Red Light Cameras

**scumdog** · 1st October 2011, 10:45

Originally Posted by Scuba_Steve

easy money… won’t cost you anything… we take care of everything. the cameras brought the city $32 million in revenue. So rather than halting the program, the city chose to expand it."[/I]

Ah well, if red-light runner losers are around why not fleece some money off them?

**JimO** · 1st October 2011, 12:53

Originally Posted by Road kill

a van full of coconuts!
Damn,it'll be like living in Ponsonby during the 60's all over again.

we dont have van loads of coconuts here

**Milts** · 1st October 2011, 15:43

Originally Posted by Scuba_Steve

[...]

"Red-light cameras just reward cities for bad engineering,"

"accidents INCREASED at red light camera intersections"
"Halloway had fallen for ATS’ slick sales fantasy of safety and profits and didn’t want to believe the news that could jeopardize the city’s cash cow, “That’s nonsense. Where are you getting your data?” City Councilor Ken Halloway asked. After being shown the data from the city, he still didn’t want to accept the harsh reality [...]
What do these cities all have in common? They all have what is referred to as “infomercial syndrome.” The city councils were mesmerized by the incredible claims and smooth presentation… increased safety… easy money… won’t cost you anything… we take care of everything. It’s so easy! Act Now! And just like the consumer who bought an Ab Roller expecting amazing results, these cities are realizing that the claims are all bogus. In reality, the answers are simple, but they are the answers that no one wants to hear. The person who bought the Ab Roller really just needs a trainer and a gym membership. The cities that bought red light cameras need to order an honest traffic engineering study for each problem location and listen the advice of true unbiased professionals"
[...]

As much as I would love to agree with you, try reading the actual research rather than the rhetoric of camera oponents. You'll find that although nose to tail crashes increase slightly total crashes decrase and fatalities significantly decrease. This is consistent between cities over different time periods (i.e. crashes reduce after cameras are instated) and between different, population controlled cities (i.e. you compare city A with cameras to a similar city B without).

This strong public support confirms that red light camera opponents, although vocal and often influential, are in the minority. Previous surveys have also found widespread support for red light cameras but opponents continue to claim that the programs violate privacy and is a way for cities to generate revenue. Red light cameras save lives. The article shows how the 14 cities that had cameras in 2004-2008 but did not have them in an earlier comparison, automated red light enforcement saved 159 lives.

Objective: To estimate the effects of red light camera enforcement on per capita fatal crash rates at intersections with signal lights. Methods: From the 99 large US cities with more than 200,000 residents in 2008, 14 cities were identified with red light camera enforcement programs during 2004-08 but not during 1992-96, and 48 cities were identified without camera programs during either period. Analyses compared the citywide per capita rate of fatal red light running crashes and the citywide per capita rate of all fatal crashes at signalized intersections during the two study periods, and rate changes then were compared for cities with and without cameras programs. Poisson regression was used to model crash rates as a function of red light camera enforcement, land area, and population density. Results: The average annual rate of fatal red light running crashes declined for both study groups, but the decline was larger for cities with red light camera enforcement programs than for cities without camera programs (35 vs. 14 percent). The average annual rate of all fatal crashes at signalized intersections decreased by 14 percent for cities with camera programs and increased slightly (2 percent) for cities without cameras. After controlling for population density and land area, the rate of fatal red light running crashes during 2004-08 for cities with camera programs was an estimated 24 percent lower than what would have been expected without cameras. The rate of all fatal crashes at signalized intersections during 2004-08 for cities with camera programs was an estimated 17 percent lower than what would have been expected without cameras. Conclusions: Red light camera enforcement programs reduce the citywide rate of fatal red light running crashes and, to a lesser but still significant extent, the rate of all fatal crashes at signalized intersections. Cities wishing to reduce fatal crashes at signalized intersections should consider red light camera enforcement

The above quotes are from an engineering research database. Records can be found here:

http://trid.trb.org/view/2011/C/1113065

http://trid.trb.org/view/2011/M/1106474

http://trid.trb.org/view/2011/M/1090406

**Berries** · 1st October 2011, 20:56

Originally Posted by Road kill

Yep an then it'll be wall to wall threads by clowns from Dunedin about "I stopped because I thought the light was going to go Orange "an got run over by six trucks,two cars, an a van full of coconuts!

What's a coconut?