My question involves a traffic ticket from the state of: Georgia. Code 40-6-163. "a) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this Code section, the driver of a vehicle meeting or overtaking from either direction any school bus stopped on the highway shall stop before reaching such school bus when there are in operation on the school bus the visual signals as specified in Code Sections 40-8-111 and 40-8-115, and such driver shall not proceed until the school bus resumes motion or the visual signals are no longer actuated."
I really enjoy how you guys tell folks like it is. I'd like to know if I have a solid argument in either obtaining a reduced fine or some type of reduced penalty at the very least. I'm not trying to skate out of anything and I did commit the violation. However I do believe there are circumstances involved that lead to an accidental violation as opposed to a premeditated or willful violation. I was issued a mailed notice of violation for the aforementioned code and it has three pictures along with a video you can view online. I went ahead and reviewed the video. Stop here if an accidental or willful violation won't make a difference. I'm hoping I can use the term "necessity".
In my case, you can see in the video that approximately 1.5 seconds elapsed from the time the stop arm was fully extended to the time it took my vehicle to actually pass the stop sign.
The average reaction time of the human brain (as heavily studied and used as national standards by road and highway safety engineers, see the AASHTO
Green Book[2011] which Georgia DOT has adopted as a standard) to such aforementioned traffic signals is approximately 2.5 seconds. The speed limit posted is 45 MPH or 66 feet per second. As shown by the camera from the time of the arm being fully extended and my vehicle passing the stop sign at 66 feet per second and approximately 1.5 seconds, that places me 69 feet from the rear of the bus at the time the stop arm was deployed. Considering school buses are on average 38 to 40 feet in length and the camera is presumably located approximately 10 feet from the front of the bus, we can come to a figure of 69 feet (99 ft before bus length is calculated) from the bumper of the bus at the time of arm deployment.
Highway traffic and safety engineers have some general guidelines they have developed over the years and hold now as standards. As an example, if a street surface is dry, the average driver can safely decelerate an automobile or light truck with reasonably good tires at the rate of about 15 feet per second (fps). That is, a driver can slow down at this rate without anticipated probability that control of the vehicle will be lost in the process.
The measure of velocity is distance divided by time (fps), stated as feet per second. The measure of acceleration (or deceleration in this case) is feet per second per second. That assumes a reasonably good co-efficient of friction of about .75; better is .8 or higher while conditions or tire quality might yield a worse factor of .7 or lower.
No matter the velocity, that velocity is reduced 15 fps every second. If the initial velocity is 60 mph, 88 fps, after 1 second elapsed, the vehicle velocity would be 73 fps, after 2 seconds it would be 58 fps decreasing progressively thereafter. For the true mathematical perfectionist (one who carries PI to 1000 decimal places), it would have been technically correct to indicated the formula is 'fpsps' rather than 'fps', but far less understandable to most drivers. Since at speeds of 200 mph or less, the difference from one method to the other is in thousandths of seconds, my calculations in these examples are based on the simple fps calculations.
Given the previous set of conditions, it would mean that a driver could stop the described vehicle in a total of 6.87 seconds (including a 1 second delay for driver reaction) and your total stopping distance would be 302.28 feet, slightly more than a football field in length!
Virtually all current production vehicles' published road braking performance tests indicate stopping distances from 60 mph that are typically 120 to 140 feet, slightly less than half of the projected safety distances. While the figures are probably achievable, they are not realistic and certainly not average; they tend to be misleading and to those that actually read them, they create a false sense of security.
To determine how far my vehicle will travel while braking, use the formula of 1/2 the initial velocity multiplied by the time required to stop. In this case, this works out to be .5 * 66 * 3.0 = 99 feet, plus a reaction time of either 88 feet for a second delay in reaction time, or 176 feet for two seconds reaction time. That yields 187 feet or 275 feet when added to the base stopping distance of 99 feet. If I am very responsive and takes only a half a second to react, the distance is reduced to between 143 and 231 feet. Notice that the reaction time is a huge factor since it is at initial velocity.
