gdp's Comments

Quincy Journal : State moves to drop police ticket quotas - Quincy, IL News - QuincyJournal.com

Fri, 9 May 2014 01:47:05 +0000

Several years ago, the Police Officers Association of Michigan and the National Motorists Association combined to support a bill in Michigan to prohibit the use of numerical ticket numbers for either work assignments for officers or their evaluations. Ticket quotas of any kind became illegal in Michigan. EVERY STATE SHOULD HAVE THIS LAW TO PREVENT TICKET PROFITEERING. James C. Walker, Life Member-National Motorists Association

NBC-WKTV News Channel 2 - News, Weather, Sports - Utica, New York Utica, New York : Speed Traps Part One: If you are caught texting and driving, you will be ticketed | NBC-WKTV News Ch

Wed, 6 Nov 2013 18:49:29 +0000

Facts. 1) Posted limits have almost no effect on the actual travel speeds, as speed trap officers know. 2) Posting low limits below what most drivers find safe and comfortable does NOT reduce travel speeds but it DOES increase crash risks by increasing speed variance, passing, tailgating, and aggressive driving. 3) The only practical effects (if not the malicious intent) of artificially low posted speed limits are to increase ticket revenue and decrease safety. 4) IF SAFETY IS THE GOAL for the posted limits (rare in New York), then the posted limits are set at the 85th percentile speed of free flowing traffic under good conditions. See the science on our website. 5) Correct 85th percentile limits are rare in NY because they gut the speed trap ticket revenue. James C. Walker, Life Member-National Motorists Association (frequent visitor to NY state to see family)

Pomerado News : Editorial: Was camera vote the best choice?

Thu, 24 Oct 2013 16:34:00 +0000

Whether the vote was a good one or a bad one depends upon your goal for the cameras. IF your goal was safety, then getting rid of the cameras was a good vote. Crashes went down without the cameras and there are MANY documented studies showing that cameras often increase the crash rates at camera intersections. IF your goal was to enrich the for-profit camera company and help reduce the bloated state budget with the massive fine surcharges, then the vote was a bad one. Red light cameras are very expensive and require ticketing mostly safe drivers to generate enough fine revenue to even pay the costs of the cameras alone. This is done in two predatory ways. Yellow intervals are set too short for the ACTUAL approach speeds of at least 85% of the vehicles and/or drivers making safe slow rolling right on red turns are targeted for money - with no safety benefit in almost every case. See the federal research showing that right on red turns are involved in only 0.4% of crashes at signalized intersections and only 0.06% of all traffic crashes with an injury or fatality. Ticketing right on red drivers is for money, not safety, in almost every case. Poway is the 58th California city to have ended their camera program, or banned them before any were installed. Good riddance. James C. Walker, Life Member-National Motorists Association

The Tory Diary : The Government should speed ahead with an 80 mph limit

Wed, 3 Jul 2013 01:59:10 +0000

No trials are required, if safety is the goal. The 85th percentile speed of free flowing traffic under good conditions is the safest point to set the speed limit and the 85th percentile speeds on Motorways were 79 mph about 3 years ago. IF safety were the true goal for the Motorway limits, rural areas would have been posted at 80 mph many years ago. But safety is NOT the goal for the DfT for Motorway speed limits. James C. Walker, National Motorists Association (USA), frequent visitor to Britain - most recently in May 2013 where I did a LOT of Motorway driving around the 85th percentile speeds of 80 mph.

WXMI-TV : Could Red-Light Cameras Be Coming To Michigan?

Mon, 3 Jun 2013 01:46:39 +0000

Red light cameras are a terrible idea. 1) They require deliberate mis-engineering of the lights to create enough split second violations by safe drivers to pay the high costs of the cameras. 2) Cameras often raise the total accident rates at camera intersections. 3) Slow rolling right on red turns account for only 0.4% of all crashes and only 0.06% of crashes with injuries or fatalities, per the federal research. So any tickets for right on red turns are 99.6% to 99.94% about money, not safety. 4) Red light cameras are for-profit business partnerships between for-profit camera companies, local governments willing to mis-engineer their traffic lights for profits, and the state that gets a big cut of the total take. 5) VERY few red light camera tickets actually go to dangerous drivers who cause or risk t-bone crashes, because these dangerous drivers are far too small a percentage to financially justify having expensive red light cameras. Cameras typically lease for $4,000 to $5,000 per month, per camera - so they must ticket mostly safe drivers to generate enough revenue to just pay their own costs, let alone produce the high profits that city and state governments demand from such programs. If you care about safety and fairness in traffic enforcement, call your state Representatives and Senators to tell them you do NOT want red light cameras or any other automated enforcement devices in Michigan. Those programs will be about money, not safety, and may well reduce safety if implemented. Links to find the contact information for your Representative and Senator are here: http://www.michigan.gov/som/0,4669,7-192-29701_29.... See the science of the safest traffic light engineering on our website in the red light camera section. James C. Walker, Life Member-National Motorists Association

