you could turn right on a red light but you have to stop first.

I figured there'd be people challenging them in court, just like they try get off on an infraction because the officer wasn't wearing a hat or something, even though they did commit it. People are pathetic.
@padriver, I was refferring to people turning left, but no one actually stops when turning right either, which could some of the reason pedestrians are being run down left and right!

But the fear of being caught on camera is bound to make people think twice about speeding through that light. Maybe we should get speed cameras as well, or are those not allowed in Saskatchewan, since Saskatoon has instead resorted to aircraft patrol which I would think is a HUGE waste of tax dollars.

@padriver: Absolutely correct; and how many drivers do you see breaking this rule around the city? On any given day, one can see dozens of idiots doing this. Surely, if they know about the rule then they must believe they will never get caught.

I would be curious to see the police statistics on this particular infraction, i.e. failing to stop at a stop sign or red light. There probably haven't been many tickets issued for this in the last few years anyway. As I have said before, just watch the northbound traffic at 6 Ave and 15 st East turning right onto 15th. Hardly anyone stops on the red light before turning, and then only if it's to avoid a collision!

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't 6th and 15th have a "merge" lane when turning right with only a yield sign? Therefore (if I'm right) that would supersede the red light because drivers don't actually have to stop because they have their own lane of traffic, they just have to yield to oncoming.

That being said, I absolutely agree that the drivers in this city are horrible. I'm currently "training" my daughter how to drive so she can go for her license and let me just say that it is a white knuckle experience...not just because of her, but because of everyone else on the road.

I reiterate my comment from a while ago where I said that license retesting should be done every 5 years when you go to renew your license. Now that we have the 5year one in place.

I'm sorry I am wrong. I was thinking of 2nd ave and 15th st instead of 6th and 15th.
My Bad LOL!!

This content is currently blocked. The content is either under review by SeeClickFix or has been confirmed by SeeClickFix for violation(s) of SeeClickFix Terms of Use (https://www.civicplus.com/terms-of-service). Content that aligns with SeeClickFix Terms of Use will be posted, and content that does not align with our Terms of Use will not be permitted for public viewing.

But we have a nice soccer center and don't forget about the lovely Scarrow Park.

@Mr H tagged only because you were not following the posted rules. Hard to see how you knew there parents were not married.

Wow, Seriously?

YOU THINK THATS GOOD? PUT A BUNCH OF TAX COLLECTING CAMERAS OUT THERE. WAIT UNTIL YOU GET A TICKET IN THE MAIL FOR SLIGHTLY ROOLING THROUGH A QUITE INTERSECTION. I WOULD HAVE TO SAY NO

@RI: Your comment makes me think that you see nothing wrong with an innocent "rolling stop." Instead of red-light cameras, I would rather see a cop pulling a car over and dealing with the issue immediately. But in my opinion, rolling stops are not a stop at all, and if you don't stop the forward movement of your vehicle, then you are NOT stopped.

Once the police allow drivers to cross that line, then everything is open to interpretation, such as, how fast did the vehicle roll through the turn, how quiet was the street, how good was the visibility, etc. . . ? To the police: just enforce the laws as they are at street level, and people will eventually get the message and learn how to drive properly - - or they will lose their priviledge to drive.

@ RI, you don't roll through stop signs and red lights. I sincerely hope you recieve a ticket before someone is injured at your hands. they are there for a reason so get a grip, I actually hope you one day lose your license, one less idiot on the raod.

I'm also not just saying cameras are needed at this particular intersection, BUT ALL MAJOR INTERSECTIONS IN THE CITY.

srry here is the link

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/story/2011/06/27/sk-regina-red-light-cameras.html

cameras are nto needed they will cause more accidents that they do help... ppl will slam on there breaks to avoid getting a ticket resulting in rear end accidents.. here i sa link to the topic of relights in regina and stakatoon...

i personally dont see why we need them we have only had one horrific red light accident this year so far but it was technically a yellow light.

UM HEY, if you rear end ANYONE YOU are at fault. That means: You're going too fast, and travelling too close, so good, another way to get bad drivers off the road.
How many accidents are at INTERSECTIONS? And WHY would there be an accident there? Because someone is running a red light, turning when they're not supposed to etc. And you failed with your link.
The point of a YELLOW light is to give time to clear an intersection. It is AGAINST THE LAW if you are in the intersection when the light is red.

