This week's set has just been posted:

http://puzzlephotos.blogspot.com/


Rob

R.H. wrote:
This week's set has just been posted:

http://puzzlephotos.blogspot.com/


Rob


830 - Ice Saw - for cutting antural ice into blocks during the 'ice harvest'

832 - traffic/secutity camera

Howard Garner in RCM

Hey Rob,

829 = ??? maybe a tin-roofers tool

830 = Ice saw

831 = Ice "Rake", missing the wooden handle. Used to move blocks of
ice cut with 830.

832 = Well, the largest part atop the pole is the bracket to hold the
other items. The largest piece attached to that is a lamp housing
with light sensor above, and the cameras mounted as they are would
speak "Video Surveillance", and my guess would be of a parking lot.

833 = ?? not a clue

834 = Jaw set removed from a brace & bit.

Take care.

Brian Lawson,
Bothwell, Ontario.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

On Thu, 23 Nov 2006 11:10:42 GMT, "R.H." wrote:

This week's set has just been posted:

http://puzzlephotos.blogspot.com/


Rob

#830 is used for cutting blocks of ice.

#832 are security cameras

#834 looks like a nutcracker

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
http://juliewaters.com/

We've heard that a million monkeys at a million
keyboards could produce the Complete Works of
Shakespeare; now, thanks to the Internet, we know
this is not true.

--Robert Wilensky, University of California

On Thu, 23 Nov 2006 11:10:42 GMT, "R.H." wrote:

This week's set has just been posted:

http://puzzlephotos.blogspot.com/


Rob



#830 looks like an ice saw, used to cut blocks of ice from a frozen
pond or river.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

832- detect the presents of a vehicle at a traffic light ( not very
effective they removed them from the area where I work)
834- jaws from a wood brace (hand drill)


R.H. wrote:

This week's set has just been posted:

http://puzzlephotos.blogspot.com/


Rob

I think 834 is a set of jaws from a bitbrace.

Paul K. Dickman

"R.H." wrote in message
. ..
This week's set has just been posted:

http://puzzlephotos.blogspot.com/


Rob

"R.H." wrote in message
. ..
This week's set has just been posted:

http://puzzlephotos.blogspot.com/


Rob



832. Traffic control sensor. Used to change the traffic light to green
when an emergency vehicle approaches the intersection.

Paul K. Dickman wrote:
I think 834 is a set of jaws from a bitbrace.

Paul K. Dickman

"R.H." wrote in message
. ..
This week's set has just been posted:

http://puzzlephotos.blogspot.com/


Rob




You are probably right but it is just "brace"
e.g. brace and bit.

Leon wrote:
"R.H." wrote in message
. ..
This week's set has just been posted:

http://puzzlephotos.blogspot.com/


Rob



832. Traffic control sensor. Used to change the traffic light to green
when an emergency vehicle approaches the intersection.



Not in my area. It is just a regular traffic
camera. Emergency sensors are much smaller where
I live (about the size of the knob atop the light).

In article , R.H.
wrote:

This week's set has just been posted:

http://puzzlephotos.blogspot.com/


830: Saw for cutting ice blocks out of a lake

832: Security cameras or radar guns?

830 is a saw for sawing blocks of ice from bodies of water
832 is a camera for observing traffic at intersections.
834 is a chuck to hold drill bits in a brace.




"R.H." wrote in message
. ..
This week's set has just been posted:

http://puzzlephotos.blogspot.com/


Rob

829. A tool for spoked wooden wheels.
830. Ice saw
831. At first I thought it was a dog to raise one log over another for
bucking, but I would have expected to see some hammer marks on it.
832. Security or traffic cameras.
833. Saw set for two man saws
834. Hand brace jaws

R

"Frank S." wrote in message
news
832- detect the presents of a vehicle at a traffic light ( not very
effective they removed them from the area where I work)

This answer is correct, though a couple times a week I go through several
different intersections that have these for detecting cars in the left turn
lane, and they have worked every time. Maybe the system where you work was
earlier technology or used different equipment.

Rob

R.H. wrote:

This answer is correct, though a couple times a week I go through
several
different intersections that have these for detecting cars in the
left turn
lane, and they have worked every time.

Based on what is happening right now in Los Angeles, that one belongs
in a museum.

L/A is spending about $1 meg per intersection not only to install
sensors, but also cameras that take a pictures of the vehicle and the
license plate complete with date and time stamp when you try to run a
red light.

Traffic ticket arrives in the mail, stands up in court, and is
expensive, at least by my standards.

