patching...
Breaking: Minutes From Seaside Heights, Sandy's Destruction Still Apparent »
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!

What's Your Take on Red Light Cameras?

Advocacy group has released a study it says shows New Jersey residents support cameras at busy intersections by a wide margin.

 

The National Coalition for Safe Roads has released the results of a survey showing 77 percent of New Jersey residents polled support the use or red light cameras.

Out of the 600 drivers surveyed, more than half said they drive more carefully when they know an intersection is monitored. Check out this article by Asbury Park Press transportation reporter Larry Higgs for more on the survey.

Brick Township is one of 17 New Jersey municipalities that has installed red light cameras as part of a pilot program examining their effectiveness – a process that could lead to the cameras' legalization statewide. Two intersections are currently monitored there, and Brick Patch reported last month that Brick officials said more cameras could be on the way.

According to Higgs' article, some New Jersey communities participating in the red light camera pilot program have seen dramatic decreases in accidents at intersections with cameras. But some who advocate against red light cameras say they don't do much to increase safety, and claim the recent NCSR survey is flawed, because it was funded by camera manufacturers.

What do you think about red light cameras? Do you think more towns should use them? Would you want them at Toms River's busy intersections?

About this column: Toms River Patch wants to know your thoughts on our Question of the Day! Related Topics: Traffic Lights and driving tickets

Martin

8:24 am on Saturday, July 9, 2011

Cops can't be everywhere at all times, so cameras are good (and photos are solid evidence). Oh, if only the cameras were sensitive enough to show whether drivers were holding a phone (talking or texting)! Then double or triple the fines, or suspend licenses because it's more distracting and dangerous than drunk driving.

Can we please set up cameras on roadsides to catch the 50% of drivers who just have to talk or text while behind the wheel? It's an accident waiting to happen... It's an epidemic. The fines would probably pay a town's entire annual budget, and make our roads much safer.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Cosmo

11:51 am on Wednesday, July 13, 2011

That will never happen, as the police are just as guilty as many drivers talking and texting on phones while they drive.

skizma

9:33 am on Saturday, July 9, 2011

It's a great idea....I think though the camera's ought be better posted with signage say on the light post so out of the area folks know there are camera's at the intersection. I have no problem because....I don't go through red lights. I have almost been killed by someone who did though. So a camera serves a good purpose.

Reply

Deborah

9:35 am on Saturday, July 9, 2011

If cops did their job you wouldn't need cameras. I agree with Martin 100% about the cell phones. Apparently the police are allowed to use them even though they cause accidents themselves. Toms River could be very wealthy if they did their jobs about people going right through stop signs, tailgating, texting, talking on cell phones, going right through red lights, speeding,etc.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Mickey

8:55 am on Sunday, July 10, 2011

If the cops did their job ? I'm sure every profession could be more efficent....probably even yours. They can't be everywhere, all the time. When it hits the fan, the Brick cops have shown they're up to the task....and then some. I'm sensing you have ill will towards cops.

DaveL

10:32 am on Saturday, July 9, 2011

They cause more accidents... look at the data, I did not make it up. Granted these accidents are less severe than head-ons or T- Bones, but the amount of rear-ending will cause all our insurances to rise.
Not to mention Brick is cheating by shortening the yellow signal to 5 seconds, instead of the state recommended 7 seconds. $$$

Reply
Comment_arrow

Martin

2:39 pm on Saturday, July 9, 2011

Yes, please "look at the data," DaveL:
"some New Jersey communities participating in the red light camera pilot program have seen dramatic decreases in accidents at intersections with cameras." That's DRAMATIC DECREASES, not "more accidents."

Comment_arrow

DaveL

1:27 pm on Sunday, July 10, 2011

That is because they are in the early stage, and this survey is flawed. Check out the National Motorist's Association, along with the NIHS.
http://www.motorists.org/red-light-cameras/increase-accidents

Reports From The Media

Los Angeles | KCAL TV
A local TV station fact-checked the city's claims that their ticket cameras reduced accidents and found that the opposite was true. At 20 of the 32 intersections studied, accidents increased and several intersections tripled their accident rate.