@Gwing, you've just proven how stupid PA drivers are. Thanks for clarifying that and proving the point.
Red Light Cameras FTW

Red light cameras are nothing but a tax grab, furthermore, they do not punish the dangerous driver, but rather the registered owner of the vehicle. What we need is not red light cameras, but rather police who do their job, get OUT of their cars, and hand out tickets.

BTW, red light cameras do not stop drunk drivers, disqualified drivers, or those with outstanding warrants. Think about that.

I think the city would make a lot of money from red lite cameras

Red light cameras often create a serious hazard, especially in the winter. Just ask anyone in Regina when they see someone slam on their brakes to avoid a red light ticket, even though the advance amber lights were not flashing when they approached the intersection . Then everyone behind them slams on their brakes or swerves to avoid a pile up. Or they rear end each other.

This system only works in optimal weather when you can maintain the speed limit after passing the ambers. If traffic is slow or there are poor weather conditions, you usually cannot rely on the ambers to let you know if the light is about to change as it will take you longer to reach the intersection. Then if it changes to yellow just as you are about to enter....the instinct is to hit your brakes cause who wants to pay $300 or $400.

I don't try to beat lights, but red light cameras seem to veto common sense. And btw, turning on a red light is legal in Sask unless otherwise posted.

Donna

Turning right on a red light is legal in Saskatchewan, but you must come to a complete stop first.

The "rear ending accidents" defense it pathetic. Doesn't matter who slams on their brakes, if you're following too closely, then you're at fault. Just another example of the how pathetic most "drivers" are. I've never seen an accident because of the red light cameras in Saskatoon

I think this is a great idea. I just watched FIVE cars go through an amber-turning red.

Agree 100%. whoever is dumb enough to cause an accident because of a red light camera shouldn't hvae a license anyways. pay attention, don't tailgate and don't speed.

Bo - you are wrong, so I'm correcting you. Dag said the NORTH bound traffic on 6th turning right onto 15th don't stop at the red light, which they do have to legally do. It is the EAST bound traffic on 15th turning right onto 6th that have the merge lane with the yield sign .

i also think this is a good idea. too many near misses because people disregard a red light

Either redlight cameras or increased traffic patrol...which is it going to be

http://blog.motorists.org/10-reasons-to-oppose-red-light-cameras/#idc-container

Check out this link for even more opinion and fact regarding the impact (and legal problems) of red light cameras.

I agree with Donna, but will add, If we want to stop accidents then we need more patrol and harsher tickets! A noise Violation Ticket is more expensive than a traffic ticket and music or barking dogs can't kill you!!!

pooky and SJ...in a perfect world I agree. It shouldn't happen. But I drove through Lewvan and Dewdney daily for over 2 years and saw many accidents. And also several 'memorial' wreaths on the lightposts over that time.

I don't know if fear of the red light camera contributed to those accidents, but it certainly didn't prevent them.

Calling names, or describing utopian scenarios of what drivers should or shouldn't do, doesn't change the reality.

"In the age of the camera, two things must happen to trigger that camera. One, the light in your direction must be red. Not green, not yellow, but red. Second, there must be a sensor at the stop line to trigger the camera. That keeps the camera from 'claiming' that you ran a red light if it was still yellow when you entered the intersection. Even if the light DOES turn red before you complete the intersection, you've already passed the sensor, which did not actuate since the yellow light precluded it."

"A cop is waiting for red light runners. You approach the intersection, the light turns yellow, you have plenty of time to get through. But the cop stops you anyway, claiming that you ran a red light. You state that the light was yellow. He says it turned red while you were still in the intersection. You were under the light, so you can't see whether it was red or still yellow. Try arguing that case in court. As a passenger in vehicles that have been cited for 'running a red light' under the circumstances just described, I was in a position to see if the light had actually turned red, and it hadn't. And many cops have even said that going through the yellow light is considered running the red. A stupid statement since blinking yellow lights would also require you to stop, and then proceed, just as blinking red lights do. But they don't."

So I ride motorcycle, and am already hard to see. So I'm in the intersection, noting the count down and the light is about to turn yellow, and I'm waiting to turn left. I observe the traffic, and the light turns yellow, then red as morons continue to go through the intersection. So I am now IN the intersection when there is a red light.
And before anyone tries to argue, it states in the drivers handbook that you can remain in your lane IN and intersection while waiting for oncoming traffic to pass. It ALSO states: Once in an intersection, when the signal changes to amber or red, a vehicle is permitted (required) to clear the intersection.

