February 15, 2007
THUS MORALITY REQUIRES GOD:
Research: Red-light cameras work (Larry Copeland, 2/15/07, USA TODAY)
Surveillance cameras at major intersections dramatically reduce the number of drivers who barrel through red lights, two new research reports say.Posted by Orrin Judd at February 15, 2007 8:20 AM
They also, however, increase the number of rear-end collisions because of drivers breaking hard suddenly rather than going through a yellow. Also, this study had the period of time in which the lights remained amber extended. By contrast, many locales installing the lights have actually shortened the yellow time in order to get more fines.
Posted by: John Thacker at February 15, 2007 9:45 AMActually, I have no sympathy for those people who rear-end the guy who suddenly has an attack of conscience at the mere thought of a "red-light ticket." Those are the people who see someone already blocking the intersection and then deliberately take advantage of it. Serves 'em right.
(And I've also noticed that these same people who follow through are often yakking into a cell phone.)
Posted by: Raoul Ortega at February 15, 2007 9:49 AMNo one will have a second rear end collision.
Posted by: oj at February 15, 2007 12:20 PMGosh, I wish you had told me that last year when I had two such collisions neither of which was credited to me.
Posted by: erp at February 15, 2007 12:23 PMBack when I was about 8, my dad had 4 accidents involving nuns in about an 18-month period. I was with him for one, and I will never forget the look on the nun's face when she got out of the car to see what had happened.
If only we had been Irish.
Posted by: jim hamlen at February 15, 2007 12:34 PM1) I shudder to think what society would be like were the run of humanity cut loose from the perception of an all-knowing and all-just God. Given the accusations of scrupulosity I endure, even at this site, when I suggest that our everyday activities have a moral dimension, I shudder a great deal.
2) As an old-time taxicab driver, I have little sympathy for rear-ending drivers who are "surprised" when someone ahead of them stops at an intersection. Every intersection is an emergency stop hazard. If you hit him, you were following too closely and going too fast for conditions.
3) The reference in the article to a "constitutional" objection to surveillance cameras seems ridiculous. It is most likely that a lower or intermediate court had been cutting a break for someone whose license was at stake. What could be more in plain view than an open intersection? Surveillance cameras seem unfair to the sneaks and cheats who want to tell themselves that an act is only wrong if one is caught.
4) Three nuns are driving along as nuns drive, and straightaway they are standing before the gates of heaven, pearly, shining gates, extending upward as high as imaginable. St Peter comes out through a small door, and addresses them, "All right sisters, I know you've been with the firm and all, but we have now have to give everyone a test of bibical knowledge before letting them in. So I'm going to ask each of you one question. Sister, You're first: who was the first man?" Relieved at such an easy question, the nun replies, "It was Adam!"
Straightaway a trumpet rings out, "Ta-ta-ta-ta-taa," from behind the gates, they swing open, the nun walks in, and they slam shut.
St. Peter addresses the second nun, O.K., sister, you're next: who was the first woman?" "I know," the second nun exclaims, "It was Eve." "Ta-ta-ta-ta-taa" the heavenly trumpets peal forth. The gates open, the second nun walks in, and again, they slam shut.
"Now sister," St. Peter says, turning to the last nun, you get the last question. Tell me, what were the first words ever spoken?" Hand on her chin, the third nun gasps, "Wow! That's a hard one!" "Ta-ta-ta-ta-taa!"
Posted by: Lou Gots at February 15, 2007 2:05 PM
Actually, I have no sympathy for those people who rear-end the guy who suddenly has an attack of conscience at the mere thought of a "red-light ticket." Those are the people who see someone already blocking the intersection and then deliberately take advantage of it. Serves 'em right.
Yes. But I have sympathy for the person who gets rear-ended. What do you do if someone is tailing you closely at the light? Slam on the brakes and get rear-ended? Or go through and get the ticket?
The bastard who's tailgating you gets away in either case. It's not as though it's not an incredible hassle when you get rear-ended, your fault or not. How exactly do you propose to prevent people from rear-ending you? Particularly when, as is the case in some places, the amber length has been shortened?
Posted by: John Thacker at February 15, 2007 5:04 PMThey'll stop.
Posted by: oj at February 15, 2007 5:24 PMA 0%/100%, sore-neck rear ender--Ka-ching!
Posted by: Lou Gots at February 15, 2007 8:59 PM