Therefore, if my vehicle position is a mere 69 feet off the rear bumper of the bus at the time of the stop arm deployment and it clearly takes between 143 and 231 feet to safely stop the vehicle from 45 mph or 66 feet per second. I would have been effectively stopped 3 to 4 seconds and 118 to 206 feet past the school bus and past the threat of imminent danger to child safety. To put this into perspective, if my reaction time was on the high end of 2 seconds, it would have taken me 3/4 of a football field to stop safely. The only other alternative would have been to slam on my brakes to unsafely stop the vehicle and risk a rear end collision or losing control of the vehicle in the distance and time provided by the video evidence.
It is my argument that given the distance of my vehicle from the bus, the rate of permissible travel at 45 mph or 66 fps, perception time, reaction time and the distance required to safely stop, I simply did not have enough distance from the bus to facilitate a safe stop at the time the arm was deployed. If you take into account that the school bus was in a turning lane, it could be considered plausible that one would assume the bus is turning and not stopping and this would only add to the confusion and reaction time. By the time the bus arm was activated and my vehicle had passed (1.5 to 2 seconds) the activated arm, my ability to perceive and react had already been used up. I'm getting my timing from the video and assuming I was doing the speed limit of 45 mph on that road. If I was going faster, which the flow of traffic in Atlanta usually is, my stopping distance would have been even further and that much further past the point of doing any justice for child safety.
I'm hoping I can get the judge to see the Prima-facie evidence available in the video. I could be completely out of the ballpark here too. Any input is appreciated. Go easy on me ;] This also brings another question to mind. Isn't the burden of proof on the state? Don't they have to prove that I was actually driving the vehicle? The code states that I can sign an affidavit saying it wasn't me but that I would have to provide the name of the person driving the vehicle. Doesn't this remove the burden of proof from the state? All they would be telling me is that they proved my car was registered to me at the time of the citation and that I would be obligated to snitch on someone to avoid the penalty. Also, wouldn't I be able to question the legitimacy and accuracy of the camera system? Don't I have a right to confront my accuser? In other words, couldn't I just object as soon as the clerk offered the evidence and call it hearsay if the officer who validated the imagery wasn't available? Even then, I can't cross examine the camera itself or anyone who is supposed to be able to validate that the camera system is accurate.
Ive been at this for 6 hours so excuse me if I'm rambling. Any insight is much appreciated.
Accidentally Failing to Yield for a School Bus
Printable View
-
09-04-2013, 06:59 PMtim0teeAccidentally Failing to Yield for a School Bus
-
09-04-2013, 07:15 PMThat GuyRe: Will This Defense WorkYou are free to try and impress whatever idea you think will mitigate your chances for a better outcome. However, "intent" is not a required element that must be proven by the prosecution when arguing its case in a traffic matter. Fact is, most traffic violations happen "accidentally", even without the driver realizing them (or acknowledging them). But that does not change the level of guilt as guilt and/or innocence are not too subjective. You are either innocent or you are guilty. There are no in betweens.Quote:
Quoting tim0tee
Some courts may allow for a "guilty with an explanation".... Legally speaking, nothing of the soet exists as you are still "guilty" for all intents and purposes. But if it helps reduce your fine, then it may serve you best to use it if allowed...
Good luck! -
09-05-2013, 03:12 AMtim0teeRe: Will This Defense Work
A school bus is a rolling stopsign, though. I didnt have the reaction time availible as shown by the video. It was physically and mathematically impossible to stop anywhere behind the bus. That isnt an argument? Would I have a case had I stopped in the mathematically required distance of 3/4 the length of a football field passed the bus? Or would the picture prevail?
-
09-05-2013, 09:02 PMThat GuyRe: Will This Defense WorkAnd therefore you would do well to try and control your speed as you approach or pass one which appears to be slowing down in preparation for what to you maybe an impossible task to stop when signaled to do so.Quote:
Quoting tim0tee
Why? Where you driving while distracted? Or were you under the influence of some thing that affected your reaction time? In either case, you would be admitting to yet another criminal charge that can be added on... Not the smartest defense plan!Quote:
Quoting tim0tee
Then you are admitting to driving at a speed that was too fast for conditions (with conditions meaning other vehicles on the same highway). Or (again) indirectly admitting to driving while distracted/under the influence. Even if no new charges are added as a result, you are sealing your own fate with a conviction.Quote:
Quoting tim0tee
No, it isn't an argument. If it were, everyone cited for this code section would simply state "it was physically and mathematically impossible to stop anywhere behind the bus" and they would be exonerated. This would then become a trend where everyone cited for a red light violation would make the same claim about it being "... physically and mathematically impossible to stop anywhere behind the line...".Quote:
Quoting tim0tee
Lets see... The statute mandates that under the described circumstances, you shall stop before reaching such school bus... And you are wondering if stopping 75 yards after passing the bus would be OK???Quote:
Quoting tim0tee
How about you think about that and let us know... -
09-05-2013, 09:13 PMadjusterjackRe: Accidentally Failing to Yield for a School BusI stopped at that sentence because traffic laws aren't written to make that distinction.Quote:
Quoting tim0tee
You either did it or you didn't.
