Speed Camera News Keep the stop sign on those red-light cameras
Keep the stop sign on those red-light cameras
Posted: Wednesday, Apr. 14, 2010
COLUMNISTS »
Mark Washburn
Mark Washburn writes television and radio commentary for The Charlotte Observer.
E-mail Mark
704.358.5007
More Information
Editorial: Red light program? Maybe not
Before we get down to business, we can all agree on this.
It is wrong to run a red light.
You can cause an accident. You can get a ticket. You can annoy other motorists.
Now, to business.
We do not need to reactivate those creepy, underhanded, loathsome red-light cameras.
Charlotte, a pioneer among Carolina cities in trying new things that sometimes turn out to be bugly messes, got into the red-light robot business in 1998.
What a deal. We were told these unblinking vigilantes would:
Reduce accidents.
Net maybe $4 million a year.
Promote vehicular nirvana.
On that last point, the cameras had been at their work about two weeks when someone pumped 20 bullets at the one at Brookshire and Hovis. And to no avail - it was in a bulletproof box; like the critic, the camera kept shooting.
No, we never reaped any $4 million. They lost money in the early days. After the initial costs were covered, the company running the program got most of the cash.
Then came a court dustup because schools were supposed to get a windfall from the fines, which they didn't. (Fortunately, the Education Lottery came along to meet all their needs.)
Yes, accidents went down at intersections after the cameras were turned on. Then they went down again after the cameras were turned off.
Nobody knows why. Go figure.
None of that cuts to the core of why red-light cameras should stay in mothballs. Here's the thing: They're just not sporting.
If I run a red light and get pulled over or breeze past a trooper at 80, I'm going to whine for a couple days about the ticket, then I'm going to take manly action - I'll get out the checkbook.
Oh, it says right there on the citation when I can go to court and tell it to the judge, and I have a reasonable expectation that the judge will politely listen, but what's the point? I did it. I took my chances and I got caught. Fair is fair.
Not so with these weasel devices hanging high.
They'd mail you a picture of your car in a week or so, Big Brother-style, and demand 50 bucks.
What if you weren't driving? Oh, simple - just rat out whoever was at the wheel at that moment, include their address, and then they'd drum that person for the money. If they didn't pay, they'd come back and get it from you anyway.
Or you could enter some complicated appeal process calculated to cost you far more than $50 in hassle.
Fair is fair. This wasn't it.
This was about the money then, and it's about the money now.
Despite the invisible torrent of free cash from the Education Lottery, another bugly promise, we're laying off teachers and talking about closing schools.
That's a serious problem, but this isn't a serious solution. We need to look elsewhere.
Intersections are safer now, and if the cameras had something to do with that, then at least something good came from this folly.
Sold as a tool of public safety, it turned out to be a gouging by snapshot.
Leave the lens cap on.
Mark Washburn: 704-358-5007; This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Articles Menu
Find Info
Latest Comments
Member Login
