Red Light Camera News TEXAS DOT/TTI CAMERA REPORT – A FRAUD AGAIN!
TEXAS DOT/TTI CAMERA REPORT – A FRAUD AGAIN!
By Greg Mauz
September 2011
For the millionth time: Any study claiming, “Cameras reduce crashes or save lives” is a FRAUD. The Texas Transportation Institute/Texas DOT Study (June 2011) is no exception.
“Evaluation of Photographic Traffic Signal Enforcement Systems in Texas” – like its predecessor from 2008 – contains the usual, predictable integrity, methodology and interpretation deceptions. See: “Texas DOT Camera Report Seriously Flawed.” http://www.bhspi.org/mauz/Texas%20Dot%20Camera%20Report%20Seriously%20Flawed%2012.5.2008.pdf
Author of both studies, Troy Walden is a retired police officer, receiving data from other cops, whose cities/police departments profit from red light ticket cameras. The biased and conflicted data is collected by pro-camera Tx DOT. Their web site reads like a camera company sales brochure. Prior to my complaint letter, their links referenced ONLY groups profiting from cameras. Hardly objective.
Like in 2008, Walden blathers on in a sensationalistic attempt to sell cameras (pages 10-12). He states many of the same lies again despite mine and other refutations and our 45 minute phone conversation in December 2008.
Paragraph 2, page 10, falsely claims, “Red light running causes 1,000 fatalities annually…..economic loss of $14 billion…..intersection – related crashes…..7,770 fatalities. Right angle intersections……46% of total.”
Truth. Red light violations cause 800 fatalities a year or only 2% of ALL U.S. traffic fatalities (only 762 of 37,261 in 2008, NHTSA – a Walden reference). This 2% has not declined despite cameras in 500 cities. It is at most a $4 billion dollar problem or <2% of $240 billion total. An honest researcher shows perspective, but honesty doesn’t sell cameras.
This “study” is about signal-related intersection crashes which incur about 2,900 fatal crashes annually, NOT 7,770. “Right angles” should be red light violation crashes which account for 28% of signal-related fatal crashes, NOT “46%.” He states similar exaggerations from Texas.
Texas maintains about 100 RLV fatal factors per year or only 1.8%. Of course, Walden fails to mention that improper right on red causes only 0.037% of crashes but greedy camera companies/cities mail 60% or more of their camera tickets for this very non-dangerous “offense” (Sugarland-Van Der Grinten; Duncanville – 95%). Oftentimes, the violator actually stopped but unethically placed violation lines entrap the mark. Right on red should be a YIELD.
Walden’s chart (page 170) does show only 2 right on red fatals in a state of 25 million. He – of course- makes no attempt to articulate or provide perspective. There were no right on red deaths in 2009 (Tx DOT Crash Contributing Factors).
On page 11, there are an astounding 8 references to bad “driver behavior” but NO mention of engineering malpractice which is so rampant the Institute of Transportation Engineers graded their own performance a D (2004). Yellow timing malpractice has also been admitted by the IIHS and FHwA, but NOT when selling RLTCs.
Walden’s study evaluated 38 cities and 275 camera enforced intersections. There were 56 Texas camera cities in 2008. We are supposed to believe the pro-camera data from integrity challenged Garland which was caught with illegal violation lines, a phony study and a City Attorney employed by the camera companies. Dallas extorted citizens’ money with 21 illegal yellow signals. Other cities with illegally short yellows included Humble, Houston, N. Richland Hills, Lubbock and Sugarland. Integrity issues abound.
This TTI/TXDOT “Study” is an embarrassment to the Texas A& M University System. The “research” contains NO control sites – research methodology 101. There is NO regression to the mean check. Walden censored 4,022 crash records (of 15,111) from the analysis (-26%) and 18 cities are missing (page 2 and 15). Injuries/fatalities are NOT reported. And before RLTC years are NOT listed separately.
Control sites almost always outscore camera sites – for safety and even violation rates. Thus, proving ticket camera programs are a FRAUD. Hence, camera promoters often omit them. Regression checks also fail to help “sell” cameras.
Also NOT mentioned, most of the after cameras periods 2008-2010 were in a recession – the greatest reducer of crashes and fatalities. Texans drove about 20 billion less miles than normal. Also, a good number of cities increased some of their unethical/illegal yellow times. Then there are historical trends? Plus, over 40 other studies prove RLTC’s cause more crashes, injuries and fatalities (“Camera Enforcement – Charting a Catastrophic Failure” http://www.bhspi.org/mauz/Camera%20Enforcement%20-%20Charting%20A%20Catastrophic%20Failure%203.12.2009.pdf ). Not even one independent study endorses cameras!