Washington, D.C. | Washington Post
This report showed an overall increase in accidents at red-light camera intersections of 107 percent.

Portland, Oregon | KATU News
KATU News reviewed city statistics and found a 140 percent increase in rear-end crashes at the intersections where red light cameras were installed.

Fort Collins, Colorado | The Coloradoan
Ft. Collins, Colorado has experienced an 83 percent increase in the number of accidents since red light cameras were installed.

Oceanside, California | North County Times
This report showed a 800 percent increase in rear-end accidents.

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Philadelphia Weekly
This article showed an increase of 10 to 21 percent in accidents in intersections with red-light cameras.

LiveinTR

11:02 am on Saturday, July 9, 2011

The poll should be considered invalid as it was funded by the red light camera company. The question was as about favoring a red light camera ticket with no points verses a police officer ticket issued with points so of course the majority would respond saying they prefer the red light camera

Reply
Comment_arrow

DaveL

12:44 pm on Saturday, July 9, 2011

I did not know the sponsorship and/or wording of the survey. Now it makes sense to me. The survey should be invalidated.

Comment_arrow

Martin

2:50 pm on Saturday, July 9, 2011

On the contrary, red light cameras should include issuance of points, because there's photographic proof of a traffic violation. The majority of us who don't drive through red lights would really appreciate it -- for life.

jessica

12:29 pm on Saturday, July 9, 2011

I think the idea of them are great but the really bright flash in the dark that goes off for no reason is a distraction. The flash goes off all of the time when no one is doing anything wrong. it doesnt make any sense.

Reply

howard

12:32 pm on Saturday, July 9, 2011

The only one who benefits is the company that owns the cameras.
I live in Florida.We have red light cameras .Last week every car in a police escorted funeral procession was ticketed.The camera even showed a cop directing cars through red light.
The courts are jammed up .Not only is it costly but it's a terrible inconvienence.
Almost everyone who fights the ticket wins.

Reply
Comment_arrow

SoylentGreen

3:49 pm on Saturday, July 9, 2011

Blame the local PD then, because they have to go through and approve violation before they are mailed out.

Comment_arrow

Mickey

9:01 am on Sunday, July 10, 2011

That's not true...where do you get your stats from. Maybe it's time for even funeral processions to have to stop for red lights, but really how many funeral processions have you seen going thru intersections with traffic camera's ? Imagine if every intersection had camera's, the roadways would be much safer......I can't wait until they come up with camera's that detect speeders.

DaveL

12:43 pm on Saturday, July 9, 2011

The easiest way to reduce severe accidents at intersections that have a red light running problem is to adjust the timing of the signals. Adding a longer yellow is the first step, then having a good 2-3 seconds of all-way red allow for drivers stuck in the intersection, or even those running the light. Those two steps alone can reduce bad collisions at intersections... but there is no money in that for the towns.

Reply

WheresTheBallot

12:58 pm on Saturday, July 9, 2011

I really can't believe what I'm reading. This is America. The cameras may be benficial in changing driving behavior and ultimatly making things safer, but at what cost? When did it become OK to give up our liberty and privacy in exchange for safety? We already think its OK for the TSA to check Grandma's adult diaper when boarding a plane in the name of safety. Now we are saying that its OK for them to take our picture at a traffic light and send us a fine in the mail without human intervention in the name of safety. What is next? Allowing the town to use the satellite images on Google to catch people improving their backyard without a permit? It can considered a safety violation if you add a deck onto your house without an inspection. Other towns around the country are already doing this. Where does it end?

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin

Reply
Comment_arrow

Martin

2:45 pm on Saturday, July 9, 2011

A driver's license is a privilege, not a right. You have to wear seat belts and obey other laws (including... don't drive through red lights). Even libertarians have to obey laws.

