Comments on: Dallas Puts Its Citizens’ Lives at Risk for Red Light Ticket Revenue

By: C.V.

C.V. — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 16:16:29 +0000

Predictions: 1)this program will result in a few lawsuits whose defense will cost the city at least 4 times the gross revenues it receives from the cameras. 2)at some point yet another story will come out about how the city has to pay X dollars to the vendor; this total will also exceed the revenues grossed 3) no one will suffer politically or career-wise as a result of this misbegotten, cynical way to raise money.

By: Lee

Lee — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 02:14:21 +0000

I don’t care about the revenue, however I think the State grabbing some of it sucks. Red light cameras seem to be successful at reducing red light runners. That is all it takes to support it. I have stopped easily at red lights, only to have nutty drivers pull around me to run the light. I see at least three every day in my commute to work. I hope that they all get tickets. If the City makes money, fine with me.

By: betty culbreath

betty culbreath — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 01:09:43 +0000

Every City in America can do new things , but Dallas.What the hell is wrong? Could it be City manager form of government? Think about it!

By: Jay Foster

Jay Foster — Sat, 12 Apr 2008 19:40:50 +0000

Okay.. I want my money back.

Anyone here up for a class action lawsuit?

By: Dallasite

Dallasite — Sat, 12 Apr 2008 17:25:14 +0000

By shortening the yellow lights, they are making it almost impossible under certain circumstances to avoid running the red light.

This is entrapment.

Bureaucratic greed will end up costing the city dearly when a court, hopefully, orders refunds of all the tickets issued under this program.

By: houston

houston — Sat, 12 Apr 2008 13:39:29 +0000

the revenue gestapo strikes again.
and it will keep up until someone files suit
on the short yellow lights. where is the ACLU
when they are needed?

By: Harvey Lacey

Harvey Lacey — Sat, 12 Apr 2008 13:15:11 +0000

If this is true it really really sucks.

There are two things that will deter red light running. The most economical is longer yellows. The most efficient is the cameras.

As I understand it immediately after the installation of a red light camera there is a flood of tickets issued. Then the number tapers off to a trickle.

This tells us two things about red light runners. It’s basically the same people who do it. They can be taught not to do it.

Shortening the yellows is typical of the mindset about everything must be a source of revenue. Once an activity is viewed as a profit center then the next step is to make it more profitable.

By: peter

peter — Sat, 12 Apr 2008 01:12:50 +0000

Uh, it says
“Six U.S. cities have been found guilty of shortening the amber cycles below what is allowed by law on intersections equipped with cameras meant to catch red-light runners.”

By: Bob

Bob — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 21:51:31 +0000

Your alert FBvian has misquoted his source. According to his source, “Dallas likewise installed the cameras at locations with existing short yellow times.” Apparently, Dallas has NOT shortened the yellow light time, but it has installed cameras at intersections that already had shorter yellow light times. So is the problem with the cameras, or the shorter yellow times?

By: Melissa

Melissa — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 21:24:20 +0000

I go through the intersection of Greenville and Mockingbird (mentioned in the article) at least 10 times a week. I haven’t noticed shorter yellow lights, but I’m almost always turning right (westbound) onto Mockingbird. I have noticed the cameras flashing when the traffic was moving on Mockingbird, taking of picture of what I’m not sure. I’m assuming most of these tickets are from turning west onto Mockingbird from north bound Greenville – always a very short cycle. Get on Matilda, people, and avoid the intersection all together.