Lew

In article . net, Lew
Hodgett wrote:

L/A is spending about $1 meg per intersection not only to install
sensors, but also cameras that take a pictures of the vehicle and the
license plate complete with date and time stamp when you try to run a
red light.

Traffic ticket arrives in the mail, stands up in court, and is
expensive, at least by my standards.

Here (Saskatoon, Canada), the city installed a red light cam at an
intersection near a new auto mall that they developed and encouraged
dealers to move to. The dealers are now going to court to challenge the
constitutionality of the law, as they're getting the tickets from
customers on test drives running the red.

It'll be an interesting case. Finally there's somebody with pockets
challenging this cash grab.

On Nov 24, 3:46 pm, Dave Balderstone
wrote:
In article . net, Lew

Hodgett wrote:
L/A is spending about $1 meg per intersection not only to install
sensors, but also cameras that take a pictures of the vehicle and the
license plate complete with date and time stamp when you try to run a
red light.

Traffic ticket arrives in the mail, stands up in court, and is
expensive, at least by my standards.Here (Saskatoon, Canada), the city installed a red light cam at an
intersection near a new auto mall that they developed and encouraged
dealers to move to. The dealers are now going to court to challenge the
constitutionality of the law, as they're getting the tickets from
customers on test drives running the red.

It'll be an interesting case. Finally there's somebody with pockets
challenging this cash grab.

Keep us posted on that one. I received one of those tickets. I was in
fact at fault, but the assumption that the owner is always the one
driving is not a particularly good one.

It's the usual tune - fine people and the majority will just pay up
rather than take the time and expense to fight it, even if they are
100% in the right.

R

RicodJour wrote:


Keep us posted on that one. I received one of those tickets. I was in
fact at fault, but the assumption that the owner is always the one
driving is not a particularly good one.

It's the usual tune - fine people and the majority will just pay up
rather than take the time and expense to fight it, even if they are
100% in the right.

The above and $10 will get you a cup of coffee in a cheap restaurant.

This one has already been thru the courts in L/A.

As California goes, the rest of the country soon follows.

Lew

Dave Balderstone wrote:

Here (Saskatoon, Canada), the city installed a red light cam at an
intersection near a new auto mall that they developed and encouraged
dealers to move to. The dealers are now going to court to challenge the
constitutionality of the law, as they're getting the tickets from
customers on test drives running the red.

It'll be an interesting case. Finally there's somebody with pockets
challenging this cash grab.

If the car is really doing something illegal and is caught on camera, I
don't have much problem with automated ticketing.

I think it's reasonable for the owner of a car to be held responsible
for its safe use, even if it has been lent out to someone else. In this
particular case, the dealer could just have people sign a waiver saying
they're responsible for any tickets, same as for rental cars.

Of course, if the vehicle was stolen at the time, then that's a whole
different story.

Chris

Dave Balderstone wrote:

In article . net, Lew
Hodgett wrote:

L/A is spending about $1 meg per intersection not only to install
sensors, but also cameras that take a pictures of the vehicle and the
license plate complete with date and time stamp when you try to run a
red light.

Traffic ticket arrives in the mail, stands up in court, and is
expensive, at least by my standards.

Here (Saskatoon, Canada), the city installed a red light cam at an
intersection near a new auto mall that they developed and encouraged
dealers to move to. The dealers are now going to court to challenge the
constitutionality of the law, as they're getting the tickets from
customers on test drives running the red.

It'll be an interesting case. Finally there's somebody with pockets
challenging this cash grab.

Other countries have had red light cameras operating effectively for decades.
Here in Australia they have been in use for something like 30 years.

They cost tens of thousands of dollars not a million, and they don't photograph
every vehicle.

They are film cameras, and they have a room full of little old ladies peering at
the developed pictures looking for clear violations.

When they get a pic of a car breaking the law a ticket is sent to the registered
owner. That owner must either pay the fine or produce an affidavit telling who
was driving the vehicle at the time.

Typically car dealerships either just pay them or just shrug and say "dunno who
was driving" and try to get away with it.

Portable speed cameras are now in widespread use as well, as of the last decade,
which have made it very cheap and easy for them to generate revenue by issuing
speeding fines. These cost some $50,000 last I heard (many years ago now).

Occasionally someone goes mockador and destroys or steals one of them, the
contractors are not allowed to sit more than about 30m away from them now.