Comment_arrow

WheresTheBallot

5:34 pm on Saturday, July 9, 2011

You are absolutely correct that its a privilege to to drive and not a right which is why I am perfectly fine with requiring insurance to drive, but passing out tickets without any definitive proof that of the driver's identity is just un-American. They may have a license plate, but that does not prove who the driver was. We do have a tradition in this country of "Innocent until proven guilty" and just handing the keys to a family member does not automatically make one guilty. I completely agree that all laws need to be followed. I'm not an anarchist. I just don't believe that we should be using any means available to catch people who violate those laws. There is a line we should not cross.

Comment_arrow

TOM JEFFERSON

6:51 pm on Saturday, July 9, 2011

AMEN !! WheresTheBallot is 100% correct. Thank you for your complete understanding of Freedom! What is wrong with you other idiots. The Term FUNCTION CREEP a useful concept for understanding gov't and surveillance. When a new technology is introduced to do one function and is later used for an entirely different thing. How long before EZ pass calculates your speed and you get a ticket for going from point A to point B too fast and get a speeding ticket. How long before these cameras are used to see if one of your tail lights is out, or your wipers were not on while it was spitting raindrops? This is America not Nazi Germany you fools. There is good reason to expect that traffic cameras in the U.S. will lead to blatent human rights abuses. There are signs that Americans are increasingly accepting of surveillance. Our state and U.S. Constitutions afford us protection from our governments, albeit eroding protection. The U.S Constitution’s 5th Amendment Article 1 Section 9 no person can be compelled to be a witness against themselves in criminal matters. The way the camera law is written, the accused has the burden of proving they didn’t commit the violation. It is similar when we move on to the 6th Amendment when the accused in a criminal matter has the right to confront witnesses against them. A camera cannot be a witness. "Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves." "It is easy to take liberty for granted, when you have never had it taken from you."

Comment_arrow

DaveL

1:33 pm on Sunday, July 10, 2011

Attention WheresTheBallot: IT HAS BEGUN!

Long Island Town Uses Google Earth to Find Rogue Swimming Pools

Officials in one Long Island town are cracking down on rogue swimming pool owners by using Google's satellite imaging technology. According to an Associated Press report in The Wall Street Journal, Riverhead, New York's chief building inspector, LeRoy Barnes, Jr., is using Google Earth to locate swimming pools that haven't been registered for a city permit. So far, Barnes and his staff have discovered about 250 pools to be missing permits, and have collected about $75,000 in fines. The city claims that this rash of unregulated pools could have faulty plumbing or electrical work, which would endanger Riverhead residents.

Lillie Coney, associate director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center in Washington, D.C. told the AP, "The technology is going so far ahead of what people think is possible, and there is too little discussion about community norms." The decision to use Google Earth probably didn't stem from safety or privacy; the city used a free service to do a faster, more efficient (and invasive) job. It makes perfect fiscal sense, even if it might ruffle some feathers. [From: AP/The Wall Street Journal]

http://www.switched.com/2010/08/02/long-island-town-uses-google-earth-to-find-rogue-swimming-pools/

Comment_arrow

Mike L

10:23 am on Tuesday, July 19, 2011

What's the cost you ask....Lets just take the corner on Rt 37 and Hooper Ave....Every day I go thru there many times and watch all the cars that run the RED not AMBER lights on the Hooper sides.......Since no gives a S__t any more its called "save a life"

Comment_arrow

S. Bar

1:52 pm on Wednesday, January 30, 2013

Mike L. I live in TR and it is extremely rare to see an acc. at the Rt 37 Hooper intersection. I just got a ticket in Brick as I was driving behind a truck (that went thru) and unable to see the light until I was too close and it was yellow. My option was to slam on my breaks and cause an accident or go thru. Brick now has way more traffic then TR and it would be interesting to see how much of Brick's tax dollars are wasted in the courts dealing w/ those fighting these tickets. It would also be interesting to see how many people slam on their breaks and cause accidents in Brick.

Comment_arrow

Martin

2:47 pm on Saturday, July 9, 2011

Let him watch if it'll help stop red-light-runners like you from hitting me. You're on a public street, so you can have no expectation of privacy. Drive carefully, and there's no problem. End of story.

