62 replies to this topic

[Rich_T]

I'm coming in late here, well into Page 4 of the comments. I side with Darth Lefty. I, an unassuming, low-key, law-abiding citizen, do believe that most of these tickets are a money-making scam perpetrated by the state against the people on whose behalf the state government exists.

Sure, some red-light running is blatant and dangerous, and should certainly be punished. But probably most infractions would be best served with a warning. The reason this doesn't happen is money.

One example of this "running a red light" topic is the right turn from Blue Ravine onto Folsom Blvd, over the light rail tracks. So many people get tickets for that. They come up to the red light, sort of stop, then turn right before the hordes of waiting cars on the left get their green light, after which one must wait 2-3 minutes before getting a chance to turn right. So people come to a "California stop", take a look left to make sure it's safe, then go. Out comes the hidden motorcycle cop, and bam! - a ticket for "running the red light". This has not happened to me, but has happened to people I know. (Yes, there is a sign stating "stop here at red light", but the sign is off to the right, and most people are looking left at that instant.)

Hey, I don't endorse trying to get people out of paying tickets when reckless driving is involved. But most red-light running involves safe judgment - i.e. you see no one else in any direction, and the light suddenly turns too soon, with you going maybe 5 mph too fast, at which point slamming on the brakes feels unnatural, as opposed to sprinting through the light.

I don't agree with those who say "you're lucky you didn't kill someone", because that's not the same as plowing belatedly through a busy intersection. After all, just because someone puts in 20 stoplights on Riley or Iron Point or whichever street, doesn't mean that now it's automatically dangerous to do a "California stop" at a given stop sign in a given situation (i.e. no one around). Signs are "dumb", so they always assume the lowest denominator for risk. In fact, it's downright annoying to come up to a four-way stop, with great visibility, no other cars except the three in front of you who demonstrably sit and wait 5 seconds at the stop sign before proceeding, when a "quick stop" would serve just as well.

Judgment and common sense may sometimes lead to rules not being followed to the letter of the law. That belief does not give people license to break laws willfully, but it does mean that the occasional harmless transgression should involve a warning at most, at least the first time.

[Robert Gary]

Sure, some red-light running is blatant and dangerous, and should certainly be punished. But probably most infractions would be best served with a warning. The reason this doesn't happen is money.

When I got mine I was written up for going 3 mph through a red light while turning red (the ticket said 3mph on it). Not being dangerous (no reckless citation). However, this shows up as a redlight violation on your record, much worse than a speeding ticket. That's why I hired an attorney to make it go away. With the high price of tickets now its worth having an attorney.

If I got a ticket on my record, even for something like this it raises my insurance premiums on my cars, my boat and even my airplane in some cases.

-Robert

[camay2327]

VERY IMPORTANT. PLEASE READ...

I read in the San Francisco Chronicle the other day that the price of running a red light has gone way, way up. Think twice folks. I think this includes the rolling stops on a right turn.
I know I will be making sure I stop from now on. No more rolling through.



http://www.sfgate.co...?...=005&sc=471

Roll through a red, fork over the green
Phillip Matier,Andrew Ross

Monday, March 2, 2009

Like a lot of California drivers, Dave Soss just got a $490 lesson on how the state budget really works.

It all began when Soss, who lives in the East Bay, was ticketed Feb. 1 for rolling through a red light while making a right turn in Emeryville - and was hit with what he called a "mind-blowing" penalty.

For starters, there was the $100 base fine. Most of that goes to Emeryville, and the leftovers go to Alameda County.

Then comes the real hit:

-- A $100 state penalty - $70 of which is divvied up among a dozen programs, including crime-victim restitution, witness protection, a Department of Fish and Game preservation fund and even a fund for victims of traumatic brain injuries. The other $30 goes to the county's general fund.

-- A $70 county penalty that goes for automated fingerprint identification, court and jail construction and other programs.

-- A $20 penalty for a state DNA crime evidence collection program.

-- A $55 fee for more court construction.

-- A $20 assessment for the county's emergency medical system.

-- A $20 court security fee to pay for all those deputies and screening devices at the county's courthouses.

-- And a $20 surcharge that goes straight into the state's general fund.

But wait - there's more, including:

// go to the above website and read the rest //