And when you consider that judges have hundreds of people coming before them every day with imaginative stories and hopes of a dismissal or reduction you'll understand why judges make short work of them. -
09-05-2013, 09:47 PMjkRe: Accidentally Failing to Yield for a School BusQuote:
In my case, you can see in the video that approximately 1.5 seconds elapsed from the time the stop arm was fully extended to the time it took my vehicle to actually pass the stop sign.
and the yellow flashing lights, which is a warning the red lights are imminent, were on how long prior to the red lights illuminating and the arm extending? -
09-06-2013, 10:57 AMtim0teeRe: Will This Defense WorkI assumed as such, but this one will make my wife happy :)Quote:
Quoting That Guy
- - - Updated - - -
I cannot cross examine the bus driver to ask that question as to whether or not she activated the lights in a reasonable amount of time. There is no police officer to examine, I can't examine the camera itself and I can't cross examine the individual that services these cameras to gaurantee the acurracy of the video/camera itself. It is not unlawful to not slow down for yellow lights. You should "use caution" and should slow down and is the reason yellow lights are set to approximately 3 seconds here in Georgia. If 3 seconds is the standard, what could I have done in 1.5? If the caution dictates that it will not be a safe stop, the cautionary thing to do would be to resume in the lane furthest from the bus (in this case, two full lanes over) and continue traveling.Quote:
Quoting jk
-
09-06-2013, 11:03 AMjkRe: Will This Defense Work
My point was: you ignored the yellow lights or intentionally attempted to pass the bus before the red was activated and as such, have no defense.
all of your mumbo jumbo and calculations are nothing more than a humorous distraction -
09-06-2013, 11:08 AMtim0teeRe: Will This Defense Work
My answer to that would be "not long enough" hah. Either way I was obviously distracted sipping coffee or changing a radio station and didn't see the yellow lights or assumed it was turning out of the corner of my eye as it was in a turning lane. As originally stated, I'm not looking to get out of it completely. Just wanted to tell the judge it wasn't intentional. Obviously, he or she won't give a damn and it would be a waste of my gas money and time to even attempt it. Thanks for the nickels and dimes, gentlemen.
- - - Updated - - -
My other assumption/argument was that if it's not unlawful to stop at a yellow, why wouldn't the perception/reaction time required to stop at a "pop out" stop sign be considered? It's a revenue generator and I understand that. Cause all the politicians talk about the generated revenue before the childrens safety. Who the hell picks up children in FRONT of a subdivision ON A FOUR LANE highway when all they had to do was turn INTO the subdivision and consider child safety that way. lol -
09-06-2013, 11:43 AMThat GuyRe: Will This Defense WorkI don't know where you're getting your statistics but you are about 1.5 seconds behind average! In other words, in hypothetical situations, driver reaction is considered on average at about 1 second. You even stated this in your first post:Quote:
Quoting tim0tee
You had to have misread something to conclude that the State of GA has adopted 2.5 seconds as a standard. Even Wikipedia, and in its article titled "Braking Distance" claims that the average "perception-reaction time" is "1.5 seconds".... And later described the "2.5 seconds" as being that of "a slow responding driver".Quote:
Quoting tim0tee
OK, so you were driving while distracted... Text messaging, was it?Quote:
Quoting tim0tee
The only "fact" that can be deduced in this case is that you failed to stop as required by law. That is the only "fact" that is of any relevance here. That is the element that must be proven by the prosecution to secure a conviction. All of your calculations, and in spite of you carrying some results to 3 decimal places, they are all speculative in nature simply because the video is not intended as a way to estimate your speed. And the only time that your speed can be utilized in this case is if was shown by the video to be zero mph. Any other speed means you are guilty as charged.Quote:
Quoting tim0tee
And you are definitely on your own on that one!Quote:
Quoting tim0tee
- - - Updated - - -
The lights are activated in an automated sequence dictated by the entire process that includes the red lights coming on, the stop arm getting extended and the camera coming on to start the recording. The bus driver isn't capable of altering the timing or the process.Quote:
Quoting tim0tee
Also, I am not going to research the GA evidence code but often times, photographs and video evidence need not be authenticated and are not subject to your scrutiny as long as they are admitted into evidence by a government entity and are the product of its daily nature of business. But even if this video were subject to your examination, are you an expert witness that can testify to what elements may have been compromised to give the impression that you violated the code? If you are, then by all means, request it under discovery and run your tests. Even then, you are grasping for straws because the video is pretty simple. If you had stopped, it would show you stopped. The fact that you did not stop, is reflected accurately as such. And again, that is the only element that the video needs to prove.
