until possibly, they push once too often and someone gets in the way and get hurt or killed.
    Do you let your children get by with little things until one of those ‘little’ things reaches out and hurts the child or someone else?
    Animal trainers NEVER let ‘little’ things slide…such as the cute little foal jumping up on people.
    That foal may be cute at 100 pounds jumping on a person…how cute is it when that foal weighs 1200 pounds?
    If we take care of the ‘little’ things and nip them in the bud…they are unlikely to grow into big, serious problems.

  9. Police officers don’t have to waste their time looking at a video..they can spend their time preventing crime. Police office people can take care of the video.
    Revenue shouldn’t be a consideration? Sure it should.
    Haven’t you noticed people pay attention when they pay for speeding, illegal parking and such?
    I don’t care what ‘mistakes’ or ‘learning experiences’ anyone has…other than they do not have the right to involve and hurt innocent people during or because of their ‘mistake’.
    Drivers making mistakes out on the highways can be lethal to other people.
    I’d like to think we can stop that driver before s/he reaches that point.
    Maybe not, but can’t we try?

  10. I find it amusing that in the original article that the first thing that was said was the income would fund 5 new police officers. We need more officers but as you know from our Mayor’s comments, police protection for the citizens of Bremerton is a very low priority. To paraphrase what he has said..If we build business, the crooks will find a job and no longer be crooks. You know that he will find a way to use the revenue generated from the cameras for something he wants, not for police officers.

  11. I’d like to think the mayor of Bremerton has Bremerton’s welfare as his priority.
    He is one of the first public official I’ve heard stop ‘politicking’ and double speaking to tell us that NAD park would not be ripped up and used for a school.
    He was forthright.. a cherished trait in anyone, surprisingly refreshing in a politician.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Before you post, please complete the prompt below.

Enter the word yellow here: