Red Light District
This week a lifelong friend of mine welcomes us to the world of commuting to the suburbs in Chicago. I won’t say much as it will spoil his intro, but I am very curious what the popular opinion of the readers is on the topic Mike discusses.
Red Light District
by Mike Grendel
You’re driving down the streets of Chicago and you’re approaching one of many busy intersections. It’s an intersection that you’ve gone through many times before. The light has been green for a while and you know when it’s finally your turn to cross it the light will be yellow. Do you go through it risking getting your picture taken and a ticket in the mail a month down the road or do you slam on the breaks, possibly getting rear ended by the person tailing behind you. Seem familiar?
An article in the WSJ last week brings up many interesting and debatable issues regarding these controversial cameras.
1. Do these red light cameras help prevent red light runners and reduce car wrecks?
2. Are these cameras a cheap and easy way of generating millions of revenue?
3. Are they fair? Should the government be allowed to issue these?
Here are a few interesting points the article made:
Suppliers estimate that there are now slightly over 3,000 red-light and speed cameras in operation in the U.S., up from about 2,500 a year ago. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety says that at the end of last year, 345 U.S. jurisdictions were using red-light cameras, up from 243 in 2007 and 155 in 2006.
Cities and states say the devices can improve safety. They also have the added bonus of bringing in revenue in tight times. But critics point to research showing cameras can actually lead to more rear-end accidents because drivers often slam their brakes when they see signs warning them of cameras in the area. Others are angry that the cameras are operated by for-profit companies that typically make around $5,000 per camera each month.
The fight back
With more and more cameras going up, motorist are coming up with clever and some time illegal ways to fight back. In Tempe, AZ, three people dressed up in Santa outfits and wrapped the cameras in wrapping paper. Also, entrepreneurs are selling products to apply to your license plates that will reflect or blur the picture taken making it impossible to identify you.
My opinion
I work out in the suburbs so I drive and combat these revenue traps each day. I have been lucky (knock on wood) and have not been a victim of one just yet. I am totally against these cameras and feel city governments are putting these up as a revenue generation crutch to support their careless spending habits. I absolutely think they are causing more accidents then preventing.
City governments decided to throw these up before trying to resolve the problem. This was the topic of discussion on a morning radio show I was listening to this week. An engineer called in and said if the city increased yellow lights by a second, the number of red lights ran dramatically declines. These studies were never done giving full proof that these are revenue traps. I agree you are breaking the law by running a red light, but often times people run red lights because they are unable to come to a smooth and safe stop.
Oh and one more thing, when a CTA bus runs a red light, the tax payers are the ones paying the ticket.
What do you think? I would like to hear from drivers and non drivers - Have you received a ticket and beaten it?
I disagree with this in so many ways. Initially I wanted to structure my response but I think I’ll just rant instead. First, lets start with safety. I love how everyone can create some metric to help prove their point. In Mike’s post he points out that there is an increase in the number of rear ends so that would lead people to believe that it increases danger. Such BS. Increase in rear ends does not mean increase in wrecks. What actually matters is do wrecks increase and specifically do serious wrecks increase. All data that has been gathered points to no. Trust me. If I rear end you that won’t be close to the damage of me slamming into your side coming from another direction because you ran the red light. So the idea of these being a safety hazard. Myth busted.
Second, I’ve been caught twice at these and paid my $100 bucks each time. I can’t say how they are all setup in Chicago this way but both of the ones I was caught at were for turning right on red. I have a bad habit of ignoring the no right turn on red and I’ve been busted twice. I know that the majority of the cameras I see look for the right turn violation and not the running straight through red light. Increasing the yellow light by one second has no impact on this. And the idea of increasing the time for yellow. While I applaud the thinking outside the box here the idea doesn’t fix the problem.
Third, who cares if someone is making money. Good for them. I’m sure the government sees a large increase in revenue from these. They are collecting money from people that are breaking the law. They can take as much money as they want. I am the person that believes that when the government needs to increase revenue because it is lacking it in other areas going after areas that are detrimental to society is fair game. Cigarettes should cost $20 bucks a pack and red light tickets should be $100.
Finally, I love that this is an automated system that has a low operating cost. When I got my first ticket I could even go online and view the video of me breaking the law.
I must agree with Eric.
I’ve gotten one of these once. The ticket included a picture of my car, clear as day, in the middle of the intersection when the light was red. Busted. I paid my fine dutifully and got over it.
Do they cause more accidents? Probably, if you are tailing someone. Would the number of people running a red light decrease if the yellow light window of opportunity increased by a second? Um, by the laws of mathematics and averages, yes. Are these revenue-generating government tools? Um, my money is on yes. But when is that not the case. As Eric said, I guess the government does need to increase its revenue given that it is lacking in other areas.
Really like this post, thanks for writing.