Answers for this week:





829. Railroad hammer

830. Pond ice saw

831. Don't know yet

832. Optic detectors for traffic signal

833. Going to wait a little while before revealing this, unless someone
guesses it.

834. Brace bit holder


Links and more info can be found on the answer page, including updates to
four of my answers from last week's set:

http://pzphotosan145t-5.blogspot.com/


Rob

R.H. wrote:
Answers for this week:





829. Railroad hammer

Looking at it closer it looks like an engineers hammer. The back of the
head fits the common square head bolts they used on the switch heads and
on the locos.


830. Pond ice saw

831. Don't know yet

I have a carb stand that looks like that but it has two of them with a
support piece between them.


832. Optic detectors for traffic signal

NY uses buried loops on the lights. Those look like the traffic cameras
they have around Albany and Rochester though.

Oh NY does have emergency trip on most lights that are signaled by a
strobe mounted on the emergency vehicle. Those use an optical trip.


833. Going to wait a little while before revealing this, unless someone
guesses it.

It's one of them things...


834. Brace bit holder


Links and more info can be found on the answer page, including updates to
four of my answers from last week's set:

http://pzphotosan145t-5.blogspot.com/


Rob

829. Railroad hammer

Looking at it closer it looks like an engineers hammer. The back of the
head fits the common square head bolts they used on the switch heads and
on the locos.


Sounds like a reasonable use for the back of the head.



831. Don't know yet

I have a carb stand that looks like that but it has two of them with a
support piece between them.


I'd really like to see that carb stand, any chance you can post a photo or
send me one? The owner of this object has a pair of them.


Rob

"George E. Cawthon" wrote in message
...



Not in my area. It is just a regular traffic camera. Emergency sensors
are much smaller where I live (about the size of the knob atop the light).

Apparently RH has indicated that it is a traffic sensor to change the light
when a vehicle is present. I thought they buried those sensors.

Here (Saskatoon, Canada), the city installed a red light cam at an
intersection near a new auto mall that they developed and encouraged
dealers to move to. The dealers are now going to court to challenge the
constitutionality of the law, as they're getting the tickets from
customers on test drives running the red.

It'll be an interesting case. Finally there's somebody with pockets
challenging this cash grab.

If the car is really doing something illegal and is caught on camera, I
don't have much problem with automated ticketing.

I read a story somewhere stating that insurance stats show that there are
actually MORE accidents at red lights with the cams. Seems that people tend
to slam on the brakes for a yellow light to prevent the chance of getting a
ticket. This causes a lot of rear end collisions.

On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 14:46:02 -0600, Dave Balderstone wrote:
In article . net, Lew
Hodgett wrote:

L/A is spending about $1 meg per intersection not only to install
sensors, but also cameras that take a pictures of the vehicle and the
license plate complete with date and time stamp when you try to run a
red light.

Traffic ticket arrives in the mail, stands up in court, and is
expensive, at least by my standards.

Here (Saskatoon, Canada), the city installed a red light cam at an
intersection near a new auto mall that they developed and encouraged
dealers to move to. The dealers are now going to court to challenge the
constitutionality of the law, as they're getting the tickets from
customers on test drives running the red.

It'll be an interesting case. Finally there's somebody with pockets
challenging this cash grab.


Yeah, those basty nastards want people to not go around running red lights
and killing innocent bystanders. How cruel!

Of course, you could always choose to NOT RUN THE RED LIGHT!

Feh.
Rich

On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 01:25:47 +0000, Leon wrote:
"George E. Cawthon" wrote in message

Not in my area. It is just a regular traffic camera. Emergency sensors
are much smaller where I live (about the size of the knob atop the light).

Apparently RH has indicated that it is a traffic sensor to change the light
when a vehicle is present. I thought they buried those sensors.

No, he's talking about a special sensor on top of the light support, that
responds to a certain frequency of strobe light, and literally changes the
light on demand. It's used by emergency vehicles (police, fire, ambulance)
so they can get through the gridlock. The system has some snazzy 21st
century name, but I can't remember what it is.

If you determined the freq, you could make one, but I'd be awfully
skittish about using it; I'm sure it'd be quite illegal.

But these aren't those - I don't even think they're ticket-cams - just
survellance, like that other poster said, probably in a parking lot.

Cheers!
Rich

R.H. wrote:
829. Railroad hammer
Looking at it closer it looks like an engineers hammer. The back of the
head fits the common square head bolts they used on the switch heads and
on the locos.


Sounds like a reasonable use for the back of the head.



