AMuzi wrote:
> On 5/17/2022 8:59 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
>> Joy Beeson writes:

>>> The ordinary pleated mask is a *handkerchief*. Only handkerchief
>>> precautions apply. (But we used to collect handkerchiefs used by sick
>>> people people in a paper bag, and burn them bag and all.)

See, that was so terribly climate-destructive it basically flooded New
Orleans! Letting birds build nests from discarded plastic masks is so
much more ecological!
;-)

>> As far as I know all US mask mandates have been satisfiable by wearing a
>> handkerchief, train-robber style.

Over here, you were refused food purchases, let alone public transport,
for wearing a medical mask instead of an N95 dust mask. That's why I
call WEF-fanboy Scharfie a willing starvation camp manager.

> +1
> All about power and virtue signalling. A chunk of tee shirt
> with ear loops isn't slowing down any aerosol virus.

I suspect a once washed, Andre-old stock DDT sprinkled, India-colored
cotton t-shirt to be practically safer than inhaling broken plastic
fibres from wearing N95 masks.
<https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8441111/>

More goodies at <https://t.me/s/CoronvirusPlushie>
<https://dailysceptic.org/2022/05/02/the-foegen-effect-why-face-masks-increase-the-death-rate-of-covid-19/>

--
"Learn Italian tv-debating, without the FCC"
<https://t.me/neuesausrussland/5495>

On Tue, 17 May 2022 13:21:30 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 5/17/2022 3:49 AM, Rolf Mantel wrote:
>> Am 17.05.2022 um 05:31 schrieb John B.:
>>> On Mon, 16 May 2022 22:34:27 -0400, Joy Beeson
>>> <jbeeson@invalid.net.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 13 May 2022 10:18:07 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> And secondly how do you
>>>>> propose to determine what the individual's "intent" is until he
>>>>> actually does whatever you anticipate he might to do.
>>>>
>>>> You don't.  You measure whether, when the light changed to yellow, the
>>>> car was far enough from the intersection to stop safely before
>>>> reaching the crosswalk.
>>>
>>> And how do you do that? Different vehicles will have different
>>> stopping rates or distances. A truck, hauling a trailer with two 40
>>> ft. shipping containers aboard will require considerably further to
>>> stop from, oh say 40 mph, then a light weight "sports car".
>>
>> Actually, in Germany red light cameras need to take two photos.
>>
>> If picture 1 is missing the vehicle might have entered at yellow and
>> olny left at red.
>> If picture 2 is missing the vehicle might have crossed the stop line but
>> not entered the intersection (slightly botched intent to stop at the
>> stop line).
>
>Do those cameras have a beneficial effect? That is, did they reduce red
>light violations?
>
>And what's the public's attitude toward them?

Well, from reading the news I suspect that "the public" dislikes
anything that impedes their desires to do just as they damn please
(:-)
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Tue, 17 May 2022 15:02:34 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

>On 5/17/2022 1:51 PM, sms wrote:
>> On 5/17/2022 11:07 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>> On Tue, 17 May 2022 13:21:30 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Do those cameras have a beneficial effect? That is, did
>>>> they reduce red
>>>> light violations?
>>>
>>> Nope. Red light cameras increase accidents:
>>> <https://ww2.motorists.org/issues/red-light-cameras/increase-accidents/>
>>>
>>
>> Yeah, one of my fears is that if I stop for a red light,
>> that the car behind me thinks that I'm going to run (and
>> they plan to run it too) will rear-end my car. You can't be
>> too conservative in your approach to traffic lights. If the
>> light turns yellow, you can be pretty certain that the line
>> of cars behind you has no intention of stopping when the
>> light turns red. Similarly, when the light turns green I
>> wait a couple of seconds before going because it's likely
>> that there will be at least a couple of cars that run the
>> red light on the perpendicular street.
>>
>>
>
>Yep.
>
>https://www.kenallenlaw.com/2014/12/red-light-cameras-rear-end-crashes-chicago-debate/
>
>https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/12/major-chicago-study-finds-red-light-cameras-not-safer-cause-more-rear-end-injuries/

Your first reference starts off by stating that
According to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), more than 40%
percent of all crashes in this country are intersection accidents. The
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) data from 2004
found that 9,100 people died and 1,500,000 people were injured in
intersection-related crashes.

And then goes on to state that stationing police at each intersection
to apprehend violators is impractical due to the large number of
police that would be required.

So, Red Light Cameras were installed, which apparently (I am reading
between the lines a bit here) didn't help in preventing accidents
largely because autos running red lights ran into cars that were
stopping for the stop lights.

In other words, red light cameras don't bother law breakers who "run
red lights", even a bit.

Which is simply more evidence of what? That USians are born law
breakers? That the penalty for running red lights isn't sufficient to
deter potential law breakers? That red light laws are
unconstitutional?
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Tue, 17 May 2022 11:16:20 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 5/17/2022 9:50 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 5/16/2022 10:31 PM, John B. wrote:
>>> On Mon, 16 May 2022 22:34:27 -0400, Joy Beeson
>>> <jbeeson@invalid.net.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 13 May 2022 10:18:07 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> And secondly how do you
>>>>> propose to determine what the individual's "intent" is until he
>>>>> actually does whatever you anticipate he might to do.
>>>>
>>>> You don't.  You measure whether, when the light changed to yellow, the
>>>> car was far enough from the intersection to stop safely before
>>>> reaching the crosswalk.
>>>
>>> And how do you do that? Different vehicles will have different
>>> stopping rates or distances. A truck, hauling a trailer with two 40
>>> ft. shipping containers aboard will require considerably further to
>>> stop from, oh say 40 mph, then a light weight "sports car".
>>>
>>
>> The law once prohibited entering an intersection on a red[1]. In theory
>> the yellow is long enough to allow a proper safe stop.
>>
>> But then cameras which necessitated short yellows to enhance revenue and
>> insure that every official's palms were adequately greased. We've
>> discussed this previously.
>>
>> http://www.poi-factory.com/node/37888
>
>If short yellows were at all a consistent problem, hundreds of lawyers
>would get rich fighting them. It would be an easy case to win.
>
>We had (or maybe still have?) a class action lawsuit going regarding
>speed cameras. One jurisdiction's police department used a camera to
>ticket people going at least ten miles per hour over what the sign said.
>Some lawyer found that the State Highway Department had the wrong sign
>posted. He's suing the jurisdiction that ran the speed camera.
>
>Please note that every one of the ticketed motorists was in violation of
>both the existing sign AND the sign that should have been there.

Well, what with all the fu-fa about the subject, why not do what the
Thai police did in regard to drunk driving... If you are caught, they
impound your car and you have to be punished, whether prison or fine
before you can reclaim your auto.

