Am I Guilty? I think not!

[rvcruiser]

Let me start by saying I do not remember ever having a traffic ticket in my 50 years of personal and professional driving. That said here is what happened while driving through Alabama, the route I have taken many times before.
I was in my Class A, pulling 4 down. A double trailer transport was ahead of me. We were both turning left. The light was green. I remained a safe distance behind him, his truck blocking my view of the left turn traffic signal for a few seconds (unfortunately I did not have the elevated view that the camera had of the left turn signal). During those seconds I was already in the intersection.

Now my choice to be made in a split second was
1)back up...not possible with a toad
2)stop in the middle of the intersection and block everyone..nope
3)continue the turn at a safe slow speed making sure the oncoming traffic did not start up....yes, I chose this.
The turn was made safely before the oncoming traffic even started up and I continued on.

Returning home to Ontario, Canada I found in my mail a week later, a red light ticket for $60. Pay it or go to court in Alabama.

Anyone like to view this "violation"?
www.violationinfo.com
notice # 2731300146816
pin # 3569

Needless to say I have no choice but to pay this.
fyi we are 'surviving' on pension only and $60 is definitely a hardship.
Sweet Winter Home Alabama....no more!

[Us_out_West]

HappyKayakers wrote:
If $60 is a hardship, perhaps you should quit snowbirding. I also agree with the previous poster that you should not enter an intersection if your view of the traffic light is obstructed.

Exactly!!

Think this thread ha run it's course. :Z

[stubblejumper]

couldn't we just all send this guy a buck and get rid of this thread:R

[RVUSA]

toolttime wrote:
Don't pay it. Think they will send some one after you for 60. dollars

Probably not, but they will contact your state and if they have a reciprical agreement, your state will suspend your license. Pretty sweet huh?

OP, pay the ticket. You clarified that the light had a red left turn signal yet you failed to stop. Any excuse is just that.

[toolttime]

Don't pay it. Think they will send some one after you for 60. dollars

[joebedford]

rvcruiser wrote:
Op here
Just to clarify.

The light for the intersection was green during my whole turn.
The red was the arrow, which I had no way of seeing due to two large transports turning ahead of me...and since I had never been in this intersection before, I had no way of knowing there wasa separate arrow light....way over from the lights for the cars going straight.
The camera could see the arrow as it was positioned up much higher than me well above the trucks.

Maybe this will help someone else avoid a ticket.

If nothing else you're determined to 'prove' your point despite the evidence. The two turn arrows were clearly red before you crossed the line and you and the truck were in positions where the reds would have been visible.

[free_radical]

rvcruiser wrote:
Op here
Just to clarify.

The light for the intersection was green during my whole turn.
The red was the arrow, which I had no way of seeing due to two large transports turning ahead of me...and since I had never been in this intersection before, I had no way of knowing there wasa separate arrow light....way over from the lights for the cars going straight.
The camera could see the arrow as it was positioned up much higher than me well above the trucks.
Maybe this will help someone else avoid a ticket.

You should send them a letter explaining this and hope theyll drop the fine,
imo you should wait until you see the lights before entering the intersection,,

Wonder what would happen if one drove on green and his engine stalled in the midle,and by the time you restarted and got going the light turned red and you got a ticket,
would one be guilty also!?
sometimes it may be worth going to court and argue..

I got a 129$ red light ticket in Edmonton,paid it without question as I was too busy working,and few months later got a REFUND from the city explaining that many cameras had some kind of glitch and ticketed many vehicles that never broke any laws!

[rvcruiser]

Op here
Just to clarify.

The light for the intersection was green during my whole turn.
The red was the arrow, which I had no way of seeing due to two large transports turning ahead of me...and since I had never been in this intersection before, I had no way of knowing there wasa separate arrow light....way over from the lights for the cars going straight.
The camera could see the arrow as it was positioned up much higher than me well above the trucks.

Maybe this will help someone else avoid a ticket.

[vtxbud]

OP, I was in law enforcement for 30 years.
1: You are probably a good driver (or darn lucky) to not have a traffic ticket other than a photo ticket, after so many years of driving;
2: If you can not see the light, DON'T enter the intersection. Plain and simple. Had that excuse tossed at me many times. Holds no water. Here's your ticket ( that carries demerit points, photo tickets do not.)
3: $60.00 is nothing. Here a red light violation is $287.00.
4. Pay the ..... ticket.

[joebedford]

michelb wrote:

Fizz wrote:

Terryallan wrote:


I'm sorry I disagree. I believe the only reason for cameras is to make money for the city, or state.

Wrong, wrong wrong...
In our city red light running is getting to be a real problem.
Where cameras have been installed accidents have dropped. All have warning signs telling you there is a camera. We have a few random fake cameras with signs all over so it's not about the money.
What price do you put on a saved life?

