Comments

  • Third coast surfer you must work for the city if not you always sound as if you do. I have already given you nothing but facts and are undeniable. There is nothing that i am doing that would cloud the judgement of simple minded people. The whole yellow light timing is under 3 seconds and if you dont believe me go to the port lavaca against red light facebook page and watch the video. Fact! For the ones that think i should have taken it up with txdot, i have already done that. fact! The real issue with the red light cameras in Port Lavaca is that the people were denied a vote on wither or not they should be in-place. Whatever side you may stand on the issue of the red light cameras i would hope to think that democracy would prevail and allow the people to decide. What the PL elected officials are doing is clearly voter suppression. We can argue back and forth on if the cameras are working or not even if they should be up. But we will have a vote and my guess is that the cameras WILL be coming down if the city will allow a vote, but that's what courts are for if they keep up their antics. For everyone who want facts on the red light cameras in Port Lavaca i have a new website coming out BanPortLavacaCams.com so go their for all the facts and updates!

    August 29, 2011 at 11:26 a.m.
  • LOL @ dwayne, who insists that everyone that disagrees with his point of view must be an idiot or corrupt. Bet you win a lot of arguments that way...

    Here's my take on the situation:
    There are some serious problems in the present system that need to be resolved, but the underlying premise is a good one - let a camera catch the blatent offenders and send them a fine, while our 'live' officers handle other tasks.
    Yes - there are problems with the criminal/civil issues; the citations that should not be given on right turns; intersection design; and the yellow light timing. These can, and will, be resolved eventually.
    Yes - I agree that the systems should be run by US companies, and that the bulk of the revenue should stay local.
    Unknown - various studies on accidents produce very different results. It appears that the results are heavily influenced by who paid for the research - duh. Much of the research suggests that we are trading more lower damage rear-end collisions for high impact, often fatal 'T-bone' crashes. Although NO ACCIDENTS should be our goal, I'm not convinced that's a bad trade.
    The Houston and Los Angeles situations are A MESS. We need to make some wise decisions here. I appreciate your boldness in taking a stand for what you believe, but lets see if we can stop short of calling everyone with a different (and yet, informed) opinion - an idiot. Thanks.

    August 29, 2011 at 10:41 a.m.
  • Carl do not waste time with these few idoits who post here supporting the cameras. They are either tied to the city or the red light SCAMERA company. They do not seem to get the fact that these devices are PROVEN to increase accidents. Uninformed people are IGNORANT people. We know if a vote happens the people will vote these things out of town as has happened in EVERY city where a vote was allowed. If these are really working and are such great safety tools then the people will approve them in a vote won't they? Huh? Well? Anyone want to answer that one? Probably not because each and every one of you fear a vote by the public because the majorty know this is a scam run by a corrupt company in conjunction with VERY corrupt city leaders who want only the money at the expense of safety.

    The momentum is on the move to run these SCAMERA companies out of business. We just beat them in Houston and Los Angeles recently decided that cameras just are not the answer. The move will continue and ultimately there will no longer be a market for these devices.......it is just a matter of time.

    August 29, 2011 at 8:20 a.m.
  • This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

    August 27, 2011 at 9:01 a.m.
  • It's a cheesy way to raise revenues, plain and simple.

    August 27, 2011 at 8:59 a.m.
  • My daughter works in PL and she says the red lights work, before she says you better wait an extra 10 seconds before going on your green light because drivers weren't paying attention or didn't care, whatever the case they seem to be doing the intended job, which is to make vehicles quit running red lights.
    BTW...we need to get some of these lights in Victoria, they make it a game here seeing how many red lights they can run, maybe the new Police Chief will have a set a cajones and set some up......

    August 26, 2011 at 12:59 p.m.
  • All right ThirdCoastSurfer! You hit the nail right on the head. And, for the record, I live in Port Lavaca, too. Carl, if you have an issue about the timing of the lights I suggest you take a more direct approach to address that via the highway department.

    August 26, 2011 at 7:28 a.m.
  • I am a resident of PL and appreciate that the red light cameras are in place. Unsafe driving behaviors have been corrected to varying degrees by stoplight cameras. Hwy 35 is safer because of the lights and this is the real issue. Mr Baugh brings up many distracting arguments to cloud and confuse the issue of improving public safety in PL.

    August 25, 2011 at 3:17 p.m.
  • For the ones that are such great drivers and no how to slow down at yellow lights. It would probably help your argument If you actually lived in Port Lavaca. But what most people don't understand Is that not only has Port Lavaca changed the light progression but the yellow light times. All the yellow light times are under three seconds. Its a fact that if you increase yellow light times you decrease red light running. Now that Houston has banned the red light cameras PL has no reason to deny the will of the people to call for a vote. Voter suppression will not be tolerated and that is exactly what the elected officials are doing to their citizens. It's not about safety but revenue!

    August 25, 2011 at 12:46 p.m.
  • I have been to Port Lavaca several times in last couple months, and I have yet to receive a ticket from one of those cameras. Oh, but wait, I haven't run any red lights either.

    August 25, 2011 at 8:47 a.m.
  • You are right on, LaBahia. It is safer here because of the cameras and I appreciate that. And as for the tip on preparing to stop on yellow - some people won't ever get it. They don't care about others' safety. They only care about getting to their destinations and there's plenty of irony in that.

    August 25, 2011 at 8:27 a.m.
  • Not me, I'll be buy my new truck from them in September and my wife a new car probably in January. I find 35 so much safer now. I travel there at least 3 - 4 times a month, and I have never seen a rear end collision. I have never had a problem stopping. It's real simple, when the light turns yellow it means the light is fixing to turn red,so stop. Just like we were taught in drivers ed. If the light turns yellow when you are too close to stop, you'll have plenty of time to get thru the intersection legally. Thank you Port Lavaca for keeping folks safe on your streets.

    August 24, 2011 at 10:32 p.m.
  • these cameras have cost Port Lavaca Auto Group's folk my business. Won't even entertain the idea of driving to that town for a quote, or anything else for that matter.

    August 24, 2011 at 5:31 p.m.