Red Light Cameras

[musicman]

You'd now better make certain that you come to a complete stop before turning right on red. The front page of today's Chronicle says that you'll get a ticket if one of those red light camera films you making what they call a "California Stop."

yeah...luckily city council tabled it this week.

[musicman]

You are misunderstanding a little bit. I am saying cameras in general (not just red light cameras) to help twart crimes or eventually catch crimes on tape is a GOOD thing. "Big Brother" watching me burn through a stop light doesn't lead me to believe that he will force me to install a camera in my house next week. Red light cameras are being installed for a purpose, in order to better use our police force elsewhere as needed. Don't you get that ?

Cameras are fine as long as i'm not paying for them. in the mall, at the bank, etc. just fine. as for better using our police force, guess who's back in the video room monitoring the video, your friendly neighborhood HPD officer. Wouldn't it be better if they are visibly in the street?

Do you honestly believe red light cameras aren't cutting down on red light runnings. If you know where they are, are you going to avoid that intersection, just because you MUST RUN RED LIGHTS, and you just can't help yourself ? Or, will you be a little more wary of where the cameras are, and most likely NOT run the intersection.

I go through 2 quite frequently, i don't drive any differently as far as i know. if i do, i'm sure you'd see me on america's most wanted. we have sooo many other things that the city should be enforcing that would give you and me a better quality of life. i'm just not sure the mayor's priorities are in the right place. and the only reason they are red light oriented is money.

Edited August 23, 2007 by musicman

[CDeb]

we have sooo many other things that the city should be enforcing that would give you and me a better quality of life.

That is exactly the point TJones is trying to make, muse.

Cameras mean that officers don't have to babysit intersections and are free to enforce all those other things you cite.

[musicman]

Cameras mean that officers don't have to babysit intersections and are free to enforce all those other things you cite.

an HPD officer at our PIP meeting told me that they have to monitor the video so they can't be on the street.

[CDeb]

an HPD officer at our PIP meeting told me that they have to monitor the video so they can't be on the street.

They do not have to watch the 24/7 video, only confirm that the violations that the system picks up are in fact violations. That takes a heck of a lot less time than babysitting the intersection.

[musicman]

They do not have to watch the 24/7 video, only confirm that the violations that the system picks up are in fact violations. That takes a heck of a lot less time than babysitting the intersection.

a certified police officer must be there is what he told us otherwise it couldn't be used in court.....something along those lines.

[CDeb]

a certified police officer must be there is what he told us otherwise it couldn't be used in court.....something along those lines.

Right, but he merely views the violations, he doesn't watch every hour of raw footage.

[ricco67]

a certified police officer must be there is what he told us otherwise it couldn't be used in court.....something along those lines.

Surprised to see you answer a question you don't have a full answer to.

Right, but he merely views the violations, he doesn't watch every hour of raw footage.

But you're both right.

Whenever a video is shot, the contractor collects the video that might be relavent (sorting out cars that run lights for a reason, i.e. Emergency vehicles, cars to get out of the WAY for emergency vehicles, etc) and forwards those to the police. The officer then determines if someone made a violation by viewing the entire video of each incident.

[musicman]

Right, but he merely views the violations, he doesn't watch every hour of raw footage.

i don't know i'm not an officer, i am simply repeating what he told me that police won't be on the street because of they have to monitor video. next time i see him i will ask.

[CDeb]

i don't know i'm not an officer, i am simply repeating what he told me that police won't be on the street because of they have to monitor video. next time i see him i will ask.

I'd be interested to know if he's in favor of the system or not. And if not, why not.

I've talked to a few police officers about the system and they were all in favor of it, so I'd be interested in hearing a dissenting opinion from an officer.

[musicman]

Surprised to see you answer a question you don't have a full answer to.

I never claimed to have all the answers. You may think i do but i don't. that's the insecurity on your part.

I'd be interested to know if he's in favor of the system or not. And if not, why not. I've talked to a few police officers about the system and they were all in favor of it, so I'd be interested in hearing a dissenting opinion from an officer.

from the standpoint of requiring officers there he's against it i will tell you that. he's a big, on the beat, kind of officer. he knows the laws he can write tickets on, even the obscure ones. and he does it. that's what i like about him. he goes well beyond what he has to be an good officer. it's not about overtime for him.

