The John Birch Society :: Truth Freedom Leadership

ARTICLE SYNOPSIS:

A recent study from the University of South Florida shows that accidents and injuries are actually increased by red light cameras. Ironically, the report was published the day after Hillsborough County (FL) commissioners voted to install the cameras at 10 intersections.

Follow this link to the original source: "Red-Light Cameras Increase Accidents, USF Study Says"

COMMENTARY:

Anyone who has read a smattering of my commentary will probably recognize this sentence as one of my favorites: "You cannot make this stuff up!"

Chalk up another entry. Back when I published my first JBS Newsfeed, entitled, "Smile, You're on Candid (Speed) Camera!" little did I know we’d be back on the same road (pardon the pun) again. In that piece, in a set of passages of which I’m particularly proud, I said:

It's a brave new world... in Arizona. In other news, George Orwell just phoned from Australia, and he wants his 1984 back.

Word has it that the State is embracing technology in ways that Orwell predicted quite some time ago. It's a veritable smorgasbord of Orwell's "big brother" come to life: fixed cameras that catch speeders as they go past "troublesome" locations; roaming cameras that record license plates to check for outstanding warrants; traffic light cameras that dispense tickets when people "crowd" the "box junctions" (all the rage in Scotland); car-based systems that warn the driver, or take more direct action, if he disobeys posted speed limits.

Alert the media! Florida is now on the cameras-make-life-better bandwagon. According to the linked article, despite the contrary findings of the university report, "We're going ahead with the program," says Col. Greg Brown, head of the Hillsborough County sheriff's patrol division. Brown further said studies he has examined showed a decline in serious collisions because of the use of cameras, even though other studies contradict those findings. He didn’t cite any of those studies, apparently feeling that naked assertion is good enough when you’re the State. Further:

Sheriff's deputies will monitor the cameras, and [Commission Chairman Ken] Hagan said that the ordinance could be amended or rescinded if the cameras appeared to cause more accidents than they prevented.

Call me cynical, but I don’t believe him. First of all, the studies cited by the USF study already illustrate that accidents increase after the installation of cameras, so unless Hagan figures the ten intersections in Hillsborough County, where the cameras will be installed in Florida, are mystically different from those reviewed during a seven-year study by the Virginia Transportation Research Council, he already has his answer. As noted in the linked article, "that [study] showed crashes at intersections with the cameras increased 29 percent." While, as an engineer, I’m relatively familiar with data analysis and statistics, such experience is not required to draw one conclusion: that’s a lot!

Secondly, the operation of this red light camera system lends itself to becoming just another revenue stream. How do I know? Returning again to the article we have:

Tickets will be mailed to the owner of the vehicle, who can appeal the $125 fine in court. The violations are civil infractions and don't add points to a driver's record.

How likely is a motorist to appeal a ticket that shows up in his mailbox? To offer his appeal, he has to go to court, versus just mailing his money in. Such an action would generate additional inconvenience and possibly attorney fees, for what would likely be no decrease in money lost. (How many times have you successfully appealed a ticket?) Furthermore, the infraction does not affect his driving record. This is only about the money.

The most simplistic logic suggests that the motorist should just "send his check in" and move on with his life. Make no mistake; that is exactly the reaction the county expects. Revenue increases; accidents, if they change at all, only change enough (albeit negatively) such that the change would only be noticed via a focused study.

The best part of this fiasco is this juicy tidbit from the article.

The USF study shows that despite what backers of the cameras say, red-light running is not a growing problem in Florida.

So, what problem were the legislators really trying to fix? Wait, it gets worse:

Traffic fatalities from red-light running are not increasing. They averaged 110 per year between 1998 and 2006, accounting for less than 4 percent of Florida's annual traffic fatalities. Injuries from red-light running crashes have steadily decreased during that same period.

So, red-light running was not a growing problem in Florida and they account for a tiny percentage of Florida’s annual traffic fatalities. Yet, the commission thinks cameras will help, well, something, and furthermore has the unmitigated gall to suggest that if the cameras don’t "work" they’ll just take them down. Call me crazy, but I bet that somewhere in the minutes of the Commission’s meeting, someone presented an estimate of the revenue from one of these cameras. There is one and only one condition under which these cameras and/or the ordinance that supports them will be rescinded: if there’s no money flowing in as a result.

How much chance is there of that?