My wife just received a ticket in the mail a few days ago, where she got caught on photo radar going through a red light (with a picture of her license plate clear as day). Obviously this is nothing but a money-making venture for the city, as no points were assessed and it will not be reported to her insurance - just a nice $85 fine . Yeah, she was in the wrong, but that photo radar crap irks me, and I'd like to defend myself from it in the future. Does anyone have any experience with a product called phantom plate? They have stuff you can spray on or covers the license plate that causes a photo to overexpose or blur, so they can't get a clear photo (http://www.phantomplate.com/photoblocker.html). I heard of this product a few years ago, but it was selling for more money than I was willing to pay ($40+). There are some video links on the page, but I can't tell if they are bogus or not. I would appreciate any comments (good or bad experiences) with these products. Thanks!

 

I don't know about the spray, but I know those reflector covers work. Well enough that the city of Phoenix is making a big stink about them and trying to outlaw them.

 

yes they do work. i once got caught speeding through an EXPASS espress lane and they took a pic of my license plate and fined me a little over a hundred dollars. i sprayed that stuff on my license plate and smeared it with a towel. when you just look at it, it looks clean and normal.. like any human eye would see it. but when i took a picture of it with my digital camera, it comes out blurred and really shiny. the letters cannot be seen.

i live in jersey, so the plate is yellow with black lettering, so you would think you cuold still see the letters, but you cant at all. its amazing how the camera cant even pick up the letters in broad day light.

this would actually come in handy at our Acura meets, so we wouldnt have to photoshop out the license plate numbers when posting the pics on the site!! i would do that if the meets didnt get too big and if the phantomplate spray was a bit cheaper.

but it definitly does help get away with little things like photo radar..

 

the plate reflectors are already illegal in many states. so its no good. its actually better to get the phantom spray. when you look at it straight on, it gives your license plate a nice reflective shine to it. haha, but when taking a picture, you cant see the lettering at all!

 

http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000033022775/


Vast majority of engadget readers say it doesn't work, and those who say that it does also say it makes the plate extremely shiny at night (noticeable to police), and that hairspray has the exact same effect.

 

will these block the camera images that are on toll roads as well?

 

Wasn't there a Top Gear episode where they tested how fast you need to go to be too fast for the camera? I thought it was like 170mph. You could try that.

 

Reminds me of a electronic speed sign on a overpass between Phoenix and Tucson in the 80's. It only said 99, though I know I was going half again as fast.

 

Maybe it didn't have the third digit for the "1".

 

They are already illegal in MO. You can't have anything covering the plate. I wouldn't doubt it if they start prohibiting the frames.

 

 

Money making venture? My family has been hit by idiots like your wife who run a red light. Stop being selfish and follow the law especially when it comes to red lights.

And for your information, they are putting these in our city too especially around school areas. Why? Hmmmm.. no, not to make money!

 

why try not running the red light??? u won't have this problem... i ain't saying im a saint when it comes to driving... i speed and have run my fair share of yellow-red lights accidentally... but i would hope that you wouldn't be running that many red lights to have to buy those plate blockers...

i know i will prob catch hell for this response, but when u almost lose someone to a jackass who tries to make the red; it pisses me off...

 

they can just pull the negatives...thats how they get u...the spray on shit is bullshit...it works...but theres ways around it...

 

oh.. well i never ran anything with the stuff sprayed on, but when i took pics with my camera with the spray on there, it definitly blurs the plates..

 

YES! To make money. No matter what the "city" says their reasons are, it;a all about the money.

There was a study done in several cities, and it showed that the lights with the "red light cameras" had at least 1/3 less time of the yellow light before it turned to red than the lights that did not have cameras.

 

dayum..they were tryin' to outlaw those along time ago..(6 years)

 

i really wish they would like standardize the length of the yellow lights it feels like some lights have a incredibly long yellow light, and some seem like they have a really quick one.. ive half ran some redlights (like my car is 3/4 thru the intersection by the time it hits red) many times on the quick ones thinking that it should have like maybe half a second to a second more on it

 

Easy on the criticism.

There’s a big difference between running a red light that is red for a fraction of a second and outright running a solid red that’s been that way for several seconds.
But BOTH of these scenarios will get you a camera ticket and one is obviously much more dangerous then the other.

I’ve read studies that show that rear end accidents noticeably INCREASED at intersections where cameras have been installed.
People traveling the road everyday that know about the camera tend to stop short and sudden to avoid a ticket.

