Talk:Traffic enforcement camera

Archives of past discussion

Archive 1
Archive 2

Merger proposal

I propose merging the content of Red light camera into this article. Both articles as they presently stand are fairly solid bases for a good bit of improvement, and merging them will coördinate editors' efforts more efficiently, without duplicative work. —Scheinwerfermann ^T·_C07:34, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Support. Red-light cameras are a subset of this topic.Socrates2008 (Talk) 10:04, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

I oppose a merge at this stage. They are different topics. There is nothing in either of those posts (especially the second!), which tells me why they should be merged, apart from some hypothetical ease of editing. To merge two different topics needs better logic than that. HiLo48 (talk) 10:46, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

I oppose a merge at this stage. Currently the three main uses for these cameras have their own articles and each article has a good deal of content in its own right. What benefits would a merge bring and how do you propose to stop the merge unbalancing the article? If you can see how to improve the articles then please do so, but please do it as two separate articles. PeterEastern (talk) 15:23, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Oppose. Initially I was minded to support, however on reflection and considering the RLC article is pretty long and detailed I oppose a merge at this stage. Springnuts (talk) 20:46, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Oppose. Red light cameras are specific and detailed enough to need its own article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frmorrison (talk • contribs) 14:19, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Oppose While it is a sub-article, the Red-Light Camera Article goes into way more detail, and alot of that would be lost if it was merged into this article. Garrett247 (talk) 09:12, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Controversy section is mostly negative POV. Where's the positive POV?

I like these cameras. I don't break the law. They discourage others from doing so.

Can I add a section saying that?

I think I know the answer, but isn't this a classic example of the problems of having a Controversy section? Those wanting to complain have been given an outlet by Wikipedia. Those who like these things haven't. That's a total lack of balance. HiLo48 (talk) 21:53, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

First use of photo radar in the United States - Traffic Monitoring Technologies

Regarding "The first speed camera systems in the USA was in Friendswood, Texas in 1986 and La Marque, Texas in 1987.[40] Neither program lasted more than a few months before public pressure forced them to be dropped." and "In 1992 cameras have been rejected by voters in referenda in Batavia, Illinois."

The company involved in these contracts was Traffic Monitoring Technologies. I introduced the two founders of Traffic Monitoring Technologies and was the very first employee.

The only use of photo radar in Friendswood, the location of the offices of Traffic Monitoring Technologies, was for R&D and testing. No contract was ever signed with the city of Friendswood and no citations were ever issued in that jurisdiction.

The first contract was with Galveston County and the radar was operated only on Interstate 45 in the south portion of League City and a little to the south. For what it's worth, I was on location in the inside median southbound on I45 for the first photo radar session in that contract for which citations were issued. That contract lasted for approximately 18 months and was not voted out by voter referendum. To the contrary, the Galveston County Constable involved decided to shut it down. My recollection is that the Galveston County commissioners would have been happy to see it keep going.

The contract with the City of La Marque lasted for less than a year. I don't remember if it was voted out by voters or by the city council.

The third contract was with the City of Paradise Valley, Arizona and the fourth with Pasadena, California.

As for Batavia, Illinois, only a few warnings were issued, no citations at all. There was a non-binding referendum to stop the use of photo radar. Initially, the city council seemed to be ready to disregard the referendum, but then they turned around and voted to cancel the project catching us completely by surprise.

65.68.190.232 (talk) 09:48, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Other potential uses of camera systems, but not necessarily traffic.

At Traffic Monitoring Technologies, the first American photo radar company, we were approached about other automatic camera systems including some that are already listed in the "Other" section.

Some that aren't listed (and aren't necessarily involved in traffic law enforcement):

1) Weight in motion -- to measure the weight of trucks on the road and issue citations if over the weight limit.

A side issue involved weighing the very large trucks in a strip mine to determine how much ore each truck was carrying. Knowing the density of the ore and the shape of the cargo bed of the truck, we thought about using lasers to measure the height of the ore to determine the volume of the ore and thus the total weight.

2) Front plate citations -- this has been done on a limited scale. In one of the early photo-radar contracts with Traffic Monitoring Technologies, a limited number of citations was issued for vehicles with no front license plates. I don't remember if we did this in Paradise Valley, Arizona or in Peoria, Arizona.

The operation of the photo radar unit took a picture from the front and then waited a period of time based on the observed speed before taking a picture with a camera attached to the front of the vehicle. If there was no front license plate and the back plate was issued by that state, then a citation was issued for no front license plate. Thus, the owner of the vehicle would receive two separate citations in the mail -- speeding and no front license plate. However, this was done with the existing, unmodified unit and incidental to the issue of the speeding citation.

It is very unlikely that there is any record on the Internet about this. It was done prior to the existence of the web and relatively few citations were issued.

3) Airport noise -- to measure the noise of departing aircraft at night for noise abatement.

4) Pollution measurement -- to measure the exhaust of passing vehicles and issue citations to those with excessive emissions.

I don't know if any of these have been fully developed and put into use.

65.68.190.232 (talk) 22:00, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

65.68.190.232 (talk) 23:17, 28 January 2012 (UTC)