Boosters of red-light cameras don’t want you to know that in many jurisdictions where red-light cameras are active, accidents and injuries have increased. [Ed. note: Red-light cameras take photos …
Stay informed about your community and support local independent journalism.
Subscribe to The River Reporter today. click here
This item is available in full to subscribers.
Please log in to continue |
Boosters of red-light cameras don’t want you to know that in many jurisdictions where red-light cameras are active, accidents and injuries have increased. [Ed. note: Red-light cameras take photos of vehicles that have entered an intersection after the light turns red.]
In Philadelphia, at Grant Avenue and the Boulevard, accidents increased 15 percent, with injury accidents increasing 27 percent. In addition, angle collisions did not decrease as promised. At Red Lion Road, accidents increased 18 percent. And again, cameras did not reduce angle collisions, as the red-light camera boosters promised they would.
In Los Angeles, at Manchester Avenue and Figueroa Street, at Westwood Boulevard and Wilshire Boulevard, and at Rodeo Road and La Brea Avenue, collisions tripled after red light cameras were installed.
So why did accidents increase at camera-enforced intersections? Local attorney Sherman Ellison said, “People see the light flash and they slam on their brakes. That’s just human nature. As a result, more accidents, more rear-end accidents.”
The Virginia Transportation Research Council found an increase of between 31 percent and 54 percent for rear-end crashes, and most likely an increase in angle crashes as well at red-light-camera intersections. And there was no decrease of rear-enders over time, as red-light camera boosters claimed would happen.
In Corpus Christi, TX, rear-end accidents increased nearly 33 percent, and accidents resulting in injury were up 28 percent at red-light camera intersections.
Red-light camera boosters don’t want you to know that adding time to yellow lights reduces red light violations dramatically, and also makes intersections safer.
The Virginia Department of Transportation increased the yellow time by 1.5 seconds at one red-light-camera intersection. This increase in yellow time resulted in a 94 percent drop in citations.
To illustrate that most red-light violations are invisible, tenths-of-a-second violations, Winnipeg, Canada, added 0.3 to 0.7 seconds to 110 city intersections, which resulted in a 75 percent to 80 percent reduction in citations at red-light-camera intersections.
I predict PennDOT will refuse to allow any red-light-camera city to add yellow light time to improve safety by more than the cameras can achieve.
Why will it refuse? Likely because Automated Red Light Enforcement (ARLE) programs are for-profit ways for PennDOT to accumulate funds that it can pass out to communities it favors for whatever reasons. PennDOT gains power and influence in relation to its total budget, and the ARLE program increases its total budget revenue to give it more power and influence.
But if the yellow intervals are lengthened by one second to reduce the violation rates by at least 60 percent and more likely 70 percent to 90 percent, then ARLE cameras would issue too few tickets for the total fines to pay the $4,000-to-$5,000-per-month-per-camera costs, and the program would lose money. Without profits, PennDOT, the for-profit camera companies and red-light-camera cities will not be interested in the red-light program.
Adding one second to yellow lights would make intersections safer, but would make red light cameras unnecessary and unprofitable, not something that either PennDOT or red light camera cities want.
And yet, with all this, red-light cameras continue to operate and proliferate, without being subjected to proper investigative reporting. A big problem is that by Pennsylvania law, camera data is kept top secret from the public, so we can’t find out what the cameras’ failures and shortcomings are. We have to rely on the information the camera boosters put out.
Will they say anything that might kill the goose that lays the golden eggs? The huge amount of money that cameras generate, which creates a conflict of interest, is too tempting for the officials in charge to ban red-light cameras. Intersections would be safer with proper yellow-light timing and without red-light cameras.
The ability to punish drivers’ inadvertent and non-dangerous behavior with gotcha technology reflects governments’ desperate quest for ever more revenue. Red-light cameras increase accidents and injuries. Intersections can be made safer with longer yellow lights. Based on the facts, red-light cameras should be banned in Pennsylvania.
Thomas McCarey lives in Berwyn, PA.
Accidents in Philadelphia:
https://www.thenewspaper.com/rlc/docs/2013/pa-rlcresults.pdf
Why do accidents increase?
https://ww2.motorists.org/blog/la-red-light-cameras-increase-accidents/
Accidents in Virginia:
https://www.thenewspaper.com/news/18/1844.asp
Accidents in Texas:
https://www.thenewspaper.com/news/27/2743.asp
Increased time for yellow signal in Virginia:
https://ww2.motorists.org/issues/red-light-cameras/red-light-citations-drop-below-one-per-day-2/
Increased yellow signal time in Winnipeg, Canada:
Comments
No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here