As for your claim that there is no officer, someone issued that citation and it isn't the bus driver... If you have any questions for him/her the use the power of a subpoena to bring him in so he can explain it all to you. Problem is, you wouldn't know what to ask him/her about, neither would I, so why put on the act? -
09-06-2013, 04:35 PMtim0teeRe: Will This Defense Work
The aashto greenbook is a national standard for design of roadways. It states sight stopping distances should be given 2.5 seconds of cushion in relation to the posted speed limits before placement of traffic signage and signals to account for driver perception and reaction. The 1 second you mentioned previously is only reaction time. You have to give another second for perception and is the reason amber traffic signals here are 2.5 to 3 seconds long. The Georgia DOT openly and via public record recognizes this standard.
- - - Updated - - -
Oh and the amber lights are activated manually, by the driver on school buses via a leaver or foot activated switch per georgia code. Red lights only come out when the bus door is actuated to the open position, by the driver. -
09-06-2013, 04:38 PMjkRe: Will This Defense Workwhat is your point? Mine was that you had ample warning to stop your car. You didn't. You are guilty. Case closed. Bye.Quote:
Quoting tim0tee
-
09-06-2013, 04:55 PMtim0teeRe: Will This Defense Work
My point is that its not automated as you suggested and that a bus driver could in theory choose to slam that stop sign open to intentionally ticket a driver at their discretion because they really hate the fact that it was unenforceable until the recent passing of sb 352 allowing these stupid cameras to operate. The driver dictates ample time to stop, not automation such as traffic signals. Driver error is certainly plausible.
-
09-06-2013, 05:02 PMllworkingRe: Will This Defense Work
How about the simple fact that the driver was behind a school bus and therefore knew that the bus was going to occasionally stop? Why not simply live with that?
Yes, its irritating to be behind a school bus. However there are other options to resolve the problem other than making an attempt to pass the bus...detouring is a good one...and one that I adopt from time to time. -
09-06-2013, 05:05 PMjkRe: Will This Defense Work
I never said it was or suggested is was automatic. I simply asked a question.
-
09-06-2013, 05:08 PMtim0teeRe: Accidentally Failing to Yield for a School Bus
Not to mention sb352 was brought to light because of a girl that was killed by a driver who willfully did not stop. This scenario would suggest a time of 5 to 10 seconds from stop arm deployment as opposed to my visually meager 1.5. If you were a bus driver angry with willful violators, wouldnt you looove having such a weapon in your arsenal?
- - - Updated - - -
Because i wasnt directly behind the school bus, i was in the far left lane and the bus was entering a right hand TURNING LANE at 45mph posted speed limit. Why would I assume it was stopping when it was entering a turning lane?Quote:
Quoting llworking
-
09-06-2013, 05:15 PMjkRe: Accidentally Failing to Yield for a School Bus
Those flashing yellow lights
-
09-06-2013, 05:49 PMtim0teeRe: Accidentally Failing to Yield for a School BusWhich is the argument, JK. Flashing yellow lights in a 45mph zone means squat when your less than 300 feet off the bumper and the driver is in a turning lane (presumably turning) furthest away from you. Once again, it's not unlawful not to slow for amber. "Should slow" and "Use Caution" is what's listed in Georgia's driver manuals, it is only unlawful when it's red and the vehicle is stopped. Newton's law (hah) and caution dictated it was unsafe to stop in the distance provided and national standards suggest it was not possible to safely stop the vehicle. Therefore, reasonable caution necessitates continuing forward rather than risk losing control of the vehicle and smashing into the school bus that they are trying so hard to protect and furthermore suggests that caution (alertness and prudence in a hazardous situation; care; wariness), in this case, negates this stopping rule given the circumstances obviously apparent in the video.Quote:
Quoting jk
- - - Updated - - -
My mistake, ThatGuy said it.Quote:
Quoting jk
-
09-06-2013, 08:09 PMjkRe: Accidentally Failing to Yield for a School Bus
Well, you go ahead and try your best using what you have posted here. Let us know how that works out for you.
