No More Red Light Cameras? Here's What Beach Residents Are Saying
As the Florida House of Representatives considers outlawing red light cameras around the state, here's what some Patch readers had to say on the subject.
Since we told you last week about a bill under consideration by the Florida House of Representatives that would strike down the use of red light cameras, Patch readers have had plenty to say on the topic.
Our story, Red Light Cameras: Should They Stay or Go?, received more than 120 comments as of Tuesday night. Here's what one Pinellas Beaches Patch reader had to say:
Sophia: "The owner of the camera gets $50 for every ticket I read. Hum. People don't have an extra $158.00 cruel. Try making the Yellow light longer not a split second."
Mary Lou Murphy, on the Pinellas Beaches Patch Facebook page: "ABSOLUTELY ! My Northern visitors say, " gee, no-one who drives here pays attention to rules of the road " Stats in Florida are, " we are 2x as likely to die from vehicular accident"
Do you agree? Should red light cameras be banned in Florida? Why or why not? Share your thoughts in the comments section below to continue the conversation.
Owen l
9:25 am on Thursday, February 21, 2013
Its raining oh sh t a cameara should I slam brakes or go there is no yellow lt its a scam goes grn to red in a split second thats safe?
One St Pete Beach resident
9:34 am on Thursday, February 21, 2013
They sometimes seem to be a nuisance, but they do influence people to slow down. I don't want to this of them as a revenue generating operation, although this is always what is discussed. I also believe it is much too profitable.
Gary Huckleberry
10:09 am on Thursday, February 21, 2013
The United States Of Extortion.
Abacus
11:25 am on Thursday, February 21, 2013
I hate them. I think they are unsafe, as locals know the yellow light lasts a second at most, and we must slam on the brakes at the first glimpse of Yellow (even at 35-40 mph for example, thus increasing odds of getting rear ended). They need to be eliminated and yellow light time length extended.
SRQDude
8:43 pm on Thursday, February 21, 2013
Well, the PROOF that those cameras are primarily there as a money-making scheme is that the "Photo Enforced" signs are way off to the side so they're hard to see and easy to miss. If the cameras were REALLY there for increased safety, then those signs would be hung right up on the crossbar next to the light, like the "No Turn On Red" signs are.
Paul Henry
2:18 am on Friday, February 22, 2013
Telling in the St. Petersburg use of automated for-profit enforcement are two things:
1. When the transportation director made a claim of a 60% reduction in red light "related" crashes, I asked for the crash data to support this claim. I received 38 crash reports for equal time periods for the 3 years prior to automated for-profit enforcement and one year after (each were the same 6 months for each year). The results were 6, 12, 10, and 10. There was no change from the year prior to the year after, and the average went from 9.3 to 10, a 7% increase.
2. City staff misled the council with incomplete and erroneous crash data.
Automated for-profit law enforcement is a bad idea, and it is un-American. Support the 2013 Florida Motorist Rights Restoration Act.
Bruce
10:08 pm on Sunday, February 24, 2013
Across the country these camera's have solved a lot of crimes that otherwise would have not been solved. I am certainly against them being used for profit, but they do serve a viable function if used in a correct context.