Red Light cameras work

if you have to slam on your brakes, you are going to fast or following too close

think about what you are saying!

and as for RI: if you roll through a stop sign, or red light, YOU BROKE THE LAW!

BooHoo if you get a TICKET!

Pooky wrote:

"A cop is waiting for red light runners. You approach the intersection, the light turns yellow, you have plenty of time to get through. But the cop stops you anyway, claiming that you ran a red light. You state that the light was yellow. He says it turned red while you were still in the intersection. You were under the light, so you can't see whether it was red or still yellow. Try arguing that case in court. As a passenger in vehicles that have been cited for 'running a red light' under the circumstances just described, I was in a position to see if the light had actually turned red, and it hadn't. And many cops have even said that going through the yellow light is considered running the red. A stupid statement since blinking yellow lights would also require you to stop, and then proceed, just as blinking red lights do. But they don't."

the BEST response to you concerns are to get in front of a COP Car, and when coming to an intersection with a green light, STAND on the Brakes and have him/her rear-end you. Then when they as why? Just tell them you thought the light was going to turn yellow, and didn't want a ticket as they are now ticketing for yellow light running.
they are at fault for driving too close.

legaleze...drivers who run red lights are the same drivers who speed and/or follow too close. What makes anyone think that a red light camera will suddenly turn them into good drivers that will follow all of the other laws. I stand by what I said...the camera will cause as many or more accidents. I've seen the aftermath. And once a camera is in...the city won't take it out because it will get addicted to the revenue.

BTW...this chatter may all be for naught....City crews were installing something at 28th and 2nd Ave this week, and it sure looked like it could be a camera.
Donna

OH HEY, why would you COMPLAIN that the red light cameras are nothing more than a MONEY GRAB?!?! Is it because you regularly run red lights?
Great thing to have, a money grab, when we are in need of so much upgrading, including a Bridge, and repairs to our current one.

If you want to follow that line of thinking, you are going to need a LOT of people running red lights to make the $81 million for the bridge. You might have to set up cctv's all through the city....then you can 'money grab' from all the jaywalkers, all the people that litter, and whatever else you would like to enforce. Then you can build a wonderful bridge and have it inspected by the same people who failed to notice this massive defect last year when they inspected it.

Of course we know there would be a problem with identifying jaywalkers and would probably be far too difficult to prosecute based on camera evidence. (Just look at the Vancouver riot, no one's been formally charged yet based on video.)

This is the same issue that a prosecutor faces when someone challenges a red light ticket. Unlike a parking ticket, running a red light is a driver offense rather than a fine to the registered owner of a car. Unfortunately, cameras issuing tickets often mean a registered owner is unjustly accused and must go to great lengths and cost to prove it. Read more at these links. Along with the cases presented against camera tickets....they also propose other, more sensible solutions.

http://www.motorists.org/red-light-cameras/
http://www.motorists.org/speed-cameras/arizona-freeway-speed-cameras

For the record...I have supported a 2nd bridge for years.....and I don't even try to beat yellow lights, let alone red ones.

Well here in Lloydminster we don't have red light cameras but what we do have are unmarked vehicles with a big camera out the back window that records and if you don't completely come to a stop at a stop sign u get dinged,,, 1 ticket in the mail and you think twice not coming to a complete stop and count for 3 seconds before you proceed,,, you never know where an umarked vehicle will be during the day..You can even view your ticket online and see if you were in the right or the wrong..They also get you for speeding.. all recorded... just letting you all know...

Diane, we now have that for construction zones... run by the Commissionaires

but having them in the city, randomly moving to different intersections, is an excellent idea

AND perhaps folks should review the rules of the road once in awhile

But regarding redlightcameras and radarspeedcameras, I'm all for them 100%
If folks want to voluntarily pay more taxes, who am I to stop them.

These things work when people know about them. My GPS unit in my vehicle tells me about them.

I've been in the middle of an intersection where there were cameras and the light had just turned yellow, so would have been unsafe for me to slam on my brakes, so I entered the intersection, but could not turn, so was delayed to the point of being in the middle when the light turned red. I had to wait out two more vehicles that ran the red the other way before I could safely make my turn... oncoming traffic from my right were tooting, but I guess they would enjoy being in accidents themselves...