-
09-07-2013, 01:13 AMptatohedRe: Accidentally Failing to Yield for a School BusQuote:
Quoting tim0tee
Can you link us to the video? Pictures?
You are right that AASHTO (2011 6th ed "GDHS") uses 2.5 seconds average reaction time when calculating stopping/braking distance. But remember, this is for unexpected emergency stops. One could argue that, by following behind a school bus, the bus stopping could be expected of the following driver. With that said, AASHTO does define its stopping site distance formula as "usually sufficient to allow reasonably competent and alert drivers to come to a hurried stop under ordinary circumstances". I guess a bus stopping is an ordinary circumstance?
Also, 11.2 ft/s/s deceleration rate is used by AASHTO, not 14.8 ft/s/s.
So, at 45mph, a 0s reaction time (rt) would result in a braking distance (bd) of 194.4 ft, a 1.0s rt would result in a bd of 260.5 ft and a 2.5s rt would result in a bd of 359.7 ft. [AASHTO stopping site distance formula 3-2]
Good luck. -
09-07-2013, 09:01 AMThat GuyRe: Accidentally Failing to Yield for a School Bus
By the way, before I start… You’re not fooling anyone coming on here pretending "you’ve been at this for 6 hours and are probably rambling" all while you are rambling but not because you’ve been at it for long, only because you copied and pasted most of your first post from another source (and ?I mean word for word) but since you don’t understand half of it, you keep digging yourself deeper in your hole.
Just like the MUTCD is the "Federal" standard for Traffic Control Devices, and as such is adopted by most states, it cannot and does not work as a substitute for the law or the elements and requirements it mandates. Similarly, the AAHTSO is an engineering standard and until you can find matching provisions under the Georgia Code, it does not override the requirements under the law, nor does it mandate ones that are not part of the law. Moreover, and just like in the MUTCD, it likely has provisions allowing for some deviation from the standards under certain circumstances. Standards, and guidance, and recommendations have no statutory authority. And cannot be used to establish legal basis for a defense.Quote:
Quoting tim0tee
Sight stopping distance is completely different than reaction-perception time and I will prove that in a bit. You really need to stop convoluting all these number as an attempt to find a way out simply because you are just rambling on but making any sense whatsoever. This is why I feel I need to continue to correct you for fear that someone might come across this mumbo-jumbo of yours, follow it believing it is even close to being valid and lose a case because you felt like pretending you know what you're posting when you clearly don't.Quote:
Quoting tim0tee
For starters, when you have any legal argument you plan on making in court, you must lay the proper foundation for each element involved. You've made plenty of claims but substantiated none. So unless and until you start linking documents and citations, you're simply making this crap up and it is not going to fly. And no, don’t link anything here if you don’t want. But be prepared to have something to show the court. Hold up though... Keep in mind that as you have been told before, Georgia law requires you to stop under the circumstances; it does not account for reaction time, or sight distance, no matter how slow yours is, nor does it consider mathematical calculations that have no basis or foundation as being part of an allowance under the law.
So before I continue, I just want to make sure you understand that it is my opinion, that your scheme here and even if you were to follow the correct and valid procedures, make accurate and justifiable presumptions and come to reasonable results, your scheme will not get you out of your predicament. Nor will it improve your situation any. Simply because the law requires you to stop with exemption or exception.
Still, there is plenty available online to prove to you that you are simply manipulating numbers only to prove the same thing that the prosecution can easily do on its own. Interestingly enough,. the 1.5 second you managed to add to the known average reaction time is the same as the time you claimed you were away from the bus at the time the stop arm was extended. So by you adding that in off the top, and before you do any calculations, you are already on a BIG cushion that is intended to have you in the clear after you manipulate more numbers and fake more calculations.