And no, it did not eliminate drunk driving but it certainly did reduce
the numbers significantly (:-)

Or Singapore's solution... a penalty of $1,000 for the first offence.
At the time the law was established S$1,000 was, probably, a bit more
then a month's pay for a working man.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Tuesday, May 17, 2022 at 12:13:11 PM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 5/17/2022 12:53 AM, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > On Monday, May 16, 2022 at 3:20:43 PM UTC-5, jeff.li...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>
> >> Maybe you should just use Bing. Bing has some really nice daily
> >> wallpaper for your phone, PC, or Chromebook:
> >> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.microsoft.bing.wallpapers>
> >> <https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/bing/bing-wallpaper>
> >> <https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/wallpaper-from-bing-for-c/kkppgecgiljdncapddmdeeonpfaboepi>
> >> --
> >> Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
> >> PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
> >> Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
> >> Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
> >
> > When I clicked on your Chrome wallpaper link above it brought up the Arc de Triomphe. I have been there and seen it in person. Cool. Tour de France always end there too. Cool.
> How many here have bicycled the Arc's roundabout?
>
> --
> - Frank Krygowski

I did not bicycle around the Arc de Triomphe. I just looked at it. And if my memory is right, I think it was about 3 or 4 lanes all encircling the Arc. So riding might be sketchy. Even walking around it would be a task because of all the lanes going in and out. 12 I believe. I'm guessing the only ones who ride around the Arc are the Tour de France riders on the last day. Or maybe some bicyclist goes for an adventure at 3 AM. Maybe traffic is less then.

On Tue, 17 May 2022 09:16:05 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

>On 5/17/2022 8:45 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
>> AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> writes:
>>
>>> On 5/16/2022 5:50 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 16 May 2022 08:14:11 -0700 (PDT), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
>>>> <funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sunday, May 15, 2022 at 7:24:27 PM UTC-4, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Or better yet, have the USA take Covid more seriously. You seem to
>>>>>> love the Republican methodology of labeling someone evil and thus
>>>>>> branding them. But that does not work too well. The Chinese
>>>>>> overall government system is less than ideal. Yet it has allowed
>>>>>> 1.4 billion people to sort of flourish. Sort of. If the USA had
>>>>>> 1.4 billion people, could democracy work? India has about as many
>>>>>> people as China and I am not sure India is thriving. India is
>>>>>> supposedly a democracy. Its often reported that Eisenhower was
>>>>>> amazed at the road network in Germany after the war. He saw how
>>>>>> beneficial it was. And implemented it in the USA. Just because
>>>>>> Germany was run by Nazi Hitler, does not mean they did not do some
>>>>>> things right. Dictator Stalin fought Germany to a standstill and
>>>>>> eventually repulsed them. In that case maybe having a dictator was
>>>>>> the best way to fight Hitler. So dictator Stalin was good. In that
>>>>>> one and only situation.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> As they say..."Il Duce made the trains run on time"...Sorry Russel,
>>>>> I don't see the upside to totalitarian dictatorships, regardless of
>>>>> how well the trains run.
>>>>
>>>> But didn't the Athenians, who invented democracy, had provisions for
>>>> the appointment of a "dictator", a single, all powerful, leader,
>>>> during wars?
>>>>
>>>
>>> As did the Roman republic, among other examples.
>>
>> The dictatorship was supposed to be temporary, as in Cincinnatus saving
>> the republic and then returning to plow his fields. Such ideals are
>> admirable, but no civilization seems to be able to keep them for too
>> long. I think we're closer to the "Caligula makes his horse a senator"
>> phase.
>>
>
>She's Vice President now.

But, but, but...

You all run about, all over the world, telling the unwashed masses
that "democracy" is the solution.. even in places where it is viewed
as some sort of fantasy.

While at home?????
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Tuesday, May 17, 2022 at 8:39:53 PM UTC-4, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 17, 2022 at 12:13:11 PM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > On 5/17/2022 12:53 AM, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > > On Monday, May 16, 2022 at 3:20:43 PM UTC-5, jeff.li...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Maybe you should just use Bing. Bing has some really nice daily
> > >> wallpaper for your phone, PC, or Chromebook:
> > >> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.microsoft.bing.wallpapers>
> > >> <https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/bing/bing-wallpaper>
> > >> <https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/wallpaper-from-bing-for-c/kkppgecgiljdncapddmdeeonpfaboepi>
> > >> --
> > >> Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
> > >> PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
> > >> Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
> > >> Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
> > >
> > > When I clicked on your Chrome wallpaper link above it brought up the Arc de Triomphe. I have been there and seen it in person. Cool. Tour de France always end there too. Cool.
> > How many here have bicycled the Arc's roundabout?
> >
> > --
> > - Frank Krygowski
> I did not bicycle around the Arc de Triomphe. I just looked at it. And if my memory is right, I think it was about 3 or 4 lanes all encircling the Arc. So riding might be sketchy. Even walking around it would be a task because of all the lanes going in and out. 12 I believe. I'm guessing the only ones who ride around the Arc are the Tour de France riders on the last day. Or maybe some bicyclist goes for an adventure at 3 AM. Maybe traffic is less then.

We didn't ride it either. We drove through it, which was entertaining enough. But as we did, there were (IIRC)
two bicyclists negotiating it with apparent aplomb. They were not riders on sporty bikes. Just people riding bikes.

- Frank Krygowski

Am 17.05.2022 um 19:21 schrieb Frank Krygowski:
> On 5/17/2022 3:49 AM, Rolf Mantel wrote:
>> Am 17.05.2022 um 05:31 schrieb John B.:
>>> On Mon, 16 May 2022 22:34:27 -0400, Joy Beeson
>>> <jbeeson@invalid.net.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 13 May 2022 10:18:07 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> And secondly how do you
>>>>> propose to determine what the individual's "intent" is until he
>>>>> actually does whatever you anticipate he might to do.
>>>>
>>>> You don't.  You measure whether, when the light changed to yellow, the
>>>> car was far enough from the intersection to stop safely before
>>>> reaching the crosswalk.
>>>
>>> And how do you do that? Different vehicles will have different
>>> stopping rates or distances. A truck, hauling a trailer with two 40
>>> ft. shipping containers aboard will require considerably further to
>>> stop from, oh say 40 mph, then a light weight "sports car".
>>
>> Actually, in Germany red light cameras need to take two photos.
>>
>> If picture 1 is missing the vehicle might have entered at yellow and
>> olny left at red.
>> If picture 2 is missing the vehicle might have crossed the stop line
>> but not entered the intersection (slightly botched intent to stop at
>> the stop line).
>
> Do those cameras have a beneficial effect? That is, did they reduce red
> light violations?
>
> And what's the public's attitude toward them?

Do they reduce red-light violations? I guess so baut I haven't seen any
statistics.

Some people (my dad) were unhappy when they were introduced in the late
1980's but nowadays nobody talks about them any more (that's different
to speed cameras which are regularly condemned by drivers being ticketed).

I remember when during my childhood my town installed red light cameras
on the three railroad crossings in town. Some guy got so upset by these
things that he drove to one of the crossings, crossed the line and let
the camera shoot a whole film full of pictures of a washing basket.
Stupidly, the first picture (before he got out of the car) led to his
conviction for "tampering with highway infrastructure" or something like
that.