EDIT: I have repeatedly told him "let's meet an shipley's sometime" LOL. he's cool.

Edited August 23, 2007 by musicman

[TJones]

i don't know i'm not an officer, i am simply repeating what he told me that police won't be on the street because of they have to monitor video. next time i see him i will ask.

LOL! That is one to three officers watching video, not 30 to 40 spread out at each intersection to write tickets musicman. Quit acting like you don't know this stuff. You are either ignorant to the facts or you just want to argue for the sake of arguing.

Edited August 23, 2007 by TJones

[musicman]

LOL! That is one to three officers watching video, not 30 to 40 spread out at each intersection to write tickets musicman. Quit acting like you don't know this stuff. You are either ignorant to the facts or you just want to argue for the sake of arguing.

i don't work for HPD. only info i was passing on was what the officer told me. If you do please share more. what do you do again?

[TJones]

I never claimed to have all the answers. You may think i do but i don't. that's the insecurity on your part.

from the standpoint of requiring officers there he's against it i will tell you that. he's a big, on the beat, kind of officer. he knows the laws he can write tickets on, even the obscure ones. and he does it. that's what i like about him. he goes well beyond what he has to be an good officer. it's not about overtime for him.

EDIT: I have repeatedly told him "let's meet an shipley's sometime" LOL. he's cool.

So, you are saying he is FOR the video system, and AGAINST placing officers at each intersection ?

[musicman]

So, you are saying he is FOR the video system, and AGAINST placing officers at each intersection ?

i'm saying he is against making it mandatory to have officers watching video monitors 24 hrs/day. he's a street cop and believes that's where officers should be. where do you want the officers to be?

Edited August 23, 2007 by musicman

[CDeb]

i'm saying he is against making it mandatory to have officers watching video monitors 24 hrs/day. he's a street cop and believes that's where officers should be. where do you want the officers to be?

The man-hours spent reviewing the relevant video footage from the red light cameras will replace many times more man-hours of officers enforcing red light running at intersections.

[Pumapayam]

The man-hours spent reviewing the relevant video footage from the red light cameras will replace many times more man-hours of officers enforcing red light running at intersections.

It's automatic I thought.

[TJones]

i'm saying he is against making it mandatory to have officers watching video monitors 24 hrs/day. he's a street cop and believes that's where officers should be. where do you want the officers to be?

The video isn't watched like TxDOT, only the violations are reviewed. Which would probably take one to two officers a regular working day to get through them all. They aren't snapping the pictures of the violators themselves, the cameras are automatic, so they don't have to watch the system 24/7. That is where you are confused, and apparently your cop buddy is also.

Oh, and I came by this today, whilest doing a little research:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-0...htcameras_x.htm

This was a good read also:

http://www.photocop.com/red-light.htm

[musicman]

The video isn't watched like TxDOT, only the violations are reviewed. Which would probably take one to two officers a regular working day to get through them all. They aren't snapping the pictures of the violators themselves, the cameras are automatic, so they don't have to watch the system 24/7. That is where you are confused, and apparently your cop buddy is also.Oh, and I came by this today, whilest doing a little research:http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-0...htcameras_x.htmThis was a good read also:http://www.photocop.com/red-light.htm

how does any of this relate to how HPD operates its system? no where does it mention that the officers don't have to monitor the system. what made you come to the conclusion that my "cop buddy" is confused based on these articles? are you a cop? the articles appear to be rehash from earlier posts. i'd prefer to move on.

The man-hours spent reviewing the relevant video footage from the red light cameras will replace many times more man-hours of officers enforcing red light running at intersections.

and lengthing the yellow light duration will allow more officers to patrol, not cost us a cent but yet results in less violations. shouldn't the city pursue this option too if it is REALLY ABOUT SAFETY or is it about MAKING MONEY? Edited August 23, 2007 by musicman

[CDeb]

and lengthing the yellow light duration will allow more officers to patrol, not cost us a cent but yet results in less violations. shouldn't the city pursue this option too if it is REALLY ABOUT SAFETY or is it about MAKING MONEY?