Comment_arrow

Mickey

9:08 am on Sunday, July 10, 2011

Martin I agree. Can't imagine why anyone wouldn't want speeders that endanger us all to be caught ? Unless, maybe if you were someone that sped all the time with no regard for others. Imagine how many lives would be saved if everyone was "forced" to obey the traffic laws. Ask someone that has lost someone because someone ran a light, or speeding and lost controll or reduced reaction time or to a DUI driver, then Ron, get back to me.

Comment_arrow

WheresTheBallot

10:34 am on Sunday, July 10, 2011

Mickey - Of course we all want speeders and people who run red lights caught, but its how they catch them is the problem. Imagine how many more lives we would save if the government took DNA samples from everyone and used it to catch criminals. Whenever someone left a DNA trace at a scene of a crime, we would know exactly who it was and stop them from committing another crime. We have the technology to do that today, so is that OK in the name of safety?

Comment_arrow

Mickey

12:01 pm on Sunday, July 10, 2011

"Where's The Ballot"....I actually wish they did. It would an excellent direction pointer in solving crimes. would save tax payer dollars & save on Police resources being wasted.

Comment_arrow

WheresTheBallot

12:26 pm on Sunday, July 10, 2011

Mickey - So would you be OK with the government using that DNA data in other ways? Perhaps using it to prioritize medical services? With everyone's DNA, they could determine people with genetic deficiencies who may be expensive and difficult to treat. This could save the tax payers a lot of money on Medicare and Medicaid and doctor's from wasting their time on a lost cause.

rayzer76

3:05 pm on Saturday, July 9, 2011

Does anyone not realize these cameras were only installed to produce revenue for the city? Sure they have a small benefit to safety, but as others said, they also cause people to jam on their brakes, an bright flashes throughout the night, even when no one has violated the light. This was just a money making scheme, shrouded by the name of safety. You don't need a camera to tell you running a yellow or red light is dumb and dangerous.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Mare

7:49 am on Sunday, July 10, 2011

My taxes haven't gone down any yet...... but I'm still waiting. Has anyone had their taxes decrease from all of this new "revenue?" Just curious.

Comment_arrow

Cosmo

12:04 pm on Wednesday, July 13, 2011

If you think taxes will ever go down, I have a bridge to sell you. This is indeed a money making scheme and if you review the Brick Budget, just about all of the proceeds are being reinvested in more cameras so they can pyramid this into a significant revenue item. I believe almost 500k was realized and 450k was reinvested. All you have to do to bypass this disguised tax is to stop on the yellow lights.

Jim

10:47 pm on Saturday, July 9, 2011

Welcome to the New World Order Police state.

Reply

Rich

8:31 am on Sunday, July 10, 2011

Continue to allow them to take away our libertys in the name of protection. Soon we will have no freedom at all. The average police officer in brick makes 100,000 dollars a year. Let them do there job. These cameras are just money genetators for an already blotted township looking for a way to take more of our money

Reply

G.Michaels

9:15 am on Sunday, July 10, 2011

Our society is shot and too many just dont realize it.. Im not even 40 years old yet & this is NOT the country i grew up in. we have no rights in the USA.
My only humor in this camera topic is:
before we all converted over to EZ Pass , we never thought they'd let all those over paid, pension etc etc toll collectors. = theyre almost extinct.
The cameras will put the cops out of work too.... these cameras are everywhere, Rt 95 through DC and Baltimore they are cash cows.. dump the cops,no more over paid civil servants, no more pensions, we could save so much without them. Hence,, our taxes should go down right????? more social programs will just come from it.. its a lose - lose people..

Reply
Comment_arrow

Mare

9:40 am on Sunday, July 10, 2011

In case you haven't been reading or watching the news, the social programs are being cut along with the state workers, cops, teachers, etc. The politicians are still receiving free, top of the line healthcare, per diem checks, free high end gym memberships, paid for meals to high end restaurants, very high pay checks and I don't think they're going to vote themselves a pay freeze anytime soon. I agree that we never do see our taxes lowered, but our pay isn't any higher either. The people we elect are reaping all the benefits. There is no partisanship here, once they get in, they all have their hands in the cash drawer. Can you imagine where Social Security would be if they never had their dirty hands in it?