To his credit, Walden does discuss some problems with yellow timing (pages 23-25). “Often drivers are caught off-guard by the duration of yellow and end up running [violating] a red light.” However, he makes no mention of cameras or their exploitation ($$$) of the multitude of ethical problems with yellow timing.
In short, minimum yellow times were lowered from 1989-1994, leaving a whopping 47% of drivers out of the formulas. Slower than average, the elderly, the disabled, drivers of large trucks and those trying to stop during inclement weather are NOT provided enough yellow time and forced to violate the red. Ticketing those people is malicious entrapment – STEALING. Even worse, dozens of U.S. Cities have been caught camera enforcing less than minimum, ILLEGAL yellows. See: “Camera Enforcement – Five Big Lies”, http://www.bhspi.org/mauz/Camera%20Enforcement%20-%20FIVE%20BIGGEST%20LIES%2012.7.2010%20Full%20Length.pdf, Truth after Lie #4. Short yellows cause crashes.
Add to the above injustices that cameras were never needed, lose every voter referendum and are ILLEGAL for violating due process rights (5th, 6th and 14th Amendments). Over 12 court decisions, 6 AG decisions and U.S. Criminal code 18:241/242 concur. Since camera tickets are mailed to registered owners, about 30% of the defendants are innocent, but coerced to pay anyway. Fraud and manslaughter are also crimes.
Walden’s pro-camera interpretation of alleged city data is wrong. Many cities claiming crash decreases have previously recorded and reported crash increases after RLTCs. Then, there’s the previously mentioned integrity issues and omitted cities.
Plano, Duncanville, Baytown, Lubbock (omitted, +50% RLV), Killeen (+15%), Corpus Christi (+28% injuries), Burleson (+33% fatals), College Station (+100% ALL), etc. recorded crash/injury increases. Houston results (Rice U.) were horrific (2008). Crashes and injuries were going down before cameras in all 5 groups of 10 RLTC intersections. After, ALL recorded increases - +100% all, +79% angle, +315 crashes with 120 injuries and 3 deaths!!! See: “Houston Cameras Increase Injuries.” http://www.bhspi.org/mauz/Houston%20Cameras%20Increase%20Injuries%201.9.2009.pdf
Walden’s last report contained 7 identical camera sites to Rice’s, but opposite results. In this study, 19 Houston camera sites were cherry picked versus all 50 sites in the Rice U. Study. At last count there were 70 Houston RLTC sites before citizens voted them out!
So how many other towns contain cherry picked sites for the desired results? And don’t forget 4,022 (-26%) crashes were censored from the results.
TTI/Tx DOT’s one year by one year chart (page 21) showed 8 of 22 cities had increases of crashes, 2 no improvements and at least 4 with integrity problems. In the two by two year group the author admits crashes were already decreasing in the before camera period but fails to document this in the chart (page 32) for objective comparison. If the one year chart had minimum 2 before periods (Research 101) most pro-camera results would be cancelled out. The 3x3 year chart contains only nine cities, including integrity challenged Duncanville, Garland, Plano, and Houston’s fraudulent results.
Even IF their biased, conflicted ($$$$), deceptive methodology study results were correct, the interpretation is wrong.
“The most severe type of crash is …right angle.” Wrong Walden. Head-on and rollover are way deadlier. “Right angles decreased 32% for all groups (1, 2 & 3 year) combined” (Table 14). However, rear-ends (Table 15) increases rose as high as +169% in the business/primary roads column but averaged +102% overall. For the record: rear-end fatalities have risen +12% nationally since serious camera proliferation, 2001-2007.
The rear-end percentage rise is equivalent to the 10 U.S. cities chart (page 11) in “Five Big Lies” (+100%). However, the number of crashes is definitely under-reported. Only 142 more crashes at 267 RLTC intersections is in no way consistent with other more objective research. Hence, the biased censorship of over 4,000 crashes. In addition, rear-end crashes almost always outnumber angle (including RLV) crashes but in this fantasy report angles outnumber rear-ends by over 10-1!!
