As if I needed to ram the point home any further: these cameras cause accidents and they are purely for revenue! It's nice to see a news station actually tell the whole truth for a change, instead of spinning the truth in favor of the government. This also further sticks it to those who seem to think I'm making this up! (see also the comments section of the latter linked to post).
Thanks to CameraFraud.com for the video:
Hi, AA-
ReplyDelete1. The UK study you cite leads with: "No significant difference was observed in the PIA rate for sites with and without speed cameras." Indeed, if you look at their data in detail and take it at face value as you do, you would conclude that digital cameras decrease accidents, and analog cameras increase accidents. Go figure! It just isn't significant.
2. In this clip, they interview their expert- a guy who caused a rear-ending by hitting his brakes in an intersection. "Did the red light camera cause this accident? Yeah!" Well, call me a hardass, but the camera didn't cause this accident. He did. Not only do I not have sympathy with this guy who endangered everyone around him (and essentially admits that he otherwise would have run the red light). But I also have little sympathy with the people behind him who were apparently willing to sail through what already was a yellow light behind him. Their damage is largely just deserts- especially if he has to pay for their damage.
3. Most importantly, by citing "collisions", you conveniently combine two very different kinds of accidents. The red-light blow-through accident is far more dangerous, injurious, and lethal than a rear-ending when some idiot who would otherwise have run the light slams his brakes. It is also more likely to involve completely innocent parties- cross traffic and pedestrians. Thus they have to be evaluated differently. I would be interested in cost, injury, and death statistics, not just "collision" statistics.
Best wishes!
Hi Mr. Braun,
ReplyDeleteAs for 1: I'm not sure which UK study you're referring to. Could you be more specific please?
2: Of course the camera caused the accident. Just because a person has to slam on their brakes for a red light doesn't mean they were speeding. It's just the timing and how long the yellow lasts (just as I noted earlier; increasing yellow light times reduces red-light running almost entirely). I've driven the speed limit many times and had to slam on my breaks because it's just the timing of when the light changes and I don't have quite enough time it make it before it changes. They didn't give any specifics about why the man slammed on his breaks so I don't see why you're assuming the worst. He didn't want to get a ticket by going through a red light so he slammed on his breaks. If the camera wasn't there he could've just run through before the change over occurred for the other traffic to go. The general rule (at least how I was taught) is if you can stop safely before the light changes, do it. If not, just go through, but these cameras cause people to over react and slam on their brakes. There have been times when the timing just wasn't right and I slammed on my brakes (and I wasn't speeding mind you - the speed limit was I believe 45 where I was) and I literally slid into the intersection while trying to stop.
I agree, people who purposefully blow red lights (and in AZ it is a problem) are wrong to do it (and by the way, I've seen cops do it too and no their lights weren't on, nor were they speeding, making it seem unlikely they were trying to get anywhere. Hypocrites.) but these cameras clearly are not doing much to stop red-light running, since these studies show that the most dangerous crash type - the right angle crashes - was only decreased by 40%. In another study, was decreased by only 24%. All the while accidents over all increased, specifically, the rear-end crashes and injuries. Clearly, the cameras are not doing much to stop red-light running and are increasing crashes and injuries. And, as I've already said, increasing the yellow light times reduces crashes by 94%, which is a much better percentage to say the least when compared to these cameras. This simple measure can prevent many crashes and injuries, but many cities aren't doing it. Why? Money, as I've said all along, and even some media outlets are starting to see the light.
3: I answered that above; the breakdown of the different kinds of accidents. The link is above.
Thanks for the comment.
There we can agree. Extending yellow light times, and even putting a pause between red and green in the other direction, all decrease accidents, which I am all for.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.motorists.org/photoenforce/home/yellow-light-timing-myths/