Rolf

Am 17.05.2022 um 20:07 schrieb Jeff Liebermann:
> On Tue, 17 May 2022 13:21:30 -0400, Frank Krygowski
> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> Do those cameras have a beneficial effect? That is, did they reduce red
>> light violations?
>
> Nope. Red light cameras increase accidents:
> <https://ww2.motorists.org/issues/red-light-cameras/increase-accidents/>
>
>> And what's the public's attitude toward them?
>
> Dunno. I helped a friend deal with a $490 red light camera fine in
> Capitola Calif. He had two dashboard camera videos, front and rear,
> which included GPS generated speed indicators. I arranged for the
> independent calibration tests, which showed that the GPS speed
> indicators were more accurate than the one in the traffic camera due
> to a badly programmed slant angle. After a few seconds of
> contemplation, the judge dropped the charges due to a "possible
> equipment failure". Capitola tried to collect it anyway, which is
> another story.

I'm not quite following you here. In what sense so "red light cameras"
measure the speed of vehicles? Are you maybe talking about Speed
cameras here rather than about red light cameras?

On Tuesday, May 17, 2022 at 3:13:45 PM UTC-7, Sepp Ruf wrote:
> AMuzi wrote:
> > On 5/17/2022 8:59 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
> >> Joy Beeson writes:
>
> >>> The ordinary pleated mask is a *handkerchief*. Only handkerchief
> >>> precautions apply. (But we used to collect handkerchiefs used by sick
> >>> people people in a paper bag, and burn them bag and all.)
> See, that was so terribly climate-destructive it basically flooded New
> Orleans! Letting birds build nests from discarded plastic masks is so
> much more ecological!
> ;-)
> >> As far as I know all US mask mandates have been satisfiable by wearing a
> >> handkerchief, train-robber style.
> Over here, you were refused food purchases, let alone public transport,
> for wearing a medical mask instead of an N95 dust mask. That's why I
> call WEF-fanboy Scharfie a willing starvation camp manager.
> > +1
> > All about power and virtue signalling. A chunk of tee shirt
> > with ear loops isn't slowing down any aerosol virus.
> I suspect a once washed, Andre-old stock DDT sprinkled, India-colored
> cotton t-shirt to be practically safer than inhaling broken plastic
> fibres from wearing N95 masks.
> <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8441111/>
>
> More goodies at <https://t.me/s/CoronvirusPlushie>
> <https://dailysceptic.org/2022/05/02/the-foegen-effect-why-face-masks-increase-the-death-rate-of-covid-19/>

The WHO, CDC and the Democrat Party have lorded over the largest transfer of wealth in history and it has been entirely from the poor to the rich. The middle class is so rapidly dissolving into the lower class that you would think that Frank, Russell, Scharf and Flunky would be on the Republican side since they have told us that they were attempting to end the rein of the rich and powerful. This simply shows what liars they are. They are willing to slice their own throats rather than admit that I was right about all of this from the start. That is proof positive of mental illness.

On 5/17/2022 2:07 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Tue, 17 May 2022 13:21:30 -0400, Frank Krygowski
> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> Do those cameras have a beneficial effect? That is, did they reduce red
>> light violations?
>
> Nope. Red light cameras increase accidents:
> <https://ww2.motorists.org/issues/red-light-cameras/increase-accidents/>
>
>> And what's the public's attitude toward them?
>
> Dunno. I helped a friend deal with a $490 red light camera fine in
> Capitola Calif. He had two dashboard camera videos, front and rear,
> which included GPS generated speed indicators. I arranged for the
> independent calibration tests, which showed that the GPS speed
> indicators were more accurate than the one in the traffic camera due
> to a badly programmed slant angle. After a few seconds of
> contemplation, the judge dropped the charges due to a "possible
> equipment failure". Capitola tried to collect it anyway, which is
> another story.
>
> If there is a bad attitude towards speed cameras, methinks it's mostly
> due to the cities using violations to enhance revenue.

As I've probably said before, I have absolutely no problem with cities
raising revenues from law violators, as long as it's done honestly.
Despite libertarian or "no taxes" fantasies, it takes money to run a
civilization. Law breakers should pay extra to help with funding.

> Any improvements in safety are lost in the noise.

I'm not yet convinced. Most of the studies cited have been from a
"motorists association" that's well known for fighting any attempt to
restrict motorists privileges. For example, they've highlighted when
crash counts did not decrease significantly, while omitting the shift
from deadly T crashes to much milder tailgating crashes. (And don't get
me going on the idiocy of tailgaters.)

> A predictable result is
> for the cities to encourage violations, rather than discourage them,
> as the cameras were originally intended to do.

Again, there are well established standards for yellow light duration.
Any competent lawyer should be able to defend against "short yellow"
tickets, probably in a profitable class action suit.

Also, I'd like to see some data on what percentage of red light cameras
have been found to have "short yellows." I'll bet it's quite small.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 5/17/2022 4:02 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 5/17/2022 1:51 PM, sms wrote:
>> On 5/17/2022 11:07 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>> On Tue, 17 May 2022 13:21:30 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Do those cameras have a beneficial effect? That is, did
>>>> they reduce red
>>>> light violations?
>>>
>>> Nope.  Red light cameras increase accidents:
>>> <https://ww2.motorists.org/issues/red-light-cameras/increase-accidents/>
>>>
>>
>> Yeah, one of my fears is that if I stop for a red light,
>> that the car behind me thinks that I'm going to run (and
>> they plan to run it too) will rear-end my car. You can't be
>> too conservative in your approach to traffic lights. If the
>> light turns yellow, you can be pretty certain that the line
>> of cars behind you has no intention of stopping when the
>> light turns red. Similarly, when the light turns green I
>> wait a couple of seconds before going because it's likely
>> that there will be at least a couple of cars that run the
>> red light on the perpendicular street.
>>
>>
>
> Yep.
>
> https://www.kenallenlaw.com/2014/12/red-light-cameras-rear-end-crashes-chicago-debate/
>
>
> https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/12/major-chicago-study-finds-red-light-cameras-not-safer-cause-more-rear-end-injuries/

That said nothing about the relative severity of crashes. Tailgating
crashes are not known for particularly serious injuries. "T-bone"
crashes from red light running are much more injurious or deadly.

And again, if the city is making money by ticketing violators, I call
that a good thing, as long as it's done honestly. It's money that
doesn't have to be contributed by law abiding citizens.