While that may have started on the road to being right, you quickly crashed and burned... You cannot take the 1 second, then add 2.5 second and then add braking distance to it. You can use the 1 second, add braking distance and you're done. Or you can use the sight distance you keep throwing around and that includes the entire process from the stop arm coming down to you coming to a full stop. And I’ll post a definition showing this in a bit.Quote:
Quoting tim0tee
For one, the 2.5 seconds of reaction time you are using and continue to refer to is from AASHTO 2004 and it is in reference to what is referred to as "sight distance" requirements for particular road designs and to allow a driver ample time to react to a feature or event without panic or urgency so that his movement is not sudden but planned and systematic.
Two, perception time and reaction time are part of the same number typically used in such calculations. And so it is often referred to as either perception time, reaction time or perception-reaction time... All of which mean the same time period; and that is "the time period between an event, and the time a reasonably attentive driver will react to such event".
Three, the AASHTO is a national organization which might set some standards for design and construction,. however, those designs are not part of a governmental mandate or rule. The AASHTO is a private organization. Conversely, the FHWA is a Federal agency that is part of the U.S.D.O.T. and it can impose rules and regulations upon all states and dictate what those states receive in federal highway funds as a result of compliance or lack thereof.
With that in mind, and to articulate the differences between "sight distance" and "reaction-perception time" more clearly, I'll refer to the FHWA Federal Highway Administration publication titled: Driver, Vehicle, and Roadway Characteristics Related to Driving in Wet Weather
2.2 Sight Distance
For the safe and efficient operation of vehicles, drivers need to be able to see the roadway ahead and any potential hazard soon enough to react to it. Sight distance is the length of roadway ahead that is visible to a driver. Sight distance is comprised of driver perception-reaction time and the time to complete the maneuver safely. The driver perception-reaction time includes the time to perceive the condition (e.g., an object in the roadway), time to complete cognitive functions to understand the condition (e.g., recognize the object and decide if and how to respond), and time to initiate the desired maneuver (e.g., take foot off accelerator and step on brake).
So in this case, sight distance does not really apply. It applies generally to a possible lane merge, slowing down for a speed bump, or a directional sign where a road splits... Generally non-adverse movements that aa driver can do without panic. If you still want to insist on using use the 2.5 seconds "sight distance" as defined under AASHTO, fine... But you are expected to "complete the movement" and be stopped in that much time.
Alternatively, the 1 second reaction-perception time I am telling you about does not include stopping distance. As soon as you start braking, reaction perception time ended and now the braking time period begins. That is something you have to calculate and add in.
Alternatively, when you are calculating stopping distance, in case of an accident investigation, or a violation of law (like failing to stop for a school bus stop arm, or failing to stop for a red light) that offers you no option but to stop and yet you failed to do so, the driver's actions here is sudden, immediate, and has to be made in as short a distance as can be. Furthermore, the fact that you are claiming it to be a task that is mathematically and physically impossible, then you must push all variables to the absolute maximum degree that would allow you to attain the objective of stopping and if you can justify all the variables, then your calculation is sound and it might be representative of the possibilities, but that does not change the outcome in this case.
What digs you even deeper into guilty is the fact that not only did you not stop as required, you never made an attempt to stop. None of this implies that the judge is under any obligation to dismiss your case, to reduce your fine or to even listen to your presentation. Simply because the law does not allow for any exceptions or exemptions in your case.
More speculative statemernts that have no basis or meaning. The minimum yellow phase time as mandated by the Federal Highway Administration in its MUTCD publication is at 3.0 seconds MINIMUM. You can read about that HERE: Traffic Signal Change Intervals: Policies, Practices, and SafetyQuote:
Quoting tim0tee
Scroll down 3 pages and you will see a section titled: RECOMMENDED CHANGE INTERVAL TIMING PRACTICES. in that section you will see the following:
Guidance for the timing of traffic signal change intervals is provided by three basic sources: Manual of Uniform Traffic control Devices (MUTCD); Traffic and Transportation Engineering Handbook (ITE Handbook); and Traffic Control Devices Handbook (TCDH). The MUTCD, which serves as a national standard for signs, signals and roadway markings, simply states that the yellow light is a warning that the green light allowing traffic movement is being terminated. It also recommends that the yellow phase should generally range from 3 to 6 seconds. The yellow phase may be followed by an all-red clearance phase to permit the intersection to clear before cross-traffic begins. No specific details are given as to how to determine the appropriate duration for the yellow phase or all-red clearance phase.
