These cameras for safety in name only. They are revenue machines for private companies who get a cut of the civil infringements, sometimes half.
On approach to a yellow light on a camera-equipped intersections there are two options, both of which increase risk of collision: 1) if close enough, put the pedal to the floor and 2) if too far, slam on the brakes.
Here they put the cameras on the lights with the shortest yellow times, in some cases the yellows are below minimum standard yellow light times.
Shorter yellows directly result in a reduced margin of error in judgement. Are you 100% sure that at your current position and speed that you will make the light? A long yellow allows you to be a little off and still make the light- and without slamming on the brakes or gas. If the yellow is short and you are slightly off, say 0.04 seconds late entering the intersection, with the cameras you get a ticket automatically (and I have, for exactly 0.04 seconds late on a light- about a yard behind the line in the photo).
I bet if Spokane increased every yellow light by 50% they would see a marked decrease in red light accidents. However, the camera company and municipalities would see a marked decrease in citation revenue as well.
An increase in rear ender accidents? Gee, you don’t think we are all driving too fast or following too close, do you?
When we begin to follow the ruled of the road, and drive the speed limit, then the rate of accidents will drop. The problem is not the equipment, its not the fact that the traffic light contractor must be paid for their services, and its not the length of the yellow light. Its that we have become a bunch of selfish crappy drivers. In a few years we’ll adapt.
Increased yellow light timing has proven to be more effective than red light cameras in reducing accidents and accident severity. It can be used in conjunction with red light cameras if you also want to catch and fine violators.
Also, anyone with a basic knowledge of statistics should understand that comparing the number of accidents year-over-year means nothing if you don’t know the total number of cars/amount of traffic for both years and other factors such as weather that increase or decrease the propensity for accidents.
If all fines are used to fund safety campaigns instead of balance the budget, you can’t use the profit argument. They either use the fines properly or they don’t, but no amount of arguing about how they actually use the money is going to stop use of these cameras unless there’s concrete proof; and maybe not even then.
–Police enforcement of red light violations, which show up on MVRs, and universal increase in yellow light length which has a direct and unquestioned positive impact on intersection safety
or
–Machine enforcement of red light violations, which do not show up on MVRs, and which have a highly contested impact on intersection safety
The city in which I used to live installed the cameras under the guise of safety but were really looking to increase revenue. The number of accidents at those intersectiuons went up and the city did not get the revenue that they had expected. They ended up killing the program after two years as it was not doing what the vendor claimed it would.
These cameras for safety in name only. They are revenue machines for private companies who get a cut of the civil infringements, sometimes half.
On approach to a yellow light on a camera-equipped intersections there are two options, both of which increase risk of collision: 1) if close enough, put the pedal to the floor and 2) if too far, slam on the brakes.
Here they put the cameras on the lights with the shortest yellow times, in some cases the yellows are below minimum standard yellow light times.
Shorter yellows directly result in a reduced margin of error in judgement. Are you 100% sure that at your current position and speed that you will make the light? A long yellow allows you to be a little off and still make the light- and without slamming on the brakes or gas. If the yellow is short and you are slightly off, say 0.04 seconds late entering the intersection, with the cameras you get a ticket automatically (and I have, for exactly 0.04 seconds late on a light- about a yard behind the line in the photo).
I bet if Spokane increased every yellow light by 50% they would see a marked decrease in red light accidents. However, the camera company and municipalities would see a marked decrease in citation revenue as well.
Is it about safety, or is it about money?
An increase in rear ender accidents? Gee, you don’t think we are all driving too fast or following too close, do you?
When we begin to follow the ruled of the road, and drive the speed limit, then the rate of accidents will drop. The problem is not the equipment, its not the fact that the traffic light contractor must be paid for their services, and its not the length of the yellow light. Its that we have become a bunch of selfish crappy drivers. In a few years we’ll adapt.
Increased yellow light timing has proven to be more effective than red light cameras in reducing accidents and accident severity. It can be used in conjunction with red light cameras if you also want to catch and fine violators.
Also, anyone with a basic knowledge of statistics should understand that comparing the number of accidents year-over-year means nothing if you don’t know the total number of cars/amount of traffic for both years and other factors such as weather that increase or decrease the propensity for accidents.
If all fines are used to fund safety campaigns instead of balance the budget, you can’t use the profit argument. They either use the fines properly or they don’t, but no amount of arguing about how they actually use the money is going to stop use of these cameras unless there’s concrete proof; and maybe not even then.
As an industry, which should we prefer?
–Police enforcement of red light violations, which show up on MVRs, and universal increase in yellow light length which has a direct and unquestioned positive impact on intersection safety
or
–Machine enforcement of red light violations, which do not show up on MVRs, and which have a highly contested impact on intersection safety
The city in which I used to live installed the cameras under the guise of safety but were really looking to increase revenue. The number of accidents at those intersectiuons went up and the city did not get the revenue that they had expected. They ended up killing the program after two years as it was not doing what the vendor claimed it would.
Sure seems like a lot of Spokane money going to some company in another state.