So, repeated studies showing that the cameras cause more accidents, are abused by cities, have unproven accuracy, are not proven to increase safety at all, are usually owned and operated by companies that obviously have a vested interest in making sure citations provide consistent revenue, and proven evidence that just carefully timing yellow lights can very nearly eliminate red light infractions make no difference to you?
The rule is "don't go through red", and my understanding is that the cameras only take a picture if the light is red BEFORE you even enter the intersection. A clear infraction.
Your understanding is probably wrong. I posted a link to an Ars Technica article about traffic cameras in Denver. For a year, the company operating the cameras failed to provided data to the Denver Police proving that the cameras were taking pictures of the right cars, were taking pictures at the right time, and that the cameras never dropped below 98% accuracy (whatever that means).
The Denver Police never asked for the data either. Probably because Denver's revenue from red light citations went from $6,000 to $173,000 per month.
By the way, not providing the data was against the law. So, that company blatantly broke the law while providing a service that is supposed to catch people breaking the law...and most likely falsely cited people in the process.
AND, the Denver Police themselves, collected data from experiments with yellow light timing showing that, without cameras, timing yellow lights correctly reduced red light infractions almost by a factor of 4.
That does not even get into cities illegally changing yellow light timing to entrap people.
Great system! I feel safer.
posted 3 years, 8 months ago
view in context