So at first, the 2.5 second "sight distance" that you are referring to is NOT this minimum yellow/amber phase time recommended for traffic signals. "Sight distance" isn't even part of it. Instead, you will see in the next page of that document the formulas used to calculate Yellow Time And All Red Time for traffic signals. You can also see how it is the "reaction-perception time" that contributes partly as only one of several variables to the yellow phase time, where the others are approach speed, roadway grade (sloping up/down), and deceleration rate...
Y = Yellow time, sec
AR = All-red time, sec
t = Perception-reaction time, sec
V = Vehicle speed, ft/sec
a = Deceleration rate, ft/sec^2
Other factors that are included in the calculation of yellow time + All Red Time required to get into and out of the intersection include:
W = Width of cross street, ft
L = Length of vehicle, ft
GREAT.... Then you can link us to one of these public records documents that describe the Georgia DOT accepting your 2.5 seconds of sight distance as the basis for Amber time phases on light signals. Otherwise, this is yet another figment of your imagination.Quote:
Quoting tim0tee
I never mentioned the "amber lights" as part of my description of the automated process.... Here is what I posted:Quote:
Quoting tim0tee
^^My words^ but utilizing the Georgia Code:Quote:
Quoting That Guy
§ 40-8-115. Identification and equipment of school buses for special school route service
This part shall not prohibit the use of a school bus as defined in paragraph (55) of Code Section 40-1-1 for special school route service, provided it shall meet the following identification and equipment requirements:
(1) The bus need not be painted yellow or black;
(2) The bus shall be equipped with four hooded or recessed red flasher lights, or four red flasher lights and four amber flasher lights mounted on the same horizontal centerline as the red lights and nearer the centerline. Such amber lights shall be at least two and one-half times brighter than the red lights. The system shall be wired so that the amber signal lights are activated only by manual or foot operation and if activated are automatically deactivated and the red signal lights activated when the bus entrance door is opened; and
(3) While transporting children to or from school, the bus shall be equipped with the following temporary signs, located conspicuously on the front and back of such vehicle:
(A) The sign on the front shall have the words "SCHOOL BUS" printed in black letters not less than six inches high, on a background of National School Bus Glossy Yellow; and
(B) The sign on the rear shall be at least ten square feet in size and shall be painted National School Bus Glossy Yellow and have the words "SCHOOL BUS" printed in black letters not less than eight inches high.
And to clarify further, my use of the term "the entire process" and to follow that up with the steps from red lights, to stop arm to camera was directed to mean the "process" which required you to stop where as amber lights allow you to proceed with caution. Meaning from the moment the red lights come on (and ambers go off) the stop arm is extended automatically and the camera starts the recording automatically.
Knowing all this, and the fact that the bus did not materialize out of thin air when you were only 300 feet off of its bumper, you still made your approach at an unreasonable speed and/or while distracted. So while it is your excuse that this was a bitter hateful bus driver intentionally causing you to get ticketed because it didn’t use to be a law, the counter argument that must be considered is that you intentionally sped through as you approached the bus in defiance of the new law and while hoping you would make it past the bus with no issue. Looks like the bus driver won this time! You couldn’t prove your claim against the bus driver, however, the conclusion against you would be much easier to prove by you not making any attempt to even slow down.Quote:
Quoting tim0tee
Blasphemy...... We live in an age of entitlement, llworking… To even consider the thought of accepting responsibility without pointing fingers at everything and everybody around is inconceivable!Quote:
Quoting llworking
Not enough reason for you to comply... Out of respect for an innocent littler girl! God forbid it should even be someone you know or care about!Quote:
Quoting tim0tee
And here you are, while appearing that you made no effort whatsoever to stop, which could be also perceived as willfully didn't even consider a stop as an option...
