Protest Letters Red-light cameras? You'll be sorry
Red-light cameras? You'll be sorry
11:54 PM, Aug. 11, 2011 |
Red-light cameras will do more harm than good.
Thank you, Iowa City Council members Connie Champion, Regenia Bailey and Susan Mims for your wise insights to the following concerns ("City moves on red-light cameras," Aug. 2).
When I lived in Chicago, there was evidence of the following costs of $100 for each ka-ching.
1. Ka-ching: There is an increase of rear-end collisions from people braking to avoid fines.
2. Ka-ching: Bikers, according to Iowa law, (see this link: ) are supposed to dismount and walk their bikes across busy intersections.
3. Ka-ching: People texting and/or talking "blindly" cross at lights even when they are red for them.
4. Ka-ching: Considering the volume of students and other pedestrians in the downtown area, drivers can be "stuck" at an intersection while lawfully and thoughtfully yielding to slow-moving vehicles and/or pedestrians.
5. Ka-ching: There is no recourse for the driver who is charged. Remember taxation without representation? Who is the driver's advocate? It costs more to contest a camera fine than to pay the fine. Is that justice?
6. Ka-ching: Unfortunately, there are some pranksters who deliberately "delay" crossing so that the driver is "stuck" at the crossing when the light changes to red. Law-abiding drivers, who commence moving at a green or recent amber light may be delayed or "stuck" as the light turns red.
7. Ka-ching: Notification to drivers by mail is delayed and in some circumstances the driver has no knowledge nor recollection of the alleged violation.
8. Ka-ching: In multi-lane roads, it is difficult to determine which car triggered the camera.
9. Ka-ching: The cameras may provide more income to the city but they do not prevent accidents and have been the cause of more.
So, you'll be sorry.
Annamarie Marcalus
Iowa City
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Activism Menu
Find Info