--
- Frank Krygowski

Am 18.05.2022 um 16:51 schrieb Frank Krygowski:
> On 5/17/2022 2:07 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> On Tue, 17 May 2022 13:21:30 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Do those cameras have a beneficial effect? That is, did they reduce red
>>> light violations?
>>
>> Nope.  Red light cameras increase accidents:
>> <https://ww2.motorists.org/issues/red-light-cameras/increase-accidents/>
>>
>>> And what's the public's attitude toward them?
>>
>> Dunno.  I helped a friend deal with a $490 red light camera fine in
>> Capitola Calif.  He had two dashboard camera videos, front and rear,
>> which included GPS generated speed indicators.  I arranged for the
>> independent calibration tests, which showed that the GPS speed
>> indicators were more accurate than the one in the traffic camera due
>> to a badly programmed slant angle.  After a few seconds of
>> contemplation, the judge dropped the charges due to a "possible
>> equipment failure".  Capitola tried to collect it anyway, which is
>> another story.
>>
>> If there is a bad attitude towards speed cameras, methinks it's mostly
>> due to the cities using violations to enhance revenue.
>
> As I've probably said before, I have absolutely no problem with cities
> raising revenues from law violators, as long as it's done honestly.
> Despite libertarian or "no taxes" fantasies, it takes money to run a
> civilization. Law breakers should pay extra to help with funding.
>
>> Any improvements in safety are lost in the noise.
>
> I'm not yet convinced. Most of the studies cited have been from a
> "motorists association" that's well known for fighting any attempt to
> restrict motorists privileges. For example, they've highlighted when
> crash counts did not decrease significantly, while omitting the shift
> from deadly T crashes to much milder tailgating crashes. (And don't get
> me going on the idiocy of tailgaters.)
>
>
>> A predictable result is
>> for the cities to encourage violations, rather than discourage them,
>> as the cameras were originally intended to do.
>
> Again, there are well established standards for yellow light duration.
> Any competent lawyer should be able to defend against "short yellow"
> tickets, probably in a profitable class action suit.

in Germany, the rules are 3 seconds minimum at a speed limit of 50 km/h
or less, 4 seconds at a speed limit of 60 km/h and 5 seconds at a speed
limit of 70 km/h (highway junctions with traffic lights must always have
a speed limit of 70 km/h or lower).

Are the legal limits in the USA similar?

Rolf

On 5/18/2022 9:56 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 5/17/2022 4:02 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 5/17/2022 1:51 PM, sms wrote:
>>> On 5/17/2022 11:07 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 17 May 2022 13:21:30 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Do those cameras have a beneficial effect? That is, did
>>>>> they reduce red
>>>>> light violations?
>>>>
>>>> Nope. Red light cameras increase accidents:
>>>> <https://ww2.motorists.org/issues/red-light-cameras/increase-accidents/>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah, one of my fears is that if I stop for a red light,
>>> that the car behind me thinks that I'm going to run (and
>>> they plan to run it too) will rear-end my car. You can't be
>>> too conservative in your approach to traffic lights. If the
>>> light turns yellow, you can be pretty certain that the line
>>> of cars behind you has no intention of stopping when the
>>> light turns red. Similarly, when the light turns green I
>>> wait a couple of seconds before going because it's likely
>>> that there will be at least a couple of cars that run the
>>> red light on the perpendicular street.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Yep.
>>
>> https://www.kenallenlaw.com/2014/12/red-light-cameras-rear-end-crashes-chicago-debate/
>>
>>
>> https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/12/major-chicago-study-finds-red-light-cameras-not-safer-cause-more-rear-end-injuries/
>
>
> That said nothing about the relative severity of crashes.
> Tailgating crashes are not known for particularly serious
> injuries. "T-bone" crashes from red light running are much
> more injurious or deadly.
>
> And again, if the city is making money by ticketing
> violators, I call that a good thing, as long as it's done
> honestly. It's money that doesn't have to be contributed by
> law abiding citizens.
>
>

There are not various degrees of 'dead'.

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=stopped+at+red+light+fatal+rear+end+crash&t=h_&ia=web

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> writes:

> On 5/13/2022 5:28 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
>> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> writes:
>>
>>> On 5/12/2022 5:21 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:

[...]

>>> thought that COVID rules and responses would be free of negative
>>> effects. But ever since the virus appeared, some irrational
>>> right-wingers have been pretending all would have been perfect if we
>>> had just let COVID run its course unabated.
>> I find it odd the way that public health questions can no longer be
>> discussed without devolving into completely irrelevant tribal politics.
>> It should be possible to discuss these things on their merits without
>> lumping anyone who disagrees with you into the *-winger camp.
>
> You're ignoring very strong correlations. From the very beginning of
> this epidemic, the right and far-right were dismissive of the problem
> and against almost any proposed defense. To this day, it's hard to
> find a COVID skeptic who isn't pretty hard right.

That is not my recollection. In early 2020, when the press started
running stories about people dropping dead in Wuhan, Trump's reaction
was to use border restrictions. Now border restrictions are costly and
damaging in the same way as other NPIs, but they do have a better chance
of being at least temporarily effective, as we can see in New Zealand.
They're not a permanent fix, as we can also see in New Zealand, not to
mention North Korea.

The response from prominent Democrats was to decry restrictions as
racist. Nancy Pelosi invited the press to watch as she publicly
celebrated Chinese New Year in San Francisco. When Trump seemed
worried, Democrats told us all was well, there was nothing to worry
about, and if we did, we were racists.

Later on, when Trump tried to downplay the hysteria, the shoe was on the
other foot.

I remember Kamala Harris during the vice presidential debates saying
that she would be very reluctant to take a "Trump vaccine", which was
being developed in an awful hurry without adequate safeguards. She had
a point there, but somehow after the vaccines rolled out right *after*
the election, they became "Biden vaccines", and every Democrat jumped on
the bandwagon to not only take the experimental vaccine, but to try to
force everyone everywhere to take it.

> That's not to say every proposed defense was correct, nor that every
> attitude of every left-winger was logical. But the farthest-right guy
> I ever hang around with was the only one in a backyard party who said
> "Hell no, I'm not getting vaccinated. I don't know what's in that
> vaccine." Oddly enough, he was later treated with monoclonal
> antibodies, at ~100 times the cost, even though I'm sure he didn't
> know what was in that treatment either.

Monoclonal antibodies are a more mature technology than mRNA treatments.
The mRNA treatments have a lot of very clever technology in them, but
were never used on humans prior to covid because it was not clear that
they were sufficiently safe. It's still not clear.

>>> As it was, we've had a million deaths (no matter what Tom says)
>>> despite serious defense measures. Without measures, those deaths might
>>> have doubled. Are you in favor of that?
>> I have not seen any credible evidence that the deaths would have
>> doubled,
>> or even increased at all.
>
> The word "credible" is inherently subjective. Tom still doesn't
> believe that the stock market rose during Obama's presidency, despite
> reams of proof.

But your figure of double is just pulled out the air. We had a lot of
simulations and predictions of covid deaths, eg by SAGE in the UK, that
turned out to be complete nonsense, and much worse than any actual
result.

> Think back to the times when hospitals were treating people in tents
> because all beds were full, when people were on ventilators for
> weeks. You're pretending mass gatherings would still have made sense?
> _That's_ incredible.

I'm saying that mandatory lockdowns did not make sense, which is not
exactly the same thing. I remember mass gatherings during the Black
Lives Matter summer of protest were suddenly ok, regardless of covid.
It became very plain that science and public health were not the only
thing governing lockdown restrictions.

>> When you see claims that they would, I
>> beseech you, just for a moment apply your bike helmet standard to what
>> is being said.
>
> I've done that. Do it yourself. Start with a quick comparison of
> fatality counts.

Fatality counts are kind of fuzzy, as you yourself pointed out at the
beginning of the pandemic. Excess mortality gives a better overall
picture. You might check out the recent WHO report:

https://www.who.int/data/sets/global-excess-deaths-associated-with-covid-19-modelled-estimates

Looking at the per-country rates it's very hard to detect any
comparative success in the countries that instituted strict and damaging
lockdowns.