Daily Camera.com: : Boulder fights bill to kill red-light cameras, photo radar - Boulder Daily Camera

Sat, 23 Feb 2013 05:13:58 +0000

The rea$on$ citie$ u$e red light camera$ and $peed camera$ $hould be obviou$ to mo$t ob$erver$ and the rea$on$ do not include $afety. Ticket cameras are about MONEY, MORE MONEY, and EVEN MORE MONEY. Artificially low posted speed limits and artificially short yellow intervals on the lights drive this corrupt money-grab industry. Ticket cameras require deliberately improper and less-safe engineering of the speed limits and traffic lights to produce maximum profits. It is corrupt and immoral and should be banned. James C. Walker, National Motorists Association

WGNO-TV : State Lawmaker Makes Push To Limit Red-Light Citations

Fri, 22 Feb 2013 04:20:40 +0000

Speed cameras make profits ONLY when the posted speed limit is set way below the safest point, usually the 85th percentile speed of free flowing traffic under good conditions, and this is done for the sole purpose of giving speeding tickets with cameras or officers - tickets to mostly safe drivers. Red light cameras make profits ONLY when the yellow intervals are deliberately set too short for the actual approach speeds and this is done for the sole purpose of giving red light camera tickets mostly to safe drivers for MONEY. Ticket cameras are scams that require deliberately improper and less safe traffic engineering that can reduce safety. The scams must end. James C. Walker, National Motorists Association

Daily Camera.com: : Greeley state Sen. Scott Renfroe aims again at photo radar, red-light cameras - Boulder Daily Camera

Sun, 16 Dec 2012 22:54:15 +0000

Senator Renfroe is correct, speed and red light cameras should be totally banned. Speed cameras produce profits ONLY when the posted speed limits are set artificially low, below the safest point which is the 85th percentile speed of free flowing traffic under good conditions. Setting 85th percentile posted speed limits almost always produces the smoothest and safest traffic flow with the fewest accidents. Typical posted speed limits are set 5 to 10 mph (and sometimes even 15 mph) below the safest levels. This enables speed traps and speed cameras to be very profitable, at the cost of lower safety. Red light cameras produce profits ONLY when the yellow intervals are deliberately set too short for the ACTUAL 85th percentile approach speeds. This improper engineering is less safe, sometimes causes increases in accident rates, and makes red light camera profitable. A total ban on ticket cameras is the only way to stop the temptation for cities to deliberately mis-engineer their speed limits and traffic lights to maximize camera ticket revenue. Without the financial incentive to raise ticket revenue, cities will more likely engineer for maximum safety, NOT maximum ticket profits. Colorado voters need to contact their state Representatives and Senators after the 2013 legislative session opens to ask them to support Senator Renfroe's bill to ban the cameras. James C. Walker, National Motorists Association

http://norfolk.wtkr.com/ : Norfolk’s first red-light camera to start in February 2013 | News | Norfolk News

Sat, 17 Nov 2012 20:09:38 +0000

Red light cameras are about money, not safety Allowing Redflex to evaluate which intersections should get the cameras is like allowing the fox to plan nightly visits to the hen house for the hen's pleasure. Norfolk's red light cameras will be profitable ONLY if 1) the yellows are set too short for the actual approach speeds and/or 2) the city tickets safe slow-rolling right on red turns that endanger no one and/or 3) tickets people who stop in the "wrong place" that endanger no one. Red light cameras are a for-profit business scam that requires ticketing mostly safe drivers to produce enough tickets to cover the high $4,350 per month per camera costs. See the science on our website of how better engineering will almost always produce fewer violations and greater safety than using predatory ticket cameras. James C. Walker, National Motorists Association, www.motorists.org

KOMO - Seattle, WA : Wash. high court rules against Mukilteo red-light initiative | Local & Regional | Seattle News, Weat

Fri, 9 Mar 2012 17:03:00 +0000

This ruling specifically authorizes greedy cities to use predatory ticket cameras and unsafe engineering to collect ticket revenue from safe drivers by using improper engineering of speed limits and traffic lights. It will make it CRITICAL to elect and hire only city officials that put safety ahead of ticket revenue. In the meantime, Washington now needs a state law that totally bans ticket cameras - joining the many other states that ban ticket cameras. See the list at www.thenewspaper.com See our website for the science on speed limit and traffic light engineering parameters that maximize safety. James C. Walker, National Motorists Association, www.motorists.org, Ann Arbor, MI

