We've all noticed the people with cardboard signs asking for money at freeway exits (in big cities).
We'll all noticed the way that people run red lights (again, in big cities).
So why not combine the two?
Let people buy a "red light camera" for (say) $5 that uses actual film from city or county police. They turn in the camera and film intact to the police. The cops develop and print the negatives. Cars that can be clearly identified as being in the intersection while the light is red (which in Oregon you are <never> supposed to be with the exception of turning left in front of traffic) get a ticket in the mail.
Our photographer returns the next day for a $25-$50/ticket bounty.
We use actual film so that there's no question about someone playing games with digital images. Plus film cameras can be manually wound and there's no flash needed.
Compared to the permanent red light installations, people can be anywhere at any time. Some people might carry one in their cars to take pictures of the guy in front running a red.
I agree
No opinion
I disagree
Add your comment
What else could you have bounty hunters for?
p.s. The camera role might lead to a decrease in contributions.
First, having people surronding a major intersection in order to take pictures of red light runners seems too dangerous. You would need to get a clear shot of the red light and a car facing in the direction of the red light at a precise second. These people who hold signs begging for spare change wouldn't seem to have the skills needed for such photography.
Sure, some of the folks don't look that healthy. But a lot of the local folks at the stoplights and exits seem like they could be behind the counter at McDonalds.
I'm not sure what that says about our society.
My grandfather worked on WPA projects during The Great Depression. Not sure that we're going to do any of those in an age where the civil service unions are against it (those should be full-time union jobs), the ambulance-chasing attorneys are just waiting for somebody to hurt themselves, and you've got a lot of fat cats who don't care about anybody but themselves.
I can be smoking my cigarette, put it down as the light turns yellow and take a nice shot of the red light as a car passes under it. Will it work for all intersections? Wouldn't expect it to. But it'll work for some.
And if you can stop people from getting in the habit of running red lights, well, it's less likely that they'll do them at other intersections.
Can I see negotiations going on, where the driver caught on film buys a camera for $50 or $100? Yup. Is that bad? The driver gets "fined", the cameraperson gets money and presumably spends it somewhere else.
Would worry about young healthy drivers intimidating camerafolk. But the driver is going away from them, plus has a car that they have to park, etc.
In response to Barry's observation, yes, it might decrease contributions to the cardboard sign brigade. Guess that's where you stand philosophically. I think giving people something to do that (I would argue) improves society by increasing safety and cutting down on the "everybody does it" feeling about breaking the law.
If everybody runs red lights, you should, too. If the rich cheat on their taxes, you should, too. Etc.
As for where else could it be used: handicapped parking or other forbidden parking areas. Smokers in no smoking zones.
I like it, it requires no new or elaborate technology, presumably existing "one-time-use" cameras could be used (I think I'd use smaller rolls of film, maybe 6 to 12 exposures max).Joe Homeless could turn in his (postage prepaid) camera at the nearest mail box, collect his bounty in a few days at a local police station, bank, courthouse, whatever. The camera package will have to have some kind of tear-off numbered receipt or serial number for Joe to hang onto until he redeems it.Side wager: your best contributors will be taxi drivers turning in other taxi drivers...