Views From Both Sides Of The Road

Supporters of red light cameras say…
  • According to the Insurance Institute of Highway Safety (IIHS), drivers who run red lights account for 22% of all traffic accidents in the United States.
  • An IIHS study in Oxnard, California showed that red-light running violations dropped 42% after red light cameras were introduced. A similar study in Fairfax, Virginia showed violations declined 40% after one year after.
  • Publicity of red light cameras deters violations.
  • Red-light cameras don’t have biases and therefore drivers cannot be unfairly profiled.
  • Privacy issues are null because of the public setting. Also, only people violating the law are photographed.
  • They make lots of money for cities in need of revenue.
Those who oppose the use of red-light cameras say . . . 
  • The owner might not have been driving the car, yet they are mailed the owner of the ticket.
  • Cameras increase other types of accidents, such as rear-ending collisions, when people notice the camera and make hasty decisions to avoid ticketing. A Virginia Transportation Research Council study shows an increase in accidents with the installment of red light cameras.
  • Longer yellow lights can make intersections much safer, in an easy and inexpensive way (check out the findings of the Texas Transportation Institute)
  • There is no standardization of yellow light duration and several cities have been caught shortening them around a red light camera to increase revenue.
  • Insurance companies (including IIHS) support red-light cameras because more tickets mean they can raise insurance rates
  • The accused receive notification weeks after the violation and there are no human witnesses to analyze the whole situation.
  • They are expensive to operate and service the tickets in our court system.
  • There are not stands to the fines through the U.S. which range from $50-$400.

Thank you to our friends at Beat The Traffic Blog for putting together this info . . .