WAVY.com : Red light cameras may be a go | WAVY.com | Norfolk

Sat, 15 Oct 2011 03:06:29 +0000

In almost every case, longer yellow intervals on the traffic lights will reduce red light violations by MORE than ticket cameras. So, if you see Norfolk install the cameras, you will know that greed won out over greater safety with longer yellow intervals and fewer violations than camera will provide. Red light cameras require improper engineering with less safety in order for the cameras to be profitable for the predatory camera vendors and their business partner cities. MANY cities installing red light cameras have seen the accident rates go UP a the camera sites. This is immoral, but very profitable and money wins out over fairness and safety in far too many cities. See our website for the science and research. if it makes any sense to you, contact your city officials and demand that cameras not be installed, but safer longer yellows be used instead. James C. Walker, National Motorists Association, www.motorists.org, Ann Arbor, MI

O'Connor's Annotations : TX: Red-Light Litigation.

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 18:55:34 +0000

With luck, other cities will see the predatory nature of ATS and the danger of dealing with that company, so the negative publicity may seriously damage their future sales results. In almost every case, red light violation rates can be reduced by MORE than ticket cameras by simply adding more time to the yellow intervals. Houston citizens came to realize that revenue was the true purpose and nature of the program and voted it out. Red light cameras have never survived a public vote and a list of those votes is at www.thenewspaper.com. Cities should be VERY careful with ticket camera contracts to be sure they can cancel them when their citizens realize the actual results of the programs. The science and research is on our website. James C. Walker, National Motorists Association, www.motorists.org, Ann Arbor, MI (frequent visitor to Texas)

KVAL - Eugene, OR : Red light cam gets a red light from city | Local & Regional News | Eugene News, Weather, Sports, Bre

Tue, 27 Sep 2011 20:29:04 +0000

It is good the council voted no on installing the red light camera revenue machines. IF the city has a genuine issue with too many red light violations, the far more effective solution is to lengthen the yellow intervals on the lights. In virtually every case this simple no-cost method will reduce violations by MORE than a ticket camera. Some cities have yellow intervals timed with a mathematical formula based on the posted speed limit. But, if the posted limit is set below the safety-optimum 85th percentile speed of free flowing traffic under good conditions (typically most limits are set too low on main roads), then the yellow will be too short for the actual approach speeds. Even if political realities prevent the engineer from posting the safest 85th percentile speed limit, they CAN set the yellows for the actual 85th percentile approach speeds. If the city does not want to do speed studies, then simply adding 1.0 seconds to the yellows (up to the federal maximum of 6.0 seconds) will almost always drastically lower any too-high violation rates. The science is on our website. James C. Walker, National Motorists Association, www.motorists.org, Ann Arbor, MI

National Motorists Association Blog : Right On Red?

Tue, 27 Sep 2011 17:48:24 +0000

Great Britain uses a LOT more of the GIVE WAY (YIELD) protocol and it makes driving there more pleasant, less frustrating, etc.

http://www.orland-press-register.com/ : Speed limits going up | speed, street, limits - Orland Press Register

Fri, 23 Sep 2011 03:57:59 +0000

This is good news. Posting realistic speed limits at the 85th percentile speed of free flowing traffic under good conditions usually produces the smoothest and safest traffic flow with the fewest accidents. This allows officers to concentrate enforcement versus the small percentage of drivers who are way above the normal traffic flow speeds and thus causing conflicts with other drivers. The science is on our website. Maybe you will join us to help influence every city to set realistic speed limits based on the reality of safe traffic flow speeds. James C. Walker, National Motorists Association, www.motorists.org, Ann Arbor, MI

KOMO - Seattle, WA : Attorney to investigate relationship between Lynnwood PD, red light camera company | Politics | Lynn

Thu, 25 Aug 2011 23:12:05 +0000

If an inappropriate relationship is found between the camera company and the police department, all the police officers involved should be dismissed for cause. A similar conflict of interest was found in Houston, but the authorities let the guilty parties escape sanctions. This sort of conflict of interest is totally unacceptable. Note that Houston has now dumped the cameras, as did LA. Several more cities will have voters decide at the next election cycle. The public is becoming aware that red light cameras are ONLY about money and that correct engineering with longer yellow intervals will almost always reduce violations by MORE than ticket cameras. With luck and more citizen objections, cameras should be on the way out in the USA. Cities should be aware of how aggressively ATS has gone after Houston when they wanted to end the contract and should rate ATS as an unacceptable contractor and business partner. The science and many unbiased studies are on our website. James C. Walker, National Motorists Association, www.motorists.org, Ann Arbor, MI