831. Don't know yet
I have a carb stand that looks like that but it has two of them with a
support piece between them.


I'd really like to see that carb stand, any chance you can post a photo or
send me one? The owner of this object has a pair of them.


Rob



I'll have to dig it out. Haven't used it in a couple years since carbs
went away.
Not much to the support though it is an elongated H shaped piece made
from spring steel. One end has two notches and the other has 3 sets of
two notches. It clips in the end of the oval area.

--
Steve W.

According to R.H. :
This week's set has just been posted:

http://puzzlephotos.blogspot.com/

A little late getting to this one, but still posting from
rec.crafts.metalworking as usual.

829) Weird! Perhaps the square notches are wrenches for some kind
of valve, and the spike on the other end to chip away ice to
allow connection of a hose to the valve in cold weather.

Or perhaps some kind of lever to start something moving.

830) Looks like an ice saw -- for ice fishing, or for cutting
blocks of ice for storage (prior to refrigeration allowing the
production of ice in the summer, instead of having to store it
in the winter and dole it out in the summer.

831) Maybe purely decorative.

Maybe to join a pair of straps as part of a working horse
harness.

If the two were mounted at right angles, I would consider it to
be a form of caltrops instead.

832) You mean other than the lights themselves?

Those look like surveillance cameras -- often used by the DOT
(or whatever it is called in your area) to judge traffic flow to
allow traffic advisories. Usually the TV stations can connect
in and monitor those as well, to show you how bad it would be if
you were on the road instead of at home watching TV. :-)

833) No real guess on this one. Is it as flat as it looks?
What are the lumps at the ends of the arms made of? They look
like nearly dead ancient rubber -- to go with the rust pitted
metal between them.

834) Jaws for a chuck for the old square-shanked drill bits used for
wood. Where did the rest of the chuck go?

Now to see what others have said.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

In article , Chris Friesen
wrote:

I think it's reasonable for the owner of a car to be held responsible
for its safe use, even if it has been lent out to someone else.

So, can I borrow your chainsaw to --ummm-- "deal with an unwanted
houseguest"? Would the responsibility for such an act be yours, or
mine?

In article , R.H.
wrote:

829. Railroad hammer

http://pzphotosan145t-5.blogspot.com/

"829. This hammer was made for use on the railroad, the left end could
be used for prying spikes, but I don't know exactly what the back end
of the head was for."

Okay, I'll challenge.

Having driven countless spikes while working on a railroad section gang
(with a good old-fashioned spike maul, not by machine), I will state
without hesitation that this tool had absolutely nothing to do with
track spikes.

A spike puller (a "claw bar") is over five feet long, made of solid
steel, and weighs about 30 pounds. Its usage is counterintuitive, and
many a rookie has been laughed at while dangling off the end of the
bar, trying to budge a spike through leverage alone.

http://noframes.harmersteel.com/cata...tracktools.htm

The hammer pictured may have been used on a railroad, but it would have
been in the roundhouse, not maintenance-of-way.

Kevin

On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 17:09:29 -0600, Chris Friesen wrote:

Dave Balderstone wrote:

Here (Saskatoon, Canada), the city installed a red light cam at an
intersection near a new auto mall that they developed and encouraged
dealers to move to. The dealers are now going to court to challenge the
constitutionality of the law, as they're getting the tickets from
customers on test drives running the red.

It'll be an interesting case. Finally there's somebody with pockets
challenging this cash grab.

If the car is really doing something illegal and is caught on camera, I
don't have much problem with automated ticketing.

I think it's reasonable for the owner of a car to be held responsible
for its safe use, even if it has been lent out to someone else. In this
particular case, the dealer could just have people sign a waiver saying
they're responsible for any tickets, same as for rental cars.

Of course, if the vehicle was stolen at the time, then that's a whole
different story.

So let's see, Osama rents a van from Avis, packs it full of fertilizer,
and blows up a building and that's Avis's fault?

It is _not_ reasonable to hold the owner of an object legally responsible
for its misuse by another person unless there is compelling evidence that
he was aware that such misuse would be the result.

The person who is driving is the one who is in control and he is the one
who bears responsibility for his actions.

--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

"George E. Cawthon" wrote in message
Not in my area. It is just a regular traffic camera. Emergency
sensors are much smaller where I live (about the size of the knob
atop the light).

Apparently RH has indicated that it is a traffic sensor to change the
light when a vehicle is present. I thought they buried those sensors.

