Hacker News Reader

Comment by capnrefsmmat | Hacker News Reader

> Turning right on red is one of those idea that once you've been exposed to it you wonder why isn't everybody adopting it...

It was first introduced in the 70s in the US in response to high oil prices, and only after road safety tests apparently demonstrated its safety. But since then there's been a fair amount of research indicating it increases accidents and pedestrian fatalities, amounting to somewhere under 100 deaths per year. The original studies were not large enough to detect the effect.

https://www.statisticsdonewrong.com/power.html#the-wrong-tur...

View on HN

And now, turning right on a red light is just a cash cow for the slimy red light camera companies. Some areas report that upwards of 95% of the tickets issued by red light cameras were for not stopping for 6 seconds before turning right on a red light.

("In a two-month period in 2010 in South San Francisco, 98 percent of the 672 red-light violations recorded at El Camino Real and Westborough Boulevard were for right turns. Other cities say 4 in 5 tickets go to people turning right at intersections."

http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/01/06/roadshow-right-on-red-...

> "And now, turning right on a red light is just a cash cow for the slimy red light camera companies."

Hm? I'm pretty sure that revenues from red light camera tickets generally go to municipalities, not the companies that make the cameras themselves.

The cameras are sold as a service, so the companies only make money if there are enough tickets for the municipality to justify the expense.

Sure, but the vast majority of the funds from tickets go to the city - that's who it's really a "cash cow" for. And the municipalities are the ones actually making the rules that govern the tickets themselves. Why "slimy companies", and not "slimy City Halls"?

Look up "redflex bribery" and you'll see why.

But yes, city hall is slimy as well. Citizens do not get any say in the matter. Citizens do not get to vote to add red light cameras. You just see them going up, and fighting them is a long, hard road. Some cities in Texas have finally banned them, fortunately.

Redflex/etc are definitely profiting plenty off of the devices. No question about that.

I thought California DMV rules only said you had to treat a red-light right like a stop sign. Make a complete stop then move. I don't recall reading anything about 6 seconds and the article doesn't mention that either.

NB: you should always make a complete stop when turning right on red (even if state regs don't require it). And slow down a LOT when turning right in general. There's always a risk of hitting a pedestrian or bicyclist coming up from behind you.

Apparently I was wrong about the 6 second thing. That's how long the cameras are recording before and after you trigger them. oops.

If modern fuel-injected cars had automagic engine running management a-la hybrids, mucho idling gas could be saved. Modern engines apparently can save gas by shutting off if expected to stop for any more than 10 seconds.

http://www.aarp.org/money/budgeting-saving/info-05-2009/ask_...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com