Red Light Cameras Work
[Guest post by DRJ]
This is for all libertarians and conservatives who love to see government get tweaked now and then.
The Houston Chronicle blog, named the No. 1 Best Blogging Newspaper in the U.S., posts this blog article by Matt Stiles on Houston’s red light cameras:
“The city’s red-light camera program is supposed to increase safety at intersections, police say, by prompting “behavior modifications” in motorists. Clearly, some government workers aren’t getting the message.
We reported last spring that more than 100 public vehicles, including police cruisers and school buses, were nabbed during the first five months the cameras were operational. Not much has changed, according to records we’ve received under the Texas Public Information Act.
In the camera system’s first year, more than 520 such vehicles have been cited, resulting in about $40,000 in fines, the records show. City vehicles were responsible for $16,425 of that. The Houston Police Department, whose officers monitor the program, had the most citations: 103.”
Stiles notes several caveats, including that citations have increased since these numbers were released because there are 67% more red light cameras in operation now than there were 6 months ago; that the police officers who received citations might have been involved in emergencies (although citations aren’t usually issued when the cruiser’s lights are flashing); and government workers make mistakes, too. He also notes that, in most cases, the offending employees must pay the fines themselves.
Here’s the take-home point for me: Over 41% of the fines issued in the first year of Houston’s red light camera program were issued to city employees. [Or maybe not! See Bob Loblaw’s comment 6, below. – DRJ]
— DRJ
Do city workers make up 41% of drivers?
That’s telling.
Christoph (92b8f7) — 9/28/2007 @ 11:22 amInteresting that they list the amount of fines assessed. I’d be curious to know how much of that amount was actually paid and the representation among city employees of those fines unpaid. Does Texas revoke driving privledges for an excessive number of infractions ? Does the running of red lights figure into it ? Are there city employees ,with revoked driving privledges, driving city vehicles ? As they say…Hmmmmmmmm.
Edward Lunny (85f233) — 9/28/2007 @ 11:38 amHe also notes that, in most cases, the offending employees must pay the fines themselves.
In most cases, sure they do. More like, in most cases, don’t get caught again.
Gerald A (e64dc9) — 9/28/2007 @ 12:00 pmEdward, Texas does use points to revoke your driver’s license for a bunch of traffic infractions, but I believe these tickets do not count.
Houston is a mess, anyway, but it’s warming to see these tickets ands tats apparently handled honestly. I HATE seeing cops run red lights for apparent non emergencies (and I see so often I know it’s usually nothing). I HATE “professional courtesy” getting cops out of DUIs and speeeding.
If this camera system means cops have to pay for their traffic misbehavior, I may change my opinion on the general matter.
Rememebr, in Texas, you can’t even sue the police under most circumstances. If they wreck your car and they were patrolling, they don’t owe you a penny. We need to make sure these guys can actually drive if we are going to trust them with that kind of power.
Dustin (9e390b) — 9/28/2007 @ 12:11 pmNothing but a big cash cow. The Washington Times had an article on D.C.’s cameras a couple of years ago. I think they even cut the caution light times to increase the collections. The cameras are owened by a private company who gives the city a cut. If you look on the net, you can find people selling license plate covers that block the camera.
Hazy (56a0a8) — 9/28/2007 @ 12:18 pmDo you mean 41% of all the public vehicles or 41% of all vehicles? I think the figure actually applies to the former from my cursory investigation of the Chronicle’s articles (I couldn’t find any actual breakdown of public/private/city etc.)
If that is the case the 41% is a little less astonishing…
Bob Loblaw (23d1c4) — 9/28/2007 @ 1:24 pmActually, the ratio of government vehicles to total is only about 20% (unless “more than a hundred” actually means “two hundred”)–100+ vehicles out of total of 520. That may mean that some of these government workers are repeat offenders, of course. And there are two logical reasons why the catch of government offenders seems so large. First, if not all the cameras were in place yet, much will depend on where the cameras were placed; a camera placed down the block from city hall will automatically see more government cars than one placed in the middle of relatively nowhere. Second, police cruisers and school buses are on the road constantly, like transit buses. Probably delivery vans and courier services are the only ones on the road as much or more than they are. (Assuming that police don’t actually spend most of their shift in donut shops 🙂 ) So the cameras have more chances of catching them than it has of catching the average commuter. (Any way of finding out what the equivalent stats for delivery vans/courier services might be?)
But twenty percent, even with that thrown in the balance, is still a lot. But it’s no surprise. If I see a police car, or a car with a Christian bumper sticker, I know to be careful, and to expect a bit of bad driving. (Cops are just bad drivers; Christian bumper sticker-types, apparently, trust in the Lord just a bit too much.)
kishnevi (3744b5) — 9/28/2007 @ 1:31 pmBob,
I think you’re right. The 41% figure is the product of 16,425/40,000. I read “such vehicles” to refer to all vehicles receiving fines but after re-reading the article, it probably refers solely to the 520 government vehicles. That would mean that 41% of the government vehicles that got tickets were city vehicles and 59% of government vehicles that got tickets were from other government entities. Thus, we don’t know what percentage of all ticketed vehicles were government vehicles – yet, although the Chron.com blog promises more information later.
Does that sound right to you?
DRJ (8b9d41) — 9/28/2007 @ 1:34 pmHow about a red light runner maker TRAINED BIRD SITTING ON A TRAFFIC LIGHT HE LETS LOSE WHEN SOMEONE RUNS A RED LIGHT AND THE CAR IS EASY TO SPOT
krazy kagu (5b69ac) — 9/28/2007 @ 2:07 pmRed light camera’s work great…at raising money for city governments. Traffic safety…eh, not so much…
D.C.Red-Light Cameras Fail to Reduce Accidents
But a Washington Post analysis of crash statistics shows that the number of accidents has gone up at intersections with the cameras. The increase is the same or worse than at traffic signals without the devices.
