Red Light Camera News OPINION SHAPER: Cameras put drivers in DZ
Home / Suburban Journals / St. Charles Journals / opinion
OPINION SHAPER: Cameras put drivers in DZ
Share |
OPINION SHAPER: Cameras put drivers in DZ
By Cameron Coursey STLtoday.com | Posted: Sunday, April 24, 2011 8:15 am
Font Size: Default font size Larger font size Share Often my definition of a traffic light is an apparatus that automatically turns red when my car approaches.
Many a day have I traveled Highway 94, hovering around the speed limit, only to have to stop at every single traffic light between Highway 40 and Jungermann Road.
So when I heard that $5 million would be invested to install a synchronized traffic control system at more than 300 traffic lights in St. Charles County, to be completed by the end of 2012, I wanted to get in my car and toot the horn in glee all the way to the county executive's office, no matter how long it took to get there. I'm hoping that synchronized traffic lights, in addition to moving traffic along, will cut down on red-light running.
Having been the victim of a collision at an intersection on Highway 94 that sent my Mustang GT to the scrap heap — thank God no one was seriously injured — I know from experience the dangers at intersections. What really bugs me, though, is that carbuncle of a red-light photo-enforcement system St. Peters uses at Highway 94 and Central School Road. I'm always afraid the light will turn yellow as I'm approaching and I will have to brake hard or get my picture taken and find a notice of violation in the mail.
The space from the intersection to the point on the road where it may be difficult to discern whether to run a yellow light or brake to be safe actually has a name — the Dilemma Zone.
No, it's not a Weird Al Yankovic parody of a song from "Top Gun." There are studies that would lead one to believe the number of rear-end collisions actually increases at intersections where red-light photo enforcement systems are used because the DZ leads to too much hesitation. This is a point that seems to be missed by municipalities using these systems — there is as much danger in being a namby-pamby on the road as in being overly aggressive.
What irritates me even more about red-light photo enforcement systems is that the municipalities using them are treating drivers like children having to be monitored. It's a police state mentality, which is ironic because many of the backers of red-light photo systems are private companies that manufacture and install the equipment and take a cut of the collected fines. In fact, recent television commercials promoting red-light photo systems were paid for by a group supported by a manufacturer of such systems.
Some would say crashes decrease with red-light cameras, although there is much debate about the statistics. Let's concede the point that red-light photo enforcement can have a positive effect on the number of right-angle crashes at intersections, which are the deadliest ones. But just because something has a positive effect doesn't mean it should be done. It would also cut down on crashes at intersections if we all rode horses — not happening.
There has to be a level of acceptable risk and personal accountability without Big Brother interceding with photo enforcement.
Lest you think this is a rant because I received a ticket as a result of red-light photo enforcement, that's not the case (knock on wood). What I'm looking forward to is a future where photo enforcement isn't needed. Perhaps someday our cars will be wirelessly tied into the traffic control system and will help us make a choice of whether to proceed through the Dilemma Zone or brake for the red light.
That's the day I'll change my definition of a traffic light.
Cameron Coursey of Defiance works for AT&T as assistant vice president of production realization for the Emerging Devices Organization. Opinion Shapers are chosen annually to write columns on topics of interest to them.
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Articles Menu
Find Info
Latest Comments
Member Login
