Red Light Camera Revenue Cost the City

[awecelot]

How many of these intersections with cameras have illegally short yellow times, I wonder?

6 Cities That Were Caught Shortening Yellow Light Times For Profit

[Westerner92]

Originally Posted by awecelot

How many of these intersections with cameras have illegally short yellow times, I wonder?

6 Cities That Were Caught Shortening Yellow Light Times For Profit

I thought about mentioning this, but I figured it wasn't worth it. They weren't going to listen to me anyway.

[texdav]

I say the times need to be checked but that is no reason to not have redlight cameras and catch voilators. I see all kinds of redlights run frequently. Better enforcement is needed. i also favor speed cameras that they say are the next thing on highways.

[Canine*Castle]

Originally Posted by texdav

I say the times need to be checked but that is no reason to not have redlight cameras and catch voilators. I see all kinds of redlights run frequently. Better enforcement is needed. i also favor speed cameras that they say are the next thing on highways.

Amen!!

[spursfan]

Originally Posted by texdav

I say the times need to be checked but that is no reason to not have redlight cameras and catch voilators. I see all kinds of redlights run frequently. Better enforcement is needed. i also favor speed cameras that they say are the next thing on highways.

I really don't understand how anyone could be in favor of speed cameras. Talk to someone from the UK and they will fill you on the "benefit" of speed cameras.

[TexasHorseLady]

Originally Posted by texdav

I say the times need to be checked but that is no reason to not have redlight cameras and catch voilators. I see all kinds of redlights run frequently. Better enforcement is needed.

Agreed. This falls into the "two wrongs don't make a right" category. Yes, the times should not be shortened and they should be legitimate. No, that doesn't mean that the cameras should be removed so that people won't get caught running red lights.

I don't see how this is such a difficult concept to get.

[Dwatted Wabbit]

Originally Posted by Westerner92

There was a big ordeal about red light cameras here in Lubbock last year. They claimed putting them up was for the safety of the public, but before they were even put up, the city incorporated the revenues from tickets into the next year's budget. They put cameras at a few intersections (which happened to be the busiest in town) to see how much "safety would be enforced". It turned out that there was an increase in rear end accidents because drivers were slamming on their brakes to avoid running the red light. They were turned off the next day after that study came out and taken down very soon after.

AMEN.

The cameras are essentially a tax increase by another name.

The companies that run the scamera systems come in with a big sales song-and-dance, and weak-spined city fathers are easily swayed by the one view they hear.

Scameras do indeed increase rear-end collisions. They do not necessarily decrease the total crash incidences at each intersection, or the severity of injuries.

A cheap way to raise taxes.
The companies make out like bandits, too.

If there's that much money to be made, seems like a competent city administration could figure out how to do it without having to work a 50/50 split with some ne'er-do-wells in the private sector.

[awecelot]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

Agreed. This falls into the "two wrongs don't make a right" category. Yes, the times should not be shortened and they should be legitimate. No, that doesn't mean that the cameras should be removed so that people won't get caught running red lights.

This is what I favor. I also favor a one-second delay after the light switches from yellow to red to give a "buffer zone" for people to clear the intersection before the camera starts taking pictures.

If we are going to use cameras, which can be a good tool for red-light enforcement, we need to keep the cameras in working order AT ALL COSTS. For a while last year, the camera at 75 @ Lovers here in Dallas would randomly flash for no reason. This wasn't an issue during the day; at night, however, the flash would catch people off-guard, and I witnessed an accident caused by this occurring (Thankfully, I was not involved, and those that were involved were not hurt).

As far as speed cameras, I used to be the type of person who would favor them, so long as they were portable (because if they are in fixed locations, everyone knows that people will just slow down in the location of the camera, and then speed back up) and 100% reliable (that is, more reliable than those "YOUR SPEED" indicators some cities have on local roads that flash when you are going too fast).

However, last Friday I travelled from Dallas to Fort Worth in order to take an out-of-town visitor to see the Stockyards. On I-30 in Arlington, the traffic was flowing nicely at about 62 MPH, two MPH over the speed limit but by no means causing any danger to anyone. Then, I noticed people ahead of me applying their brakes...traffic slowed to a crawl. The culprit? A member of the Arlington Police force was on the side of the road with a radar gun measuring everyone's speed.

I've seen that sort of practice before, but I've never experienced it on a very busy roadway, and let me tell you, it causes a safety hazard with everyone applying their brakes, not to mention that as soon as people got out of the bottleneck, they sped up to 70-75 MPH, probably to make up for lost time.

Speed cameras, even the portable kind, would cause this same phenomenon, making the road less safe for all of us.

[Westerner92]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

Agreed. This falls into the "two wrongs don't make a right" category. Yes, the times should not be shortened and they should be legitimate. No, that doesn't mean that the cameras should be removed so that people won't get caught running red lights.

I don't see how this is such a difficult concept to get.

I can agree with this. I never meant to start a debate. I was just saying that cameras, in general, are put up for revenue instead of enforcing a perfectly legitimate traffic law. I feel as if I'm being made out to be someone who distrusts the government and believes you shouldn't have consequences for your actions when all I was doing was pointing out an injustice. How is this such a difficult concept to get?

[loudes13]

$10,000 Ticket Challenge - Press Releases - National Motorists Association


$10,000 TICKET CAMERA CHALLENGE

The NMA knows that engineering solutions are the real way to prevent red-light violations and accidents at problematic intersections. In fact, we are willing to wager $10,000 to prove that engineering will work better than ticket cameras.

The revenue from ticket cameras serves as a reward to cities that fail to make motorists safer through proper signal timing, better signal design, and improved intersections. The apparent increase in red-light violations is largely the result of a 20-year pattern of deliberately changing the standards for the timing of yellow lights. This is an engineering problem, not an enforcement issue. Today we say to the communities that employ ticket cameras, "Let's put traffic engineering solutions to the test."

Here's our challenge:

Show us any camera-equipped intersection that still has high numbers of red-light violations and we will guarantee a minimum 50-percent reduction in red-light violations through the application of engineering solutions.

If our recommendations fail to meet our minimum goal, we will pay the community $10,000 to be used on any traffic safety program or project it chooses. However, if we succeed, the community must employ our engineering-based recommendations at other troublesome intersections and scrap its ticket-camera program.

What do you have to lose, other than your ticket-camera revenue? If you have any questions about this challenge or you believe your community would be interested in participating, please contact the NMA at (608) 849-6000 or via email at nma@motorists.org.