I agree 100% with this. I don't usually like this type of 'unmanned revenue generating system' but I happen to believe that red light cameras do make roads safer.

As Fizz mentioned, in many cities, the red light cameras are announced by signs before you even get to the intersection.

Let me say right up front that I don't agree with running red lights.

However, Ottawa is the WORST city I have driven in (North America and Europe) for installing lights and stop signs that interfere with the normal flow of traffic. It is one of the reasons (albeit down the list of reasons) we moved out of Ottawa (Kanata).

On the odd occasion we go back to Ottawa it's become a bit of a game with DW and me to count how many red lights we get. It's disgusting. Also, many lights block left turns when straight gets a green - can't trust the drivers to cross traffic EVEN WHEN THERE USUALLY IS NO TRAFFIC. Argh! And the slowness of the light cycles - no traffic sensed so light decides to turn but we have to give the pedestrians another 20 seconds to get across EVEN WHEN THERE ARE NO PEDESTRIANS! Argh!

I don't do it but I understand why people run reds. Usually they're completely safe because the lights are red in both directions for 3 seconds.

Don't even get me started on the stupidly slow speed limits...

It's a pleasure to drive in the USA where the lights are more sensible and the speed limits higher. In most places in the USA people drive closer to the limit and don't run reds nearly as much as in Ottawa.

Governments shouldn't make stupid laws because people won't obey them. Like it's OK to pass on a double yellow in Ontario. Used to be NEVER pass on a double yellow. Now somebody might try to pass in a place where it's unsafe - there's no guidelines (pun intended) to stop them from doing so.

I don't care about red light cameras one way or the other. Photo radar OTOH is just a money grab and I don't like it.

Oh dear, time to switch to decaf...

[paulcardoza]

ABSOLUTELY CORRECT!

Terryallan wrote:

I believe the only reason for cameras is to make money for the city, or state.

[Community Alumni]

michelb wrote:

Fizz wrote:

Terryallan wrote:


I'm sorry I disagree. I believe the only reason for cameras is to make money for the city, or state.

Wrong, wrong wrong...
In our city red light running is getting to be a real problem.
Where cameras have been installed accidents have dropped. All have warning signs telling you there is a camera. We have a few random fake cameras with signs all over so it's not about the money.
What price do you put on a saved life?

I agree 100% with this. I don't usually like this type of 'unmanned revenue generating system' but I happen to believe that red light cameras do make roads safer.

As Fizz mentioned, in many cities, the red light cameras are announced by signs before you even get to the intersection.

Yeah, I agree too. We have had a few test locations in the Montreal area and now we will be getting many more both for traffic lights and radar. I think it is a great idea and here it has proven to make things safer.

[michelb]

rvcruiser wrote:
...

Also, as I said the light was green when I started...yes I could have possibly slammed on the brakes and stopped when the view of the light was obstructed but I would have been in the intersection...a split second decision had to be made.
Just posted this as more of a warning to those travelling the roads. I feel my decision was the safest at the time and still do.

The evidence just doesn't support that. Red light cameras are designed with a sensor at the start of the intersection and it's only enabled when the light is red. If you enter the intersection while it's still green, you do not get a ticket - the system will only get triggered if you pass the sensor after the light has already turned red.

[michelb]

Fizz wrote:

Terryallan wrote:


I'm sorry I disagree. I believe the only reason for cameras is to make money for the city, or state.

Wrong, wrong wrong...
In our city red light running is getting to be a real problem.
Where cameras have been installed accidents have dropped. All have warning signs telling you there is a camera. We have a few random fake cameras with signs all over so it's not about the money.
What price do you put on a saved life?

I agree 100% with this. I don't usually like this type of 'unmanned revenue generating system' but I happen to believe that red light cameras do make roads safer.

As Fizz mentioned, in many cities, the red light cameras are announced by signs before you even get to the intersection.

[Bumpyroad]

Francesca Knowles wrote:

Flyfisherman128 wrote:
Not to be stupid but I don't have a clue what you people are talking about. You have cameras on traffic lights? Never actually heard of such a thing until this post. There was talk about giving out tickets for going from one thruway exit to another too quick and getting a ticket. In NYS the driver gets the ticket for a moving violation not the vehicle. You can give my car all the tickets you want it cant pay because it doesn't work.

:h

Is that "New York" location in your sig for real?

New York (city) was the first place in the U.S.A. to use red light cameras-You can look it up!

and if those tickets are ignored, good luck on getting your plates renewed next time.
but somebody not knowing about red light/speeding/etc. camera enforcement must have been sleeping under a rock someplace.

bumpy