Red Light Camera News RLC are not the benefit as touted when authorized by Florida Legislature, so scrap them!
(Thanks to www.stpetecameras.org for the link!)
http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2011/apr/24/editorial-red-light-cameras-are-not-the-benefit/
Editorial: Red light cameras are not the benefit as touted when authorized by Florida Legislature, so scrap them
Efforts to reduce collisions at roadway intersections valuable, but current authorized system leaves a lot to be desired
editorial board , TCPalm , Posted April 24, 2011 at 6 a.m.
A year after the Florida Legislature authorized local governments to install cameras at intersections to catch and fine red-light runners, some lawmakers are having second thoughts.
And, well they should. Touted as a means to reduce traffic collisions and produce substantial revenue for state and local coffers, the cameras may not be quite as good as sold at doing either.
Prior to adoption of the state law and shortly thereafter, the cities of Vero Beach and Fort Pierce were well on their way to installing the cameras until elected and law enforcement officials began having second thoughts themselves. Now, the cameras are on hold if not simply dropped from consideration.
Studies on the effectiveness of the cameras tend to show they do reduce the number and severity of side crashes at intersections. But, some studies also indicate that rear-end collisions increase at intersections where the cameras are located as drivers slam on brakes to avoid potential fines.
Concerns have also been raised that the fines are levied against the owners of vehicles that run through lights who may not be the individuals at the wheel at the time of the violation.
And, studies have shown that many of the alleged violations have not been the result of vehicles running red lights but legally making right turns.
From the beginning of the discussion of the feasibility and value of red light cameras has been the enticing potential for additional revenue for local governments as a result of fines levied. But, under the law passed by the Legislature, $83 of the $158 fine goes to the state while the remaining $75 goes to the local jurisdiction. The state gets additional revenue — in the millions of dollars — for doing nothing while the local governments have to balance the money they receive with their costs.
In some cases, the local governments can actually lose money by adopting the red light cameras since each alleged violation must be confirmed by law enforcement before a citation is issued. That cost in personnel time and expense can be considerable and takes officers away from other duties which may be more essential in tight budget situations. And, there is the cost of defending the cases in court if the violations are appealed.
Earlier this month, protests were conducted across the state, led by libertarian and tea party organizations, claiming the cameras are unconstititutional and reduce public safety by increasing vehicle crashes.
The rallies also supported legislation in Tallahassee that would ban the use of the cameras and order their removal in locations where they have already been installed. While a bill calling for the ban has been moving through the House, a companion bill has not been moving as smoothly through the Senate.
Time may run out before a bill can get final legislative approval. If that occurs, the reasonable alternative would be for local jurisdictions which have not installed the cameras to keep the cameras from being installed and for those which have installed them to voluntarily remove them.
A better system for reducing the tragedies that can occur at intersections should be studied using better technology than is available from the camera system. Some experts have claimed accidents can be reduced simply by changing the timing patterns for intersection stoplights.
No one wants anyone to be injured or killed as a result of collisions at intersections. But, the red light cameras are not the answer.
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Articles Menu
Find Info
Latest Comments
Member Login