FOX Toledo Online : $8.5M uncollected from red-light fines

Mon, 15 Aug 2011 19:35:13 +0000

In almost every case, longer yellow intervals on the lights and 85th percentile posted speed limit will produce fewer violations and more safety than ticket cameras. Cities that use cameras are after the money, above safety. The science and a lot of unbiased research on both issues is on our website. James C. Walker, National Motorists Association, www.motorists.org, Ann Arbor, MI (frequent visitor to Toledo)

KATU - Portland, OR : Longview voters won\'t decide on red light cameras | KATU.com - Portland News, Sports, Traffic Weath

Thu, 26 May 2011 22:40:45 +0000

Mayor Anagnostou says he is against the cameras personally. It is very likely that the citizens will vote against the cameras as well. If the Mayor and Council do the honorable thing and accept the probable "Advisory Vote" against the cameras, they will then remove them, no later than the contract expiration in May 2012 and sooner if possible. Note that the cameras have never survived a public vote - see the list at www.thenewspaper.com where voters said "NO". Red light cameras are just a cynical means to make money with improper and/or unethical traffic management policies, some of which can actually raise accident risks. In virtually every case, simply adding 1.0 seconds to the yellow intervals will reduce the red light violation rate by MORE than a ticket camera program. Will the camera vendors point this out? Do elephants fly at the speed of sound? Didn't think so. Camera vendors depend upon bad and often less-safe engineering to make their products profitable, and make no mistake - profits are the ONLY interest for the scamera vendors. The science is on our website. Please read it and maybe you will join us to help rid the country of the scourge of red light cameras which exist almost entirely for revenue purposes, not safety. James. C. Walker, National Motorists Association, www.motorists.org, Ann Arbor, MI

National Motorists Association Blog : Bad Public Policy: Turning Police Into Tax Collectors

Thu, 5 May 2011 01:31:35 +0000

The judge is right, excessive fines for minor offenses have a severe unintended consequence on those that cannot pay the very high fees. A collection rate of only 50% to 65% is clear evidence that the fee schedule is WAY too high for far too many people. In these times of great unemployment and under-employment, a very large proportion of people simply cannot pay. When faced with huge fees, they often have to decide between paying the fines or feeding their kids. Which would YOU choose? Rational traffic laws enforced fairly for SAFETY only is our goal. Read our website and maybe you will join us to end the war on drivers. James C. Walker, National Motorists Association, www.motorists.org, Ann Arbor, MI (and a frequent visitor to the great state of Texas)

National Motorists Association Blog : Is Speeding Ever Appropriate?

Fri, 14 Jan 2011 19:12:16 +0000

It has been known for at least 70 years with many unbiased research reports that you achieve the smoothest traffic flow and the greatest safety when posted speed limits are set at the 85th percentile speed of free flowing traffic under good conditions. THIS is the number you paint on the signs, if safety and smooth traffic flow are the true goals. It is NOT always the safest speed of travel, as Eric Peters points out clearly. He is one of the most knowledgeable journalists on this subject. Other traffic, weather conditions, road conditions and other influences often dictate that a prudent driver will go slower for various reasons. EVERY state has what most call their Basic Speed Law, that is you are legally required to drive at an appropriate speed for the conditions involved, regardless of what the signs say. That might be 30 mph on a road posted at 55 mph, if that is what it takes to have your car fully under control in bad conditions. BUT, the principle of posting most main roads at or near the 85th percentile speed of free flowing traffic under good conditions to maximize safety died in most states in 1974 with the inappropriate and counter-productive National Maximum Speed Limit. The NMSL was VERY BRIEFLY effective to save gas during the first Arab Oil Embargo, but speeds soon returned to normal as gas became available again. However, cities and states found the under posted limits to be outrageously profitable and the insurance companies did as well with surcharges to ticket recipients that often are higher than the court fines. So, today we have a system in many or most venues where the posted limit bears almost no relationship to the normal travel speeds and many or most tickets given are given to some of the safest drivers on the road -- the ones going along with the normal flow of traffic in the safest possible way. When safe drivers receive tickets in this terrible system, it undermines their respect for the officers involved and for traffic laws in general. They get cynical about it, and their cynicism is justified. It is NOT the fault of the officers, they are forced to enforce improper limits that actually degrade safety. The fault lies with the politicians who set, or force their engineers to set, arbitrarily low posted limits that define 70% or 80% or 90% of the drivers as violators or criminals. Regards, Jim Walker, NMA, Ann Arbor, MI