If you entered the intersection as the light turned yellow, and drove the speed limit, you would still be partially in the intersection when the light turned red. And promptly get a ticket in the mail.

Nobody realized what was happening (at least not those on the receiving end of the tickets) until my high school math teacher got one.

She went out there and measured the intersection, timed the lights, then showed up to contest the ticket with poster boards containing diagrams of the velocity/distance equations.

In a display of civic engagement, Mats emailed the Oregon State Board of Examiners for Engineering and Land Surveying in the hopes that they could help him raise public awareness and asked for their “support and help to investigate and present the laws of physics related to transportation engineering.”

He got the opposite.

After curtly informing Mats that they do not regulate traffic lights, the Board warned him that without an engineering license from the state of Oregon, Mats would be breaking the law if he even referred to himself using the word “engineer.” Then, the Board launched an investigation into Mats, which lingered for nearly two years and culminated in a $500 fine. According to the Board, Mats engaged in the unlicensed “practice of engineering” when he spoke publicly about his “critique and calculations” for the yellow-light formula. Moreover, only Oregon-licensed professional engineers are allowed to use the word “engineer” to describe themselves.

Although Mats is not a licensed professional engineer (and never claimed to), he has a broad background in math and science. In his native Sweden, Mats earned a degree in electrical engineering, and worked for the Swedish Air Force and Luxor Electronics. Mats even presented his research on traffic-light timing at an Institute of Transportation Engineers conference, and he corresponded with one of the physicists who developed the original 1959 formula.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/instituteforjustice/2017/04/28/...

They did not refund any of the past fines though.

- one that shows your car before crossing the stop line when the light is red

- second showing your car after crossing the stop line within same light cycle (i.e. seconds from previous photo)

No need to do the math if you entered the intersection before the light turned red

The road is signed probably for 30 because that's what is was historically or that's what they got after evaluating what the confusing web of rules and regulations says it should be.

The lights are set up for 40-50 because the person responsible for tuning the light a) looked at existing traffic data and set the light to that or b) assessed the properties of the road using totally different measures and determined that's the speed traffic would go.

And the city doesn't change the sign to reflect the reality of the traffic because a) they'd have to re-navigate the web of rules to do that and b) shirking potential revenue is a fast track to a dead end job for bureaucrats in that state c) doing nothing is easy.

Unless the road is determined to be a local road, posted speed limits are only enforcable if set by an engineering survey, or if it's at least X, which I think is 60 or 65. But I'm not sure it's illegal to post an unenforcable speed limit, or to ticket against it, it's just that those contesting the ticket will win.

I hate it. I hate it so much. Travelling down an avenue for 3 or 4 miles is just painful. The worst is when there is zero traffic (say 10:30 at night) and you sit at red lights watching nobody pass.

People here are talking about unjust systems built to needlessly punish law abiding citizens monetarily and time wise. No gymnastics or ideologies necessary.

What comes to mind is the obscenity of civil forfeiture used without accompanying crimes upheld against the people who rightfully own said assets..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United...