No, he's talking about a special sensor on top of the light support,
that responds to a certain frequency of strobe light, and literally
changes the light on demand. It's used by emergency vehicles (police,
fire, ambulance)so they can get through the gridlock. The system has
some snazzy 21st century name, but I can't remember what it is.

If you determined the freq, you could make one, but I'd be awfully
skittish about using it; I'm sure it'd be quite illegal.

But these aren't those - I don't even think they're ticket-cams - just
surveillance, like that other poster said, probably in a parking lot.

Cheers!
Rich


3M Opticom, and Tomar Strobecom are the big two in light controls. They
operate on the same principle though. They use a set frequency strobe
to trigger the light.

10Hz for low priority: Increases your green light time.
14Hz for high priority: Turns your light green and all others red plus a
few other items.

http://www.themirt.com/how.html

--
Steve W.





--
Steve W.
Near Cooperstown, New York

"Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of
arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to
skid in sideways, BBQ in one hand, martini in the other, body
thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming: "WOO HOO what a ride!"

On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 02:07:24 GMT, Rich Grise wrote:

On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 14:46:02 -0600, Dave Balderstone wrote:
In article . net, Lew
Hodgett wrote:

L/A is spending about $1 meg per intersection not only to install
sensors, but also cameras that take a pictures of the vehicle and the
license plate complete with date and time stamp when you try to run a
red light.

Traffic ticket arrives in the mail, stands up in court, and is
expensive, at least by my standards.

Here (Saskatoon, Canada), the city installed a red light cam at an
intersection near a new auto mall that they developed and encouraged
dealers to move to. The dealers are now going to court to challenge the
constitutionality of the law, as they're getting the tickets from
customers on test drives running the red.

It'll be an interesting case. Finally there's somebody with pockets
challenging this cash grab.


Yeah, those basty nastards want people to not go around running red lights
and killing innocent bystanders. How cruel!

Of course, you could always choose to NOT RUN THE RED LIGHT!

Feh.
Rich

I would feel better about this if I knew exactly *when* the camera issues
the citation. Is it when a car is *in* the intersection as the light turns
red? When a car enters the intersection just *after* a yellow light turns
red (that may have been a very short yellow)? Or is it a second or so
*after* the light turns red? In the latter case, I have absolutely no
problem with the concept. The other cases are bothersome because they do
not in any way cause a traffic hazard and are often the result of
misjudging the length of a yellow or making a poor choice when the light
turns yellow. In those cases, the cars in the opposing direction will not
have had a chance to enter the intersection, whereas in the last example,
that is when accidents occur.



+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 23:34:23 -0700, Mark & Juanita
wrote:


Of course, you could always choose to NOT RUN THE RED LIGHT!

Feh.
Rich

I would feel better about this if I knew exactly *when* the camera issues
the citation. Is it when a car is *in* the intersection as the light turns
red? When a car enters the intersection just *after* a yellow light turns
red (that may have been a very short yellow)? Or is it a second or so
*after* the light turns red? In the latter case, I have absolutely no
problem with the concept. The other cases are bothersome because they do
not in any way cause a traffic hazard and are often the result of
misjudging the length of a yellow or making a poor choice when the light
turns yellow. In those cases, the cars in the opposing direction will not
have had a chance to enter the intersection, whereas in the last example,
that is when accidents occur.


In some states that Im aware of, and California used to be the same..no
idea if its changed..was that if you entered the intersection, after the
light change..you were in violation. Any part of your vehicle being in
the intersection as the light changed, and you were ok.

It should be noted that many juristictions who were/are using red light
cameras as revenue machines, shortened up the yellows. Folks who were
used to the length of the yellows in regularly traveled intersections
got ****ed in the ass.

Personally, Ive noted 2 rear end accidents because of cameras and afor
the reason given above, in the last 3 yrs. And a ****load of "almosts",
including one I nearly plowed into the back of a woman in an SUV who
slammed on her brakes as the light turned yellow..at 45 mph..with me
behind her pulling 1800lbs on a trailer with no trailer brakes.

I was able to read the fine print on her "my child is an honor student
at Our Lady of Perpetual Motion" bumper sticker as the tire smoke
cleared.

Gunner

Political Correctness

A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical liberal minority and
rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media,
which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible
to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Mark & Juanita wrote:

I would feel better about this if I knew exactly *when* the camera issues
the citation. Is it when a car is *in* the intersection as the light turns
red? When a car enters the intersection just *after* a yellow light turns
red (that may have been a very short yellow)? Or is it a second or so
*after* the light turns red? In the latter case, I have absolutely no
problem with the concept. The other cases are bothersome because they do
not in any way cause a traffic hazard and are often the result of
misjudging the length of a yellow or making a poor choice when the light
turns yellow. In those cases, the cars in the opposing direction will not
have had a chance to enter the intersection, whereas in the last example,
that is when accidents occur.