Lengthening the yellow interval WILL cost you a cent (a signal technician actually has to visit the controller to reprogram it) and does not add any enforcement. You still need a cop to babysit the intersection.

Edited August 23, 2007 by CDeb

[RedScare]

Actually, musicman, I am going to go out on a limb and say your "cop buddy" doesn't have a clue how this thing operates. The private camera company installs and operates the cameras. Their employees review all raw footage for violations, tossing close calls or other non-obvious violations. They send the clear violations to HPD by computer. There, a trained officer reviews the videos to confirm a violation, just as a supervisor reviews detective work before an arrest is made. Only one officer does it, though another is being trained as backup. One officer, clearing 13,000 to 15,000 violations per month sounds a lot more efficient than anything else HPD does.

Now, about THE MONEY. I'm curious, would you rather red light violators pay $75 per violation, or would you rather pay more property taxes?

[TJones]

Just got off the phone with my cop buddies, yes plural. I was wrong, there are actually 4 guys that filter through all the remotely triggered shots taken throughout the day of ALL the cameras around town. They DO NOT sit there and watch video all day. The only time they watch video is when the shot is questionable or the shot is challenged in court. They agree that they think it is a money generator, which is what we all here seem to agree on. They also agree it allows them to be other places rather than having to slap the hands of red light violators because they aren't paying attention to their surroundings.

[musicman]

Lengthening the yellow interval WILL cost you a cent (a signal technician actually has to visit the controller to reprogram it) and does not add any enforcement. You still need a cop to babysit the intersection.

there are technicians all over town every day fixing signal lights. this isn't an arduous task.

for me the issue comes down to safety, if the city really does care about our safety, the yellow might method can be implemented now with no new hardware and be implemented ALL OVER HOUSTON, not just 50 intersections (or whatever the number is now).

[musicman]

One officer, clearing 13,000 to 15,000 violations per month sounds a lot more efficient than anything else HPD does.

Now, about THE MONEY. I'm curious, would you rather red light violators pay $75 per violation, or would you rather pay more property taxes?

i will give you the efficiency increase red as for the taxes, i don't mind other people (including myself) paying $75 per violation if it really is about safety. i'm not convinced safety is the primary reason otherwise the city would be doing other things to improve safety such as lengthening the yellow light duration AND installing crossing arms at all railroad crossings.......but unfortunately these aren't money makers for the city.

[musicman]

Just got off the phone with my cop buddies, yes plural. I was wrong, there are actually 4 guys that filter through all the remotely triggered shots taken throughout the day of ALL the cameras around town. They DO NOT sit there and watch video all day. The only time they watch video is when the shot is questionable or the shot is challenged in court. They agree that they think it is a money generator, which is what we all here seem to agree on. They also agree it allows them to be other places rather than having to slap the hands of red light violators because they aren't paying attention to their surroundings.

TJ i can believe this. good info.

EDIT: and no one called anyone an idiot.

Edited August 23, 2007 by musicman

[TJones]

TJ i can believe this. good info.

EDIT: and no one called anyone an idiot.

I got no reason to lie to you musicman, because I am not trying to get into your pants.

[musicman]

I got no reason to lie to you musicman, because I am not trying to get into your pants.

thankfully not cause i ate a big lunch.

[northbeaumont]

The man-hours spent reviewing the relevant video footage from the red light cameras will replace many times more man-hours of officers enforcing red light running at intersections.

Why doesn't HPD simply outsource that job to somewhere in India? Almost everyplace in the U.S. is doing that.

[musicman]

Why doesn't HPD simply outsource that job to somewhere in India? Almost everyplace in the U.S. is doing that.

i think with the history of problems HPD has had with outsourcing (crime lab, evidence room, etc) it would be in their best interest to maintain control.

[northbeaumont]

i think with the history of problems HPD has had with outsourcing (crime lab, evidence room, etc) it would be in their best interest to maintain control.

Outsouring really irritates me. Everytime I call Tracfone to ask about my cell phone service, it's someone overseas. Same thing when I call TransUnion to ask about my credit record.