G.Michaels

9:49 am on Sunday, July 10, 2011

really? how long is unemployment now - 2 years..
I walk into the 7-11 down town periodically - im a rarity using cash. apparently, the state issues credit/charge cards for people who are in perfectly good health - the language is insane, when their not allowed to buy an $8.00 pack of cigs. (which mind you,,, more then 50% of that goes back to NJ in tax)
my point is: this state & country is draining the working household. They will never reduce our taxes, and when the market drops again at the end of the 3rd Qtr - more programs will be rolled out.

Reply

Mare

10:07 am on Sunday, July 10, 2011

Really? How much are the social security checks going down for grandma and grandpa? How far have the funds to charity (medical $$ through churches) care for the "working poor" been cut back? How far are they going to cut welfare, foodstamps and medicaid? It's good for your kind that they cut it, but there are people out there like grandma and grandpa and the disabled who need these benefits. If you want to get into illegal aliens, that's a different thread altogether.

Reply

savethedrama foryamamma

10:15 am on Sunday, July 10, 2011

Before posting your thoughts, has anyone thought about talking to the Traffic Safety Division of the PD snd getting some info? A lot if the info your all have posted about the process is incorrect.

Reply

G.Michaels

10:37 am on Sunday, July 10, 2011

Hi mare,
I'm not trying argue with you..
The fact is = more $$ is being generated through this "light program" and where's the benefit for the work g class?? Safety? I dont think that's the idea behind this.
As for welfare and SS. I'm 39 working 2 jobs soon a 3rd to keep a desired lifestyle. There are far more seniors in local restaurants then younger families. This area caters to the seniors -this town has fallen apart since the seniors poured in.
Social security will not be there for me -
Welfare people,there's jobs out there- they choose to sit back and take the socialist train and not work.
American values left us after WW2.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Mare

2:59 pm on Monday, July 11, 2011

I agree with you on all points. I'm 12 years older than you and I honestly don't believe social security will be there for me either. In fact I know it won't because we die rather young in my family and they keep raising the age. We work 4 jobs between the two of us and we're just too old. Something's got to give. Welfare gave the working poor a reason to sit on their kiesters and collect a check. You could work three jobs earning minimum wage and you still couldn't afford a place to live. It's easier for the poor to collect, that's the problem. The government made it's own problem there.

Martin

10:37 am on Sunday, July 10, 2011

Patch, please do so and report back: Fewer red-light-running collisions? Are other local towns considering the red-light cams as a result of this? How much revenue to Brick? Is that a drop in the bucket in town's budget? Thanks, and please stop texting, dialing and phoning while driving (you know who you are).

Reply
Comment_arrow

DaveL

1:37 pm on Sunday, July 10, 2011

Martin & Others... I agree!

Can someone ask the Traffic Safety department in Brick PD about the decision to install cameras. Did they attempt to lengthen the yellow signal to 7 seconds first to decrease accidents? Did they program a 1-2 second all way red to allow vehicles to clear the intersection? I would bet serious money these two steps would reduce collisions at the intersections more dramatically than the cameras.
Problem is, no revenue generated from reconfiguring the signal timing.

disgusted homeowner

12:14 pm on Sunday, July 10, 2011

The potential safety concept is good but in some towns ( i.e. Newark) it has been proven the camera's have given "bad tickets" to cars that did not go thru the red lite. There was a huge expose on News 12 and how some towns up north had to do away with dozens of summonses that were issued. The technology is not perfect. There's also some serious "big brother" issues here, looking over our shoulder so to speak.

Reply

savethedrama foryamamma

12:53 pm on Sunday, July 10, 2011

If you are not in the wrong, you should not care who is looking.