>>> You ignore the fact that the infected and ignorant put not only
>>> themselves at risk. They impose their ignorant choices on others.
>> There has never, ever been a case in human history when controlling
>> "ignorance" stopped a respiratory pandemic.
>
> Human history is very old. Knowledge of viruses occurred in only the
> last sliver of that time. In other words, the world as a whole is much
> less ignorant than it was.

The complete revision of ideas about respiratory pandemic handling happened
during the *last two years*. That was not due to an increase in
knowledge or wisdom.

> Which does not mean there are not exceptions - dedicated,
> enthusiastic, even bombastic exceptions who treasure their ignorance.
>
> I've never been a fan of ignorance.

Yet you're constantly deriding the modern safety culture when it comes
to hard hats, or bicycling, or anything trivial. When it comes to this
massive and hugely damaging expansion of safety culture you somehow
become blind.

--

On 5/18/2022 11:07 AM, Rolf Mantel wrote:
> Am 18.05.2022 um 16:51 schrieb Frank Krygowski:
>> On 5/17/2022 2:07 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>> On Tue, 17 May 2022 13:21:30 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Do those cameras have a beneficial effect? That is, did they reduce red
>>>> light violations?
>>>
>>> Nope.  Red light cameras increase accidents:
>>> <https://ww2.motorists.org/issues/red-light-cameras/increase-accidents/>
>>>
>>>> And what's the public's attitude toward them?
>>>
>>> Dunno.  I helped a friend deal with a $490 red light camera fine in
>>> Capitola Calif.  He had two dashboard camera videos, front and rear,
>>> which included GPS generated speed indicators.  I arranged for the
>>> independent calibration tests, which showed that the GPS speed
>>> indicators were more accurate than the one in the traffic camera due
>>> to a badly programmed slant angle.  After a few seconds of
>>> contemplation, the judge dropped the charges due to a "possible
>>> equipment failure".  Capitola tried to collect it anyway, which is
>>> another story.
>>>
>>> If there is a bad attitude towards speed cameras, methinks it's mostly
>>> due to the cities using violations to enhance revenue.
>>
>> As I've probably said before, I have absolutely no problem with cities
>> raising revenues from law violators, as long as it's done honestly.
>> Despite libertarian or "no taxes" fantasies, it takes money to run a
>> civilization. Law breakers should pay extra to help with funding.
>>
>>> Any improvements in safety are lost in the noise.
>>
>> I'm not yet convinced. Most of the studies cited have been from a
>> "motorists association" that's well known for fighting any attempt to
>> restrict motorists privileges. For example, they've highlighted when
>> crash counts did not decrease significantly, while omitting the shift
>> from deadly T crashes to much milder tailgating crashes. (And don't
>> get me going on the idiocy of tailgaters.)
>>
>>
>>> A predictable result is
>>> for the cities to encourage violations, rather than discourage them,
>>> as the cameras were originally intended to do.
>>
>> Again, there are well established standards for yellow light duration.
>> Any competent lawyer should be able to defend against "short yellow"
>> tickets, probably in a profitable class action suit.
>
> in Germany, the rules are 3 seconds minimum at a speed limit of 50 km/h
> or less, 4 seconds at a speed limit of 60 km/h and 5 seconds at a speed
> limit of 70 km/h (highway junctions with traffic lights must always have
> a speed limit of 70 km/h or lower).
>
> Are the legal limits in the USA similar?

They are, although I don't know exact values without more digging than
I'm willing to do now. One source says this, for California:
"• If the posted speed limit is 25 (or less) mph the minimum yellow
interval is 3.0 seconds (this includes both right and left-hand turns).
• If the posted speed limit is 35 mph the minimum yellow interval is 3.6
seconds.
• If the posted speed limit is 45 mph the minimum yellow interval is 4.3
seconds."

Things are slightly complicated by our state-vs-federal government
system. The national Manual for Uniform Traffic Control Devices has
strong suggestions on this and most other aspects or roadway design, but
in principle, each state is usually able to make its own rules.

As I understand it, my state, Ohio, essentially says it follows the
MUTCD regarding yellow light timing, _but_ it says if there is a red
light camera, the yellow phase must be even longer, by one second. Which
makes me very, very skeptical of the whining from people afraid of
getting tickets.

"A local authority that uses traffic law photo-monitoring devices to
detect or enforce any traffic law violation at an intersection where
traffic is controlled by traffic control signals that exhibit different
colored lights or colored lighted arrows shall time the operation of the
yellow lights and yellow arrows of those traffic control signals so that
the steady yellow indication exceeds by one second the minimum duration
for yellow indicators at similar intersections as established by the
provisions of the manual adopted by the department of transportation
under section 4511.09 of the Revised Code." - ORC 4511.094 (D)

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 5/18/2022 11:14 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 5/18/2022 9:56 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 5/17/2022 4:02 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 5/17/2022 1:51 PM, sms wrote:
>>>> On 5/17/2022 11:07 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 17 May 2022 13:21:30 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>>>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Do those cameras have a beneficial effect? That is, did
>>>>>> they reduce red
>>>>>> light violations?
>>>>>
>>>>> Nope.  Red light cameras increase accidents:
>>>>> <https://ww2.motorists.org/issues/red-light-cameras/increase-accidents/>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, one of my fears is that if I stop for a red light,
>>>> that the car behind me thinks that I'm going to run (and
>>>> they plan to run it too) will rear-end my car. You can't be
>>>> too conservative in your approach to traffic lights. If the
>>>> light turns yellow, you can be pretty certain that the line
>>>> of cars behind you has no intention of stopping when the
>>>> light turns red. Similarly, when the light turns green I
>>>> wait a couple of seconds before going because it's likely
>>>> that there will be at least a couple of cars that run the
>>>> red light on the perpendicular street.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yep.
>>>
>>> https://www.kenallenlaw.com/2014/12/red-light-cameras-rear-end-crashes-chicago-debate/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/12/major-chicago-study-finds-red-light-cameras-not-safer-cause-more-rear-end-injuries/
>>>
>>
>>
>> That said nothing about the relative severity of crashes.
>> Tailgating crashes are not known for particularly serious
>> injuries. "T-bone" crashes from red light running are much
>> more injurious or deadly.
>>
>> And again, if the city is making money by ticketing
>> violators, I call that a good thing, as long as it's done
>> honestly. It's money that doesn't have to be contributed by
>> law abiding citizens.
>>
>>
>
> There are not various degrees of 'dead'.
>
> https://duckduckgo.com/?q=stopped+at+red+light+fatal+rear+end+crash&t=h_&ia=web

But there are various degrees of deadly.

Anecdotes are fun, but many of your google hits refer to cars already
stopped at lights. I hope you're not trying to argue that nobody should
ever stop for a red light!

Data clearly indicates right angle crashes are much more likely to kill
or seriously injure compared to tailgating crashes. Here's a discussion
starter: https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/motor-vehicle/overview/type-of-crash/

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 5/16/2022 9:39 PM, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:

<snip>

> "Yet Australia’s COVID death rate sits at one-tenth of America’s, putting the nation of 25 million people (with around 7,500 deaths) near the top of global rankings in the protection of life."