Plus camera makers provide the equipment nearly FREE to towns in trade for a share of the ticket revenue.

Increases accidents and increases city revenue….. Sounds like a great idea to me.

 

Have heard most of this and agree with some, for example the sharing of the revenue seems like a money making scheme vs a safety concern that it should be.

As for the increase in accidents I did here that was true in some areas but I would also think that Rear end > t bone accidents Much rather have someone hit me from behind than from the side. Either way no one wants accidents and I would think once the cameras are more wide spread and known the rear ends will decrease as more people know that you will stop on the end of the yellow now.

he onese that piss me off are the photo radar tickets for speeding. Got one on 295 in DC and anyone that knows 295 knows that the speed varies from 55 to 35 but the entire time it is a 3 lane highway. THose are the real money making schemes because no one considers going 10 miles over as much of a danger as red light running

edit: man did some more research and there really are a lot of increases in accidents with these cameras. Below is a pretty large look at them

http://www.thenewspaper.com/rlc/news.asp?ID=29

 

First of all invincible569, or shall I call you "mistake-free all mighty God", my wife is certainly not an idiot (amazing how bold people can get on a chat forum) - she is human like the rest of us (except you, of course). In 24 years of driving, that is only the second ticket she has ever received, and she was almost through the intersection according to the picture. It was Thanksgiving when it occurred, and there were no other cars ANYWHERE in the picture, as there was no one out. We both acknowledge that she was in the wrong, but you need to get off your high and mighty horse of criticism. Contrary to your belief, NEWSFLASH - YOU ARE NOT A PERFECT DRIVER - or anything else for that matter!!! The very people who are critical of my asking about this product are the very people who probably have radar detectors in their cars, trying to avoid being caught by radar/laser.

I happen to think that these cameras have nothing to do with safety and everything to do with revenue generation. In the city my wife was ticketed, the company gives the city the cameras for free, and in return the city gives them $70 for each ticket, keeping $15. They don't report the incident to the insurance company, but if they really wanted to deter motorists from unsafe behavior, they would report it - just like they do with speeding tickets. I truly think that the main reason why these incidents are not reported to insurance is that cities are still grappling with the legalities of it all and don't want to open themselves up to a lawsuit.

Please understand, I don't advocate breaking the law. My wife and I are generally safe drivers, just like the rest of you. I'm not a speeder (I received two tickets in two years of getting my license and was broken from that) and we don't make it a habit of running red lights. But the police and their methods are not perfect either, and I am using a COMPLETELY LEGAL means of lessening our chances of getting a ticket by photo - nothing more, nothing less. I'm not trying to hide the information on my plates as it will be completely visible by police at all times. To me, those who own radar/laser detectors/jammers to lessen their chance of a ticket are no different.

 

i have heard no

 

i dont have experience with the spray on stuff...but in Switzerland about 8/10 intersection or lights have a camera on them, and its a huge fine.

 

San Diego was sued because of that (and other errors). Over 300 tickets were dismissed.

The lights now have longer yellow times.

 

That's illegal in CA.

I believe they do report them here. The ticket is $281, I think.

It's illegal in all states. The license plate must be visible at night, and cannot be obstructed in any form. This spray blocks the plate...

Not true. It won't come out in digital photos. If the car is involved in an accident in an intersection equipped with a camera, and the driver (let's say it's the guy you sell the car to...) runs off, it would make finding him more difficult. Shame on you.

 

Just wanted to add that if I get a ticket for running a red light, I most likely deserve the fine. There's no excuse to run a red light.

BTW, I did get a fine for running such a light this past August, while in Brazil. The amount showed up in my credit card 30 days after I got home. I was following my dad in another car, and didn't realize the light was about to turn red. I totally deserved the fine, and will never consider hiding my identity because of it.

 

My buddy and I drove through a tunnel in Switz. He got hit by a camera and they sent the speeding tix to his house in the states.

 

How did they get your credit card info? Were you renting a car and they got it off the rental contract? Is that legal?

 

Yes, it was a rental. I assume it's legal... after the currency conversion, it came to about $54. No biggie. (It's R$200 over there, or about one monthly pay (minimum).)

An acquaintance rented a car and drove on the toll freeway (73) without stopping to pay (he went through the express pass lanes, where you are supposed to have a transmitter on the windshield). His credit card in another country had the $75 fine on his first statement after the trip. The DMV billed the rental company, which billed him.