Reply

Tom Rondello

8:50 am on Monday, July 11, 2011

In reading all of your comments, I can tell you that I am fine with the cameras....IF Crime decreases in Brick. So far I have gotten a few tickets for going through the light and making a turn on red without coming to a stop. I am an idiot for doing those things and I have paid my fine. I would really like crime in Brick to be where it was a few years ago and with our very large police force not working traffic duty I expect reductions in drugs, robberies, petty larceny etc
Texting and driving scares the hell out of me, I ride a motorcycle and I get cut off all the time by a motorist looking into their laps, I would assume reading an email or texting. Sure, if the cameras could detect that, I think that would be good too...So now what about smoking in a car...ever get hit in the neck with a discarded cigarette?

Reply

skizma

6:52 pm on Monday, July 11, 2011

You know what....I have to agree with some of the above.....clicking a picture only gives you a car. Not a licensed driver/name etc. How does that work? your car your ticket? No wayyyyyy

Reply

G.Michaels

8:22 pm on Monday, July 11, 2011

It's a win, when you fight it.
Ask the prosecutor to identify the driver of the vehicle.
Case dropped.. Been down that road already.

Reply

DH

11:36 pm on Monday, July 11, 2011

I am amazed at how many people have taken the "if you're not doing anything wrong, you shouldn't worry about who's looking" stance. People really have no idea what principles were sacred to the founders of this nation.
Just today, I went through the light at Chambers Bridge and Rt 70 - making a left from 70 East to Chambers Bridge North. The light turned yellow, and then red, before I could make it through the intersection because the light at the Shop-Rite left turn was red and the cars were backed up to the intersection. I honestly had no choice in the matter. So I expect I will be getting one of these tickets in the mail. And I will fight it and see what happens.
These things exist to extort money from the people who live and shop in this town, plain and simply. They figure that for every person who fights one of these tickets, 20 more will just pay it. And that's probably exactly what happens. Most people are afraid of the system - the police, the courts, etc.
Unfortunately, I'm sure those camera's are just the first of many more. And taxes will still rise, garbage will be privatized sooner or later, and the Mayor just might have the police shake us down in the street before long to finally win his hockey rink.
As long as people keep saying "it doesn't affect me so it's ok", things will continue to get worse until it affects EVERYONE.

Reply

DaveL

7:44 am on Tuesday, July 12, 2011

DH: That Shop Rite left turn is a disaster. The state needs to add a left turn lane on Route 70 East into the center and coordinate a left turn signal when C. Bridge is green... OR close that left turn lane and force everyone to use the jughandle by the post office to enter the plaza that way.

Also, as a history professor, I often think our founding fathers would cry at stuff like this. Would anyone who has the "if you are behaving, who cares?" attitude be happy if the state installed cameras on poles outside their house to monitor any suspicious activity?

Reply

MIC

7:46 am on Tuesday, July 12, 2011

Great idea for the tourist season, but give the locals a break during the winter, the town will make plenty off the tourists to allow for the locals to not have the enforcement during the off season. I also beleive that having the cameras on rt 37 is benfical as well .

Reply

BIG BLUE 11

1:56 pm on Tuesday, July 12, 2011

It does not matter what anyone thinks-Acrapolis is going to do what he wants with the cameras and the money. I cant wait to hear the yelling when huge new tax increases show up in the mail.

Reply

George

12:12 pm on Wednesday, August 10, 2011

It's the best fund raiser they have for towns that want to make quick money on the taxpayers.

Reply

Kim E

9:14 pm on Friday, June 22, 2012

This could be the end of these lights......
As reported in the Star- Ledger
:http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2012/06/nj_slams_the_breaks_on_red-lig.html

Reply

GaryR

5:06 pm on Thursday, July 5, 2012

Another interesting article about red light cameras. Recent reports are starting to show they DO NOT lead to driver & pedestrian safety...it truly is a money grab at our expense. I'm just so tired of some entrepreneur coming up with another clever way to stick their hands in my pocket. At some point in time, this 'money well' is going to go dry...and it's fast coming!

http://www.motorists.org/red-light-cameras/increase-accidents

Reply

Leave a comment

 

The Toms River Patch
Valentine's Shopping Guide

See the full guide!

Patch Picks