In many countries, due to political considerations, the number of Covid
deaths has been vastly under-reported.

• The UK is actually doing very well, the official Covid death rate is
only about 10% less than the excess death rate.

• In the U.S. there have been about 175,000 excess deaths that logically
could only be attributed to Covid, about a 17% difference.

• In Russia it's about 361K official Covid deaths but 1.2 million excess
deaths, about 840,000 unreported Covid deaths.

• China claims only 5,217 Covid deaths, but the actual number is
estimated to be 1.7 million.

• Australia, which took the pandemic seriously, the excess death rate is
actually 50% _lower_ than the Covid death rate. The steps they took not
only resulted in a relatively low Covid death rate, it also reduced the
expected excess death rate.

On Wed, 18 May 2022 10:17:13 +0200, Rolf Mantel
<news@hartig-mantel.de> wrote:

>Am 17.05.2022 um 20:07 schrieb Jeff Liebermann:
>> On Tue, 17 May 2022 13:21:30 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Do those cameras have a beneficial effect? That is, did they reduce red
>>> light violations?
>>
>> Nope. Red light cameras increase accidents:
>> <https://ww2.motorists.org/issues/red-light-cameras/increase-accidents/>
>>
>>> And what's the public's attitude toward them?
>>
>> Dunno. I helped a friend deal with a $490 red light camera fine in
>> Capitola Calif. He had two dashboard camera videos, front and rear,
>> which included GPS generated speed indicators. I arranged for the
>> independent calibration tests, which showed that the GPS speed
>> indicators were more accurate than the one in the traffic camera due
>> to a badly programmed slant angle. After a few seconds of
>> contemplation, the judge dropped the charges due to a "possible
>> equipment failure". Capitola tried to collect it anyway, which is
>> another story.

>I'm not quite following you here. In what sense so "red light cameras"
>measure the speed of vehicles? Are you maybe talking about Speed
>cameras here rather than about red light cameras?

It was both. The ticket was for both speeding and running the red
light. The photos were not clear as to whether the car was in the
intersection. Of course, the operating company ATS (American Traffic
Solutions) claimed it was "within range of acceptable error". The
ticket also showed other statistics and details including the speed.
The speed limit was 30 mph and the front dashboard camera video showed
25 mph maximum when approaching the intersection. The ticket claimed
about 40 mph. which was appended to the running a red light charge.
The camera determines speed by the vehicles change in position between
two consecutive photos. At the time, wireless detectors in the
roadway were not being used.

ATS is now part of Verra Mobility:
<https://www.verramobility.com>

Capitola was having multiple problems with their system,
<https://www.thenewspaper.com/news/11/1146.asp>
<https://www.thenewspaper.com/news/21/2118.asp>
possibly because ATS wanted to generate as much revenue as possible
for the city so the city council would approve expansion of a
profitable project.
<https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2017/08/24/capitola-extends-red-light-cameras-on-41st-ave-for-two-more-years/>
We suspected that ATS enabled on the speed trap feature without
informing anyone and later started automatically issuing tickets that
including speeding violations.

What the defendant was trying to do was discredit the accuracy of the
camera based on the rather large speed errors. We later noticed that
date and time on the photo about 30 minutes off when compared to the
dashboard cameras. After listening to a brief summary of the
discrepancies found, and not looking at much of the documentation, the
judge ordered the charges to be dropped. I wasn't present in the
courtroom.

Unfortunately, Capitola and ATS assumed the judgement applied only to
the speeding charge, and attempted to collect on the red light charge.
That took about a year to fix, another year to get to get it removed
from the DMV and insurance company records, and an unknown time to get
reimbursed by the insurance company for an insurance premium increase.
There was also some kind of problem getting the bail money back from
Capitola, but I don't recall the details.

If you want, I can explain how the slant angle affects the calculated
speed, but not now. Busy.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On 5/18/2022 10:31 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

<snip>

> What the defendant was trying to do was discredit the accuracy of the
> camera based on the rather large speed errors. We later noticed that
> date and time on the photo about 30 minutes off when compared to the
> dashboard cameras. After listening to a brief summary of the
> discrepancies found, and not looking at much of the documentation, the
> judge ordered the charges to be dropped. I wasn't present in the
> courtroom.

The problem here is that many other victims just paid these tickets,
without going to court, since it's such a hassle to fight a ticket.

I recall one time when I was dropping my son off at swimming lessons and
an over-zealous officer was ticketing every vehicle that dropped someone
off by the curb, insisting that it was not legal to stop there. It was
in a parking lot at the local community college and there was no red
curb and no signs that prohibited stopping. I took a bunch of photos and
successfully got the ticket voided, but I'm certain that all the other
victims just paid the fine. Shortly afterward, the college went out and
painted the curb red and I think that they added a "No Stopping" sign,
you can see the red curb at <https://goo.gl/maps/cH8n8x1yphrjRqfZ9>.

On Wednesday, May 18, 2022 at 8:14:42 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> On 5/18/2022 9:56 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > On 5/17/2022 4:02 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> >> On 5/17/2022 1:51 PM, sms wrote:
> >>> On 5/17/2022 11:07 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> >>>> On Tue, 17 May 2022 13:21:30 -0400, Frank Krygowski
> >>>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Do those cameras have a beneficial effect? That is, did
> >>>>> they reduce red
> >>>>> light violations?
> >>>>
> >>>> Nope. Red light cameras increase accidents:
> >>>> <https://ww2.motorists.org/issues/red-light-cameras/increase-accidents/>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Yeah, one of my fears is that if I stop for a red light,
> >>> that the car behind me thinks that I'm going to run (and
> >>> they plan to run it too) will rear-end my car. You can't be
> >>> too conservative in your approach to traffic lights. If the
> >>> light turns yellow, you can be pretty certain that the line
> >>> of cars behind you has no intention of stopping when the
> >>> light turns red. Similarly, when the light turns green I
> >>> wait a couple of seconds before going because it's likely
> >>> that there will be at least a couple of cars that run the
> >>> red light on the perpendicular street.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> Yep.
> >>
> >> https://www.kenallenlaw.com/2014/12/red-light-cameras-rear-end-crashes-chicago-debate/
> >>
> >>
> >> https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/12/major-chicago-study-finds-red-light-cameras-not-safer-cause-more-rear-end-injuries/
> >
> >
> > That said nothing about the relative severity of crashes.
> > Tailgating crashes are not known for particularly serious
> > injuries. "T-bone" crashes from red light running are much
> > more injurious or deadly.
> >
> > And again, if the city is making money by ticketing
> > violators, I call that a good thing, as long as it's done
> > honestly. It's money that doesn't have to be contributed by
> > law abiding citizens.
> >
> >
> There are not various degrees of 'dead'.
>
> https://duckduckgo.com/?q=stopped+at+red+light+fatal+rear+end+crash&t=h_&ia=web

I haven't gotten a ticket at these lights yet because I drive below the speed limits in the area where they have these super short yellow lives.

