Apparently those cameras that are supposed to catch the red light runners are working too well; more drivers are obeying the law (not to run red lights) that some cities are actually thinking of taking the cameras down.
It almost appears that the city/town governments view lives being saved by less accidents as a result of red light runners are not quite as important as the lost revenue from "catching" the law-breakers. On the other hand, different types of accidents do happen as a result of these cameras.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23710970/
Do you have them in your city/town? What are your thoughts regarding the efficiency and purpose of these cameras?
- Ceicei
It almost appears that the city/town governments view lives being saved by less accidents as a result of red light runners are not quite as important as the lost revenue from "catching" the law-breakers. On the other hand, different types of accidents do happen as a result of these cameras.
Last week, Dallas officials reviewed the numbers and decided that a quarter of the cameras they had installed to catch motorists running red lights were too effective. So they shut them down.
They are not alone. Faced with data showing that drivers pay attention to cameras at intersections — resulting in fewer ticketable violations and ever-shrinking revenue from fines — municipalities across the country are reconsidering red light cameras, which often work too well.
Opponents of cameras highlight rear-end crashes, noting that they make up more than 71 percent of accidents at intersections. Removing the cameras would lessen the most common kind of accidents.
But advocates point out that right-angle crashes are far more dangerous, causing 64 percent of the injuries at those intersections.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23710970/
Do you have them in your city/town? What are your thoughts regarding the efficiency and purpose of these cameras?
- Ceicei