The camera doesn't issue the citation.... OK I know what you mean. But it would
be interesting to get an email informing you of the fine on your 3G mobile
before you cleared the intersection...

It depends on your local traffic laws... ie what constitutes illegally entering
an intersection. Here in Australia it's illegal to enter after the light goes
red, and also illegal to enter if you can't clear the intersection, ie if it's
blocked by stationary cars waiting to exit. Red light cameras will get you for
either.
--
Patrick Hamlyn posting from Perth, Western Australia
Windsurfing capital of the Southern Hemisphere
Moderator: polyforms group )

"Kevin Craig" wrote in message
...
In article , R.H.
wrote:

829. Railroad hammer

http://pzphotosan145t-5.blogspot.com/

"829. This hammer was made for use on the railroad, the left end could
be used for prying spikes, but I don't know exactly what the back end
of the head was for."

Okay, I'll challenge.

Having driven countless spikes while working on a railroad section gang
(with a good old-fashioned spike maul, not by machine), I will state
without hesitation that this tool had absolutely nothing to do with
track spikes.

This hammer was on display at one of the tool shows and was marked as being
made for use on the railroad. I thought I was making a safe guess that it
could be used to pry out spikes, but it looks like I guessed wrong. Thanks,
I fix the answer page.


Rob

Rich Grise (in ) said:

| Of course, you could always choose to NOT RUN THE RED LIGHT!

Some of the politicos in our state capital decided that red light
cameras would provide a convenient source of revenue - so they bought,
installed, and monitored the cameras for a whole bunch of
intersections...

They should have taken the time to watch traffic for a while first. In
the first year of operation they were able to cite only a handful of
drivers - seems like people around here just aren't in so much of a
hurry that they feel the need to run red lights.

It'd be hilarious if it wasn't such an expensive screw-up.

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto

Morris Dovey said:

Rich Grise (in ) said:

| Of course, you could always choose to NOT RUN THE RED LIGHT!

Some of the politicos in our state capital decided that red light
cameras would provide a convenient source of revenue - so they bought,
installed, and monitored the cameras for a whole bunch of
intersections...

They should have taken the time to watch traffic for a while first. In
the first year of operation they were able to cite only a handful of
drivers - seems like people around here just aren't in so much of a
hurry that they feel the need to run red lights.

It'd be hilarious if it wasn't such an expensive screw-up.

I'm afraid I can't source this, but I remember reading of a Scottish town
where traffic lights were installed. The good burghers of that town,
however, were in no particular hurry, and they drove so slowly that the
traffic light sensors couldn't detect them at all! This caused some serious
traffic problems, as you might imagine.

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at the above domain, - www.

In article ,
Rich Grise wrote:

On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 14:46:02 -0600, Dave Balderstone wrote:
In article . net, Lew
Hodgett wrote:

L/A is spending about $1 meg per intersection not only to install
sensors, but also cameras that take a pictures of the vehicle and the
license plate complete with date and time stamp when you try to run a
red light.

Traffic ticket arrives in the mail, stands up in court, and is
expensive, at least by my standards.

Here (Saskatoon, Canada), the city installed a red light cam at an
intersection near a new auto mall that they developed and encouraged
dealers to move to. The dealers are now going to court to challenge the
constitutionality of the law, as they're getting the tickets from
customers on test drives running the red.

It'll be an interesting case. Finally there's somebody with pockets
challenging this cash grab.


Yeah, those basty nastards want people to not go around running red lights
and killing innocent bystanders. How cruel!

Of course, you could always choose to NOT RUN THE RED LIGHT!

Feh.
Rich

Trouble is: They issue the ticket and enforce payment from the owner of
the car, not the driver. Maybe you think getting penalized for something
you didn't do and couldn't possibly have done is just fine. I don't. But
then, I didn't like having teacher say s/he was going to punish everyone
in the class unless and until the guilty party either confessed or was
identified, (Read: ratted out) especially when the same teacher then
ridiculed the "tattletale." (No, it wasn't me)

Feh, indeed.

--
Bring back, Oh bring back
Oh, bring back that old continuity.
Bring back, oh, bring back
Oh, bring back Clerk Maxwell to me.