On 5/18/2022 1:31 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Wed, 18 May 2022 10:17:13 +0200, Rolf Mantel
> <news@hartig-mantel.de> wrote:
>
>> Am 17.05.2022 um 20:07 schrieb Jeff Liebermann:
>>> On Tue, 17 May 2022 13:21:30 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Do those cameras have a beneficial effect? That is, did they reduce red
>>>> light violations?
>>>
>>> Nope. Red light cameras increase accidents:
>>> <https://ww2.motorists.org/issues/red-light-cameras/increase-accidents/>
>>>
>>>> And what's the public's attitude toward them?
>>>
>>> Dunno. I helped a friend deal with a $490 red light camera fine in
>>> Capitola Calif. He had two dashboard camera videos, front and rear,
>>> which included GPS generated speed indicators. I arranged for the
>>> independent calibration tests, which showed that the GPS speed
>>> indicators were more accurate than the one in the traffic camera due
>>> to a badly programmed slant angle. After a few seconds of
>>> contemplation, the judge dropped the charges due to a "possible
>>> equipment failure". Capitola tried to collect it anyway, which is
>>> another story.
>
>> I'm not quite following you here. In what sense so "red light cameras"
>> measure the speed of vehicles? Are you maybe talking about Speed
>> cameras here rather than about red light cameras?
>
> It was both. The ticket was for both speeding and running the red
> light. The photos were not clear as to whether the car was in the
> intersection. Of course, the operating company ATS (American Traffic
> Solutions) claimed it was "within range of acceptable error". The
> ticket also showed other statistics and details including the speed.
> The speed limit was 30 mph and the front dashboard camera video showed
> 25 mph maximum when approaching the intersection. The ticket claimed
> about 40 mph. which was appended to the running a red light charge.
> The camera determines speed by the vehicles change in position between
> two consecutive photos. At the time, wireless detectors in the
> roadway were not being used.
>
> ATS is now part of Verra Mobility:
> <https://www.verramobility.com>
>
> Capitola was having multiple problems with their system,
> <https://www.thenewspaper.com/news/11/1146.asp>
> <https://www.thenewspaper.com/news/21/2118.asp>
> possibly because ATS wanted to generate as much revenue as possible
> for the city so the city council would approve expansion of a
> profitable project.
> <https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2017/08/24/capitola-extends-red-light-cameras-on-41st-ave-for-two-more-years/>
> We suspected that ATS enabled on the speed trap feature without
> informing anyone and later started automatically issuing tickets that
> including speeding violations.
>
> What the defendant was trying to do was discredit the accuracy of the
> camera based on the rather large speed errors. We later noticed that
> date and time on the photo about 30 minutes off when compared to the
> dashboard cameras. After listening to a brief summary of the
> discrepancies found, and not looking at much of the documentation, the
> judge ordered the charges to be dropped. I wasn't present in the
> courtroom.
>
> Unfortunately, Capitola and ATS assumed the judgement applied only to
> the speeding charge, and attempted to collect on the red light charge.
> That took about a year to fix, another year to get to get it removed
> from the DMV and insurance company records, and an unknown time to get
> reimbursed by the insurance company for an insurance premium increase.
> There was also some kind of problem getting the bail money back from
> Capitola, but I don't recall the details.

I don't have personal experience fighting tickets, but I recall one good
engineer friend, years ago, who successfully fought one. IIRC, he had
skidded into a crash with another car, and was ticketed for speeding
based on the length of the skid. He came to the court with a poster of
calculations of stopping distances based on coefficient of friction and
a claim of moisture or mud on the road.

The judge said "I see you've done your homework" and dropped charges,
but certainly didn't bother to verify any of the physics.

And when our local speed cameras were first installed, the newspaper
carried the reports of some of the appeals. One woman claimed she
shouldn't pay a fine because the speed limit sign was too small. The
judge let her off.

Based on those tales, I suspect that any reasonably respectable looking
person has a reasonable chance of ticket dismissal with any vaguely
reasonable excuse.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 5/18/2022 11:50 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> writes:
>
>> On 5/13/2022 5:28 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
>>> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 5/12/2022 5:21 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>>> thought that COVID rules and responses would be free of negative
>>>> effects. But ever since the virus appeared, some irrational
>>>> right-wingers have been pretending all would have been perfect if we
>>>> had just let COVID run its course unabated.
>>> I find it odd the way that public health questions can no longer be
>>> discussed without devolving into completely irrelevant tribal politics.
>>> It should be possible to discuss these things on their merits without
>>> lumping anyone who disagrees with you into the *-winger camp.
>>
>> You're ignoring very strong correlations. From the very beginning of
>> this epidemic, the right and far-right were dismissive of the problem
>> and against almost any proposed defense. To this day, it's hard to
>> find a COVID skeptic who isn't pretty hard right.
>
> That is not my recollection. In early 2020, when the press started
> running stories about people dropping dead in Wuhan, Trump's reaction
> was to use border restrictions. Now border restrictions are costly and
> damaging in the same way as other NPIs, but they do have a better chance
> of being at least temporarily effective, as we can see in New Zealand.
> They're not a permanent fix, as we can also see in New Zealand, not to
> mention North Korea.
>
> The response from prominent Democrats was to decry restrictions as
> racist. Nancy Pelosi invited the press to watch as she publicly
> celebrated Chinese New Year in San Francisco. When Trump seemed
> worried, Democrats told us all was well, there was nothing to worry
> about, and if we did, we were racists.

Your recollection seems pretty faulty. See
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/03/the-facts-on-trumps-travel-restrictions/

> I remember Kamala Harris during the vice presidential debates saying
> that she would be very reluctant to take a "Trump vaccine", which was
> being developed in an awful hurry without adequate safeguards. She had
> a point there, but somehow after the vaccines rolled out right *after*
> the election, they became "Biden vaccines", and every Democrat jumped on
> the bandwagon to not only take the experimental vaccine, but to try to
> force everyone everywhere to take it.

My personal physician said he would be reluctant to take the vaccine
when it first came out. He later enthusiastically endorsed it. In his
case at least, it was not political. It was based on getting enough data
on benefits vs. risks.

>
>> That's not to say every proposed defense was correct, nor that every
>> attitude of every left-winger was logical. But the farthest-right guy
>> I ever hang around with was the only one in a backyard party who said
>> "Hell no, I'm not getting vaccinated. I don't know what's in that
>> vaccine." Oddly enough, he was later treated with monoclonal
>> antibodies, at ~100 times the cost, even though I'm sure he didn't
>> know what was in that treatment either.
>
> Monoclonal antibodies are a more mature technology than mRNA treatments.
> The mRNA treatments have a lot of very clever technology in them, but
> were never used on humans prior to covid because it was not clear that
> they were sufficiently safe. It's still not clear.

I disagree. I have one friend who is a research virologist. He strongly
disagrees. In fact, there are now many millions of data bits that disagree.

>
>>>> As it was, we've had a million deaths (no matter what Tom says)
>>>> despite serious defense measures. Without measures, those deaths might
>>>> have doubled. Are you in favor of that?
>>> I have not seen any credible evidence that the deaths would have
>>> doubled,
>>> or even increased at all.
>>
>> The word "credible" is inherently subjective. Tom still doesn't
>> believe that the stock market rose during Obama's presidency, despite
>> reams of proof.
>
> But your figure of double is just pulled out the air.

