this is in the news again. Barnes & Company are moving forward with getting the formalities taken care of. The news report did emphasize that the whole idea is going to be evaluated based on safety after a year of operation, not just revenue for the city...so they say. I'll believe it when I see it.

i seem to remember running a red light in omaha that had a camera on it about 4 years ago...never got a ticket, but i was a bit 'fraid.

In remote areas of New Zealand they have speed cameras.  Watch out.

i'm glad that kansas city once again has it's priorities in check 

They have photo radar on the 101 in Scottsdale.  I was driving therabout a month ago, and I saw the flash, immediately looked at my speedometer, and saw that I was going 70 in a 65, then looked to the left and saw that I was going with the flow of traffic.  A couple weeks later, I recieved my ticket in the mail.  It said that I was going 76 (conveniently exactly 11 miles over the spped limit).  I did some research and found that those things are pretty unreliable, that they will sometimes pan across the car and clock you at a higher rate than what you are doing.  I wanted to fight, but was told that Scottsdale judges don't really let you get by with much.  Also, if you don;t respond to the mailing, they will serve you physically (and Scottsdale will do that inside the valley) and then you will be charged an additional fine to pay for that.  There is also a redlight camera near my school.  I'm sure thsoe things cause accidents as people slam on their breaks to avoid getting ticketed.

These things are badnews- fight it- keep it out of KC.

The only bad thing I see is that it is inaccurate, which if true, should be fixable.  What else is bad about it?

I don't have data to back this up, but it can't be safe for traffic to be flowing at 70 mph, then for some drivers to see the cameras and slam on the brakes.  Also, with a traffic cop, he can see the flow of traffic and take that into account.  If traffic is going 75 mph, he isn't going to be pulling people over, butthe camera doesn't care.  It is also hard to fight in court.  Even if you are innocent (as I was) you can;t go to court and say "I wasn't speeding".  You have to find procedural loopholes.  In places like Scottsdale, it is purly a money making venture.  The courts will back the city.

Any lawyers know if I could demand a jury trial, based on the 8th amendment? 

Aside from the likely false pretenses under which this is being supported; the societal acceptance of further sliding toward a surveillance society; the inevitable increased rear-end accidents; the fact that traffic deaths keep going generally up, not down, despite that many cities have invested in these things; and the fact that according to research, the purported objective of the cameras can be acheived simply by elongated the yellow cycle...why are we even considering these?

Because they make lots of people feel warm and fuzzy, and they make lots of money (hundreds of thousands of dollars per year) for cities.

Generally speaking, if a majority of people think it's a good idea, it's probably a very bad idea...

Has anyone noticed the traffic camera, north of the river, at 72nd and North Oak?  Two gray boxes mounted on the northwest corner of the intersection.  Looks like a red light camera.. its aimed directly at the center of the intersection.

Are these the 1st in the city?

There should be 4, along with the strobe light to illuminate the front plate. We are stuck with them here in Oregon. I guess That's one advantage to having a car licensed in Ks.; you can flip the bird at the camera as you cruise thru.

I just found a article..

Earlier this month, the city chose a Maryland company, Traffitax Inc., to install a red-light camera system at no cost to the taxpayers, said city engineer Gregory Rokos. The contract is still being negotiated, but the basic plan calls for the company to receive a flat fee — paid from fine revenues — regardless of how many cameras go up.

Camera locations will be based on traffic studies and accident reports. The number of intersections covered could be anywhere from 10 to 50.

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascit ... 926268.htm

Yea, as long as you plan on never going back.  So are they speed cameras or red light cameras?

We have mobile speed vans and Red light cameras.

Someone got arrested for that in Scottsdale.  AZ has only back plates too.

they're discussing red light cameras at the infrastructure committee working session this week. apparently the new council put the effort on hold until they're all up to speed.

The Council has officially voted to install red light cameras in KCMO - despite increasing national scepticism about their value/effectiveness.  Better get those brake pads checked. 

KCK already has several Red Light Cameras in place.  Everytime I get stuck at a red light (after several cycles, that is), there's no choice but to run it.  I have had to "run" red lights in KCK about 5 -10 times in the past 2 years or so.  I have yet to get a ticket in the mail.

I mean, I don't make it a habbit of running red lights.  But, when you're stopped and all the other lights have gone through their cycles several times, what else are you supposed to do?

smile. Big Brother is watching you.

If you want to turn right, turn R.
If you want to go straight, turn R, L, L, R.
If you want to turn left, turn R, Powerslide U.  They don't have cameras set up in the middle of the block, do they?