Open Letter From a Cop
in [Drive]
|
Prev: NM gov asks drivers to hang up their cell phones
Next: Surprise: North Korea is part of the Kyoto Protocol!??????????????????????????
From: Paul Hovnanian P.E. on 6 May 2010 14:39 Brent wrote: [snip] > Don't forget the RLCs set for right on red ticketing... Very rarely the > cause of a collision but very profitable with mechanical enforcement. > IME the problem with right on red isn't people not coming to a complete > stop it's failure to accelerate after. I LIKE draconian stop-on-red, yield right-of-way laws. But only when they are enforced by a cop with some sense of judgment. I don't care if someone oozes through an intersection when there's no crossing traffic. Big deal. No harm, no foul. But the RLCs don't catch the people that come to a full stop on red, stare straight at me as I'm approaching (on green) from their side, and then pull out anyway. If the cops don't like watching for this sort of stuff, then I say 'Fine'. Replace them with cameras. To the cycle cop that thinks his job is nothing more than being a meatbag speed camera, I say we can save a bundle of money by replacing you. One camera can probably 'write' as many tickets as half a dozen cops, work 24/7, and not tie up tables at Denny's. City councils should be required to let go X cops for every camera they hang. -- Paul Hovnanian paul(a)hovnanian.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Have gnu, will travel.
From: Brent on 6 May 2010 15:18 On 2010-05-06, Paul Hovnanian P.E. <paul(a)hovnanian.com> wrote: > Brent wrote: > > [snip] >> Don't forget the RLCs set for right on red ticketing... Very rarely the >> cause of a collision but very profitable with mechanical enforcement. >> IME the problem with right on red isn't people not coming to a complete >> stop it's failure to accelerate after. > > I LIKE draconian stop-on-red, yield right-of-way laws. But only when they > are enforced by a cop with some sense of judgment. The cops often have no judgement other than 'can I get another point towards my performance objectives'. > I don't care if someone oozes through an intersection when there's no > crossing traffic. Big deal. No harm, no foul. Cops will ticket like an RLC. As I discussed in this group before, some years ago I got a ticket for right on red without stopping. It was an odd intersection with the cross walk 40 some feet before the plane of the intersection. I passed the crosswalk on green entered the plane of the intersection red. I got ticketed. Odds are because I actually accelerated once I saw the condition of the light had changed and was beyond the point of no return. > But the RLCs don't catch the > people that come to a full stop on red, stare straight at me as I'm > approaching (on green) from their side, and then pull out anyway. Of course not, and they are the real hazard. > If the cops don't like watching for this sort of stuff, then I say 'Fine'. Real cops don't stop the pull-out-in-front-you-sloths either.
From: Jim Yanik on 6 May 2010 15:58
"Paul Hovnanian P.E." <paul(a)hovnanian.com> wrote in news:Df-dnaTPJIYZkX7WnZ2dnUVZ_g2dnZ2d(a)posted.isomediainc: > Brent wrote: > > [snip] >> Don't forget the RLCs set for right on red ticketing... Very rarely >> the cause of a collision but very profitable with mechanical >> enforcement. IME the problem with right on red isn't people not >> coming to a complete stop it's failure to accelerate after. > > I LIKE draconian stop-on-red, yield right-of-way laws. But only when > they are enforced by a cop with some sense of judgment. > > I don't care if someone oozes through an intersection when there's no > crossing traffic. Big deal. No harm, no foul. But the RLCs don't catch > the people that come to a full stop on red, stare straight at me as > I'm approaching (on green) from their side, and then pull out anyway. > > If the cops don't like watching for this sort of stuff, then I say > 'Fine'. Replace them with cameras. To the cycle cop that thinks his > job is nothing more than being a meatbag speed camera, I say we can > save a bundle of money by replacing you. One camera can probably > 'write' as many tickets as half a dozen cops, work 24/7, and not tie > up tables at Denny's. City councils should be required to let go X > cops for every camera they hang. > I don't like the RLC cams because generally,the ticket does not award points on the operator's license,so it can't be revoked for running too many RLs. It's just a revenue generator,then. One other major beef; one could run many red lights before they get their -FIRST- RLC ticket in the mail,it could be weeks before the first ticket arrives;it doesn't give the driver opportunity to change their behavior before getting the next ticket. This is one more indication of RLCs are a revenue source rather than safety enforcement. Since RLrunning is a cause of SEVERE accidents and severe injuries to people,and also a critical part of traffic flow,it should be getting high priority HUMAN enforcement,so that not only the driver has to endure the traffic stop,other drivers SEE the stop and it does affect their driving behavior. They SEE that the laws are being enforced.That -is- important. IMO,police should have their radar and laser speed guns taken away from them,and go back to real traffic enforcement. "speed" is not the problem. -- Jim Yanik jyanik at localnet dot com |