True, which is why I was careful to include the phrase "might have." But
whether the factor was two or was some other number, it seems obvious
the deaths would have been much higher. At least, it's obvious to those
people actually working in related medical fields. My best (now retired)
physician friend certainly has no doubts.

>> Think back to the times when hospitals were treating people in tents
>> because all beds were full, when people were on ventilators for
>> weeks. You're pretending mass gatherings would still have made sense?
>> _That's_ incredible.
>
>>>> You ignore the fact that the infected and ignorant put not only
>>>> themselves at risk. They impose their ignorant choices on others.
>>> There has never, ever been a case in human history when controlling
>>> "ignorance" stopped a respiratory pandemic.
>>
>> Human history is very old. Knowledge of viruses occurred in only the
>> last sliver of that time. In other words, the world as a whole is much
>> less ignorant than it was.
>
> The complete revision of ideas about respiratory pandemic handling happened
> during the *last two years*. That was not due to an increase in
> knowledge or wisdom.

It _was_ due to an increase in knowledge, mostly in response to a
tremendous increase in available data! At the beginning of the pandemic
the mode of transmission was not even certain! Remember fomite or
surface transmission worries?

The scientific community has been VERY hard at work, trying to
understand a new virus with exceptional transmissibility. As facts were
learned, strategies changed. This happens - or should happen - in every
human endeavor.

>
>> Which does not mean there are not exceptions - dedicated,
>> enthusiastic, even bombastic exceptions who treasure their ignorance.
>>
>> I've never been a fan of ignorance.
>
> Yet you're constantly deriding the modern safety culture when it comes
> to hard hats, or bicycling, or anything trivial. When it comes to this
> massive and hugely damaging expansion of safety culture you somehow
> become blind.

I'm very much data driven, and I think I'm noted for posting relevant
data. Admittedly, that doesn't cut much ice with people who are
politically driven.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Wed, 18 May 2022 07:12:20 -0700 (PDT), Ann Kunich
<elizabethannie.47@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Tuesday, May 17, 2022 at 3:13:45 PM UTC-7, Sepp Ruf wrote:
>> AMuzi wrote:
>> > On 5/17/2022 8:59 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
>> >> Joy Beeson writes:
>>
>> >>> The ordinary pleated mask is a *handkerchief*. Only handkerchief
>> >>> precautions apply. (But we used to collect handkerchiefs used by sick
>> >>> people people in a paper bag, and burn them bag and all.)
>> See, that was so terribly climate-destructive it basically flooded New
>> Orleans! Letting birds build nests from discarded plastic masks is so
>> much more ecological!
>> ;-)
>> >> As far as I know all US mask mandates have been satisfiable by wearing a
>> >> handkerchief, train-robber style.
>> Over here, you were refused food purchases, let alone public transport,
>> for wearing a medical mask instead of an N95 dust mask. That's why I
>> call WEF-fanboy Scharfie a willing starvation camp manager.
>> > +1
>> > All about power and virtue signalling. A chunk of tee shirt
>> > with ear loops isn't slowing down any aerosol virus.
>> I suspect a once washed, Andre-old stock DDT sprinkled, India-colored
>> cotton t-shirt to be practically safer than inhaling broken plastic
>> fibres from wearing N95 masks.
>> <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8441111/>
>>
>> More goodies at <https://t.me/s/CoronvirusPlushie>
>> <https://dailysceptic.org/2022/05/02/the-foegen-effect-why-face-masks-increase-the-death-rate-of-covid-19/>
>
>The WHO, CDC and the Democrat Party have lorded over the largest transfer of wealth in history and it has been entirely from the poor to the rich. The middle class is so rapidly dissolving into the lower class that you would think that Frank, Russell, Scharf and Flunky would be on the Republican side since they have told us that they were attempting to end the rein of the rich and powerful. This simply shows what liars they are. They are willing to slice their own throats rather than admit that I was right about all of this from the start. That is proof positive of mental illness.

An interesting statement. But HOW is wealth being transferred from the
poor to the rich? I would really be interested in how this is done as
the "Poor" are usually designated as those without assets.

So you seize what appear to be non-existent assets and give them to
people with assets who now have their own assets PLUS these nonexempt
assets. Making them richer?
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Wed, 18 May 2022 10:51:00 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 5/17/2022 2:07 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> On Tue, 17 May 2022 13:21:30 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Do those cameras have a beneficial effect? That is, did they reduce red
>>> light violations?
>>
>> Nope. Red light cameras increase accidents:
>> <https://ww2.motorists.org/issues/red-light-cameras/increase-accidents/>
>>
>>> And what's the public's attitude toward them?
>>
>> Dunno. I helped a friend deal with a $490 red light camera fine in
>> Capitola Calif. He had two dashboard camera videos, front and rear,
>> which included GPS generated speed indicators. I arranged for the
>> independent calibration tests, which showed that the GPS speed
>> indicators were more accurate than the one in the traffic camera due
>> to a badly programmed slant angle. After a few seconds of
>> contemplation, the judge dropped the charges due to a "possible
>> equipment failure". Capitola tried to collect it anyway, which is
>> another story.
>>
>> If there is a bad attitude towards speed cameras, methinks it's mostly
>> due to the cities using violations to enhance revenue.
>
>As I've probably said before, I have absolutely no problem with cities
>raising revenues from law violators, as long as it's done honestly.
>Despite libertarian or "no taxes" fantasies, it takes money to run a
>civilization. Law breakers should pay extra to help with funding.
>
>> Any improvements in safety are lost in the noise.
>
>I'm not yet convinced. Most of the studies cited have been from a
>"motorists association" that's well known for fighting any attempt to
>restrict motorists privileges. For example, they've highlighted when
>crash counts did not decrease significantly, while omitting the shift
>from deadly T crashes to much milder tailgating crashes. (And don't get
>me going on the idiocy of tailgaters.)
>
>
>> A predictable result is
>> for the cities to encourage violations, rather than discourage them,
>> as the cameras were originally intended to do.
>
>Again, there are well established standards for yellow light duration.
>Any competent lawyer should be able to defend against "short yellow"
>tickets, probably in a profitable class action suit.
>
>Also, I'd like to see some data on what percentage of red light cameras
>have been found to have "short yellows." I'll bet it's quite small.

When I lived there the New England town I grew up in had a real
democratic government. Each year a "Town Meeting" was held and a
"Selectman" elected to manage the town for the coming year.

Anyway, one year the idea of having parking meters was on the agenda
and as part of the sales pitch the company proposing the idea set out
the advantages to the town. The meters were the property of the
company, they maintained them and would even collect the money from
the meters - I believe the meters had some sort of counter to tell how
much money had been paid in - and effectively it was essentially free
money from the town's point of view.

As an aside, some old Geezer got up and argued that he'd, "been
driving a horse and buggy to town for Saturday shopping for 20 years"
and he didn't see why he'd have to pay for tethering his horse... so
the town decreed that there would be "Horses Only" meter less" parking
area at the town common.
--
Cheers,

John B.