Three outside traffic specialists independently reviewed the data and said they were surprised by the results. Their conclusion: The cameras do not appear to be making any difference in preventing injuries or collisions.
“The data are very clear,” said Dick Raub, a traffic consultant and a former senior researcher at Northwestern University’s Center for Public Safety. “They are not performing any better than intersections without cameras.”
Virginia DOT Study Shows Cameras Increase Injury Accidents
A brand new, exhaustive study of all seven Virginia red light camera programs shows an overall increase in injury accidents has occured where the devices are installed. The study was performed by The Virginia Transportation Research Council at the request of the state transportation secretary…This study agrees with long-term findings in Australia and North Carolina.
Stoplight Traffic Cameras: Why Is Big Brother Ticketing You?
Likewise, red-light cameras in Portland, Ore., produced a 140 percent increase in rear-end collisions at monitored intersections,…
But is there a cheaper, more effective way? Perhaps…
Pavement Marking Reduces Red Light Running
…University of Central Florida researchers concluded that improving street markings near intersections reduced red light running by 74 percent without increasing the likelihood of rear end collisions.
But the money wouldn’t be as good…
The District’s red-light cameras have generated more than 500,000 violations and $32 million in fines over the past six years.
Eric
Eric (b923fa) — 9/28/2007 @ 5:57 pmhttp://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/001/078ftoqz.asp?pg=2
Hazy (c36902) — 9/28/2007 @ 6:46 pmThe space where the vehicle’s shotgun seat used to be is now occupied by a giant T-bar bolted to the floor, on which is mounted a Gatso Radar 24 camera control unit, a data memory card, and all manner of technical doodads. With all their Doppler radar talk, the officers sound like meteorologists with guns. But their police car is not really a police car in any conventional sense. “It doesn’t have any police equipment,” explains McCoy, “no siren, no police radio.”
In fact, these working cops aren’t technically working cops. They’re off-duty cops, getting paid overtime that is covered by the city’s camera contractor, Lockheed Martin IMS. At the time of my outing, Lockheed is responsible for maintaining the equipment, processing the data, and sending out the citations–which entitles them to $32.50 out of every $75 red-light-camera ticket and $29 of every photo-radar ticket. (Since then, Lockheed sold their national automated enforcement business to Affiliated Computer Services in Dallas, with the same profit arrangement applying.) Proponents of the system like to point out that the whole operation doesn’t cost taxpayers a dime. Cynics could contend that it’s cost taxpayers and commuters quite a few dimes. As of February 2002, D.C.’s red-light camera not only collected over $15 million since August of 1999, but its photo radar program, which has only been in operation for seven months, has already netted the District a cool $9,041,295.
When asked if they would pull over most of the people the camera is shooting, the officers say no. “Thing is,” says Cephas, “the speed limit’s 25, but people just constantly drive with the flow of traffic.” “We know everybody drives over the speed limit,” adds McCoy, “so you have some tolerance.” At that moment, a fellow officer whizzes by, waving. “No discrimination here,” says McCoy pointing to the camera, which likely just captured their colleague racking up a citation. While emergency vehicles are supposed to be exempt from paying fines, even ambulance drivers and fire trucks get tickets. (The Washington Times recently reported that a raft of tickets earned by D.C. police has actually slowed their response time on calls.) “If George Bush comes through here,” laughs Cephas, “he’s gonna get it too.”
The full Houston Chronicle article on this subject is online and it turns out government tickets are but a fraction of total tickets: Over 100,000 tickets were issued since last Fall, of which 520 were issued to government entities.
If 520 tickets generated $40,000 in revenue, imagine what over a 100,000 brought in.
DRJ (ec59b5) — 9/29/2007 @ 10:50 amThere’s a red light camera at an intersection near where I used to work in Plano, TX. They put it in a year or so ago. At the same time they put it in, they shortened the yellow light by at least a second. The yellow is so short now that if you’re going towards the intersection and you see it turn yellow you almost have to slam on your brakes.
Not so strangely, there are a ton of accidents at this intersection. At some point I expect there to be a lawsuit, and it’s one I’d fully support.
Skip (b45646) — 9/29/2007 @ 9:51 pmNow this is what it really looks like when government gets “tweaked”…
Ruling to refund 147 PhotoCop fines may be just a start
“Thousands of people could reclaim up to $2.8 million in fines paid after their vehicles were videotaped going through red lights in Minneapolis, thanks to a ruling Monday that applies to a smaller number of people who sued.
…
“Wernick ruled that in the case of the 147 claimants, since the city collected the fine, it will be up to the city to pay it back, even after the money has been split with the county.
“…Of the $142 fine payment, the city receives roughly 30 percent and the rest goes to the county…”
“Tweaked,” indeed.
Eric (d01ea0) — 10/2/2007 @ 5:10 pmIndeed, Eric.
DRJ (ec59b5) — 10/2/2007 @ 5:25 pmzylos segidosy gikma
su379427 (30b2b5) — 1/14/2008 @ 3:59 pmgihe http://su379427.qkdz3ii.info/sitemap10.html [url=http://su379427.qkdz3ii.info/sitemap10.html ]raro[/url] vevon
The court’s part of this is messed up too. When I sold my car, I didn’t realize that I needed to record the buyer’s full name and address. Buyer never registered vehicle, and the court holds me accountable since I cannot completely fill out the form to contest the ticket. Yeah, they could get it from his cell#, which I do have, but its easier for them to victimize me.
cellopaddy (c8e41c) — 1/18/2008 @ 10:22 am