Furthermore, Walden tries to blame the censored rear-end crashes on drivers following too close. Bottom line: No cameras. No increase. But often a decrease of cashes.
Camera promoters brag that their programs “dramatically reduce ALL or overall crashes, injuries and fatalities.” Walden’s overall results: 5,869 total crashes before cameras versus 5,253 after for 616 allegedly less crashes after cameras (Table 12, page 45.). This equates to a totally unimpressive 11% improvement (actually 10.5%) over 3 or more years of after data. Historical trends and control sites have equaled or exceeded this percentage of improvements (Oxnard, NC Study).
From 2007-2009, total Texas crashes dropped 6.5% from 458,289 to 428,667 or 29,622 less accidents. From 2008-2009, fatalities fell a huge (recession induced) -11.16% from 3,477 to 3,089. Disobeyed Stop and Go Signal (RLV), from 2005-2009, fell a whopping -42% from 19,250 crash factors down to only 11,157 – better than TTIs alleged results!
Camera promoters need to quit fraudulently linking recession induced safety improvements to their crash CAUSING camera programs.
Some of Walden’s’ worse deceptions involves NOT fully articulating the utmost importance of yellow timing and hiding Bonneson’s identity and study.
Although two references (page 48) are made to Bonneson/Zimmerman studies, their identities and conclusions are censored from this report.
First of all, these guys work for the Texas Transportation Institute (like Troy Walden). So why censor their work? Rhetorical question. Because it contradicts Walden’s report and all pro-camera propaganda.
The guys analyzed accidents over a three year period, at 181 intersection approaches, in three Texas cities. Adding one second of yellow to ITE minimums resulted in a -53% reduction in red light violations and a -40% reduction in crashes. These real safety improvements trounce even the fantasy results of camera promoters, including both Walden studies. Other yellow/engineering improvements show +1 second reduces RLVs by 50-80% and crashes/injuries by -25-50% (AAA Detroit, San Francisco, Philadelphia, Omaha, etc.). Longer [honest] yellows are Kryptonite to cameras. Honest yellows killed 21 camera sites in Dallas, 6 in Mesa, Arizona and most cameras in 12 Georgia cities.
Proper yellows are the Key to safety, NOT red light ticket cameras. RLTCs require short, unethical/illegal yellows to entrap enough marks for all camera promoters to greatly prosper. Over 70% + of tickets are less than one second into red [invisible], CAUSED by short yellows and NOT endangering the public.
Like a good camera promoter, Walden NEVER mentions money. Money is the ONLY reason cameras exist.
Ticket cameras – in about 500 locations across the “land of the free” – defraud mostly safe driving Americans for a conservative estimate of $8 billion annually. Add $ billions more for lost income, property damage, thousands of injuries and about 500 deaths! All this so a few ultra greedy, unpatriotic, inhumane, self-absorbed corporate/government/personal special interests can become obscenely rich at We the People’s expense.
“Camera Enforcement – A Picture of Fraud” http://www.bhspi.org/mauz/PictureOfFraud.pdf, 2007, proves from 7 different analyses that cameras cause more fatalities – common sense, photos, kinds of crashes, studies, control sties, 10 years of statistics and truth. Also see “Red Light Cameras KILL” http://www.bhspi.org/mauz/Red%20Light%20Cameras%20KILL%20Full%20Length%203.1.2011.pdf, 2011.
Camera enforcement is the worse fraud ever perpetrated upon the American public. Bernie Madoff is a Boy Scout compared to camera company CEOs, sales people, and phony “safety” group leaders.
Whether city managers, attorneys, local politicians, former (Walden) or current police officers, media puppets, college professors, Attorney General, Texas Senators, or even the Texas Governor, those who endorse camera programs have sold out their fellow Americans to corrupt corporate special interests. These people are traitors to the very notion of Democracy as can be seen in Houston, TX.
Walden’s report, like all pro-camera propaganda, is bought and paid for FRAUD.
Greg Mauz is an honest (no $$$ conflicts) traffic safety researcher with 25 years experience and volunteer Activist with the Best Highway Safety Practices Institute. He is the leading researcher/author on red light ticket cameras with 9 Camera Enforcement Reports. See [real] research at www.bhspi.org/mauz or www.banthecams.org. or call 325-896-2595.
| File | Description |
|---|---|
 Greg_Mauz_response_to_Waden_report__8.22.2011.pdf |
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Articles Menu
Find Info
Latest Comments
Member Login
