Photo-monitoring; systems to enforce traffic light signals. (HB255)
Introduced By
Del. Scott Lingamfelter (R-Woodbridge)
Progress
✓ |
Introduced |
✓ |
Passed Committee |
✓ |
Passed House |
✓ |
Passed Senate |
✓ |
Signed by Governor |
☐ |
Became Law |
Description
"Photo-red" traffic light enforcement systems. Requires that all "photo-red" systems have yellow light signal lengths of at least three seconds. Read the Bill »
Outcome
Bill Has Passed
History
Date | Action |
---|---|
12/30/2013 | Committee |
12/30/2013 | Prefiled and ordered printed; offered 01/08/14 14102015D |
12/30/2013 | Referred to Committee on Transportation |
01/10/2014 | Assigned Transportation sub: Subcommittee #1 |
01/15/2014 | Subcommittee recommends reporting (7-Y 0-N) |
01/16/2014 | Reported from Transportation (22-Y 0-N) (see vote tally) |
01/17/2014 | Read first time |
01/20/2014 | Read second time and engrossed |
01/21/2014 | Read third time and passed House (89-Y 2-N) |
01/21/2014 | VOTE: PASSAGE (89-Y 2-N) (see vote tally) |
01/22/2014 | Constitutional reading dispensed |
01/22/2014 | Referred to Committee on Transportation |
02/12/2014 | Reported from Transportation with amendments (15-Y 0-N) |
02/14/2014 | Constitutional reading dispensed (37-Y 0-N) |
02/17/2014 | Read third time |
02/17/2014 | Reading of amendments waived |
02/17/2014 | Committee amendments agreed to |
02/17/2014 | Engrossed by Senate as amended |
02/17/2014 | Passed Senate with amendments (40-Y 0-N) |
02/18/2014 | Placed on Calendar |
02/19/2014 | Senate amendments agreed to by House (99-Y 0-N) |
02/19/2014 | VOTE: ADOPTION (99-Y 0-N) (see vote tally) |
02/21/2014 | Enrolled |
02/21/2014 | Bill text as passed House and Senate (HB255ER) |
02/21/2014 | Signed by Speaker |
02/23/2014 | Signed by President |
03/05/2014 | G Approved by Governor-Chapter 163 (effective 7/1/14) |
03/05/2014 | G Acts of Assembly Chapter text (CHAP0163) |
Comments
Federal rules ALREADY require yellows to be at least three seconds long. Any light with less than a three second yellow already violates federal rules.
James C. Walker, Life Member-National Motorists Association
James, do you what rule that is, specifically? I'd love to see it, to find out what sort of enforcement mechanism exists for states who do not follow that rule, if any.
The ACLU of Virginia supports repeal of the state statute authorizing the use of photo-monitoring systems for traffic enforcement. Data available now shows that these programs, compared to extended yellow lights, do not actually make us safer. A Federal Highway Administration study showed that, although red-light cameras decrease side-impact collisions by 25 percent, they cause a 15 percent increase in the number of rear-impact crashes. There are also constitutional due process concerns about the use of this technology. Use of the cameras to record traffic infractions require you to prove that you are innocent. That is not the usual constitutional requirement. Moreover, the systems in place make it difficult for most drivers to effectively challenge the tickets in court. Sometimes these systems don’t send out tickets for weeks. The driver may not be able to remember, much less prove, where he/she was four weeks ago. There are also privacy concerns regarding the collection and use of information from these cameras for dragnet surveillance. As is the case will all of the new technologies, whether red-light cameras, drones or license plate readers, the greatest concern is not knowing how the pictures and data collected will be used beyond the initial reason given. In this case, the greatest rationale for continuing to use these cameras is the revenue streams that they are producing for localities and the possible use of the data for purposes other than traffic enforcement and safety.