« Bad news out of Nashville tonight, but not the last word | Main | Obama wins Iowa..again..some more »
March 15, 2008
More traffic cameras on the way
According to Friday's Times Free Press (page B3), the City of East Ridge is the latest local municipality to move toward using cameras at traffic intersections to help enforce driving laws:
The council approved an ordinance Thursday night that paves the way for cameras at intersections to cite those who run lights or make illegal turns as well as others to ticket speeders. “This is a safety issue,” said Mayor Mike Steele, who along with Councilmen Tom Card, Denny Manning and Larry Sewell supported the measure.
Michael Silence has been blogging about traffic cameras in Knoxville for some time now, and has taken great care to illustrate that the safety gains from these implementations are at best nonexistent, and at worst negative (despite his own paper's reporting of irrational claims to the contrary). (Oh, and his latest post on the subject features a story from right here in River City.)
What do you think? Are we more safe with the cameras? Or are they merely means of increasing revenues without those pesky, albeit low, police officer salaries as offset?
By the way, if you think Chattanooga police officers aren't required to meet "quotas" for traffic citations, you might want to think again. And you might want to stay tuned.
Government | By joe lance | 12:21 PM
Comments
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.
http://www2.tbo.com/content/2008/mar/12/na-red-light-cameras-increase-accidents-usf-study-/
Posted by: mickey at March 15, 2008 08:06 PM
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 city 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.
Posted by: mickey at March 15, 2008 08:08 PM