Not very practical.... not when you're dealing with children. It would be more reasonable to expect an adult driver to slow down and be delayed 30 to 40 seconds instead of risking the alternative. But throw practical and reasonable out the window. If the Georgia state legislature would have intended that to be the standard, they certainly aren't short on words and could have easily included such provision. They didn't!Quote:
Quoting tim0tee
Really, frustrated or not, to suggest that anyone could be this randomly hateful is not going to help you get over this. The quicker you look in the mirror, accept what's happened for what it is and hope you'll react in a better manner the next time, the quicker to better off you will be!Quote:
Quoting tim0tee
Lastly, in all the threads that I have ever participated in, I have not ever come across anyone who's gone this far out of his way not to only make several statements admitting being inattentive, and willful and careless... But to even go as far as helping the prosecution meet its burden of showing he violated the law. Don't you see it? The plan you are hoping will mitigate your losses is one that is only working to confirm that you did not stop! That does not help your case; your guilt can be easily proven by preponderance of the evidence and only by viewing the video once... And in spite of the twisted calculations and the manipulation of numbers, and the false or speculative presumptions, you're putting forth all this effort to further pile mathematical and physical theories that can only work to confirm the violation!
I'm done here... If any future members do read this, use the information provided here at your own risk. I tried to correct a lot of it but there is only so much time and research I am going to do for one thread and an OP who didn't come here for information but only to whine. -
09-07-2013, 10:18 AMtim0teeRe: Accidentally Failing to Yield for a School Bus
I am preparing for the case as I have until the end of the month to even contest it. I will get you the links you ask for, thatguy, if by whining you mean adding some humanity to the 'roboness' of this forum, then damn right. Lol. It seems like rather han have a healthy debate as you may find in a courtroom, you get angry and dissapear. Thats ok. I appreciate the opinions even though you could be some half wit attorney that never made it anywhere. I asked on another thread for credentials and you ignored the request.
Either way, Im still im research mode and havent even begun documenting or citing code yet. Maybe i'll respond when I have everything together snd you can pick it apart too. If you would do me thr honor, anyway... everything you dispute gives me reason to argue it and prepare for court. Oh, and I was at it for 8 hours actually if you include some talking back and forth on this forum.
Stopping Sight Distance” has been identified as a "controlling criteria" that has substantial importance to the operational and safety performance of a roadway such that special attention should be given to the design decision. Therefore, GDOT adopts the AASHTO Green Book criteria as the standard for Stopping Sight Distance for roadways in Georgia. - Georgia DOT Design Policy Manual
http://www.dot.ga.gov/doingbusiness/...DPM-Chap04.pdf -
09-07-2013, 12:06 PMjkRe: Accidentally Failing to Yield for a School Bus
.
You think there will be a debate in a court room? I guess you haven't spent much time in one. Each side gets to present their case, including supporting law. The judge or jury hears it. They then decide guilt or not. There is no debating anything. You've been watching too much TV.Quote:
It seems like rather han have a healthy debate as you may find in a courtroom,
In fact, if you want to debate, you will likely find yourself facing a contempt charge for a failure to maintain courtroom decorum.
If researching this keeps you off the streets and away from school buses, by all means, research til the cows come home, go out to pasture and come home again. If you are so distracted by, as you suggested,
I would prefer such a negligent driver never be allowed near a bus, or even on the road for that matter, again.Quote:
Either way I was obviously distracted sipping coffee or changing a radio station and didn't see the yellow lights
All of your argument will serve no purpose as it is not a defense to the violation. A judge will crucify you should you bring such BS into their courtroom./
on second though; pack the briefcase and head on down to the court. I can think of nothing you deserve more than a sound verbal thrashing from a judge for wasting their time and endangering the lives of children and then thinking you are some whiz kid lawyer that has the perfect defense. -
09-07-2013, 01:32 PMMr. KnowitallRe: Accidentally Failing to Yield for a School Bus
Saying, "I wasn't paying attention, and thus didn't see the flashing lights on the bus", is pretty much going to get you convicted. If you didn't look up to see the lights, how do you know they weren't red?
-
09-07-2013, 03:50 PMtim0teeRe: Accidentally Failing to Yield for a School Bus
Good fun here gentlemen. I've been awaiting responses for two days like a virgin school boy chasing tail. I'll be sure to let you all know how it turns out. Now I know what I can expect from the judge. Thanks for the stern lesson on the rules of the road!