Slashdot Mirror
Cities Tampering With Traffic Lights To Generate Revenue
Techdirt is reporting that there has been a rash of reports indicating that red light cameras are being used to generate revenue rather than to promote safety. "Time and time again studies have shown that if cities really wanted to make traffic crossings safer there's a very simple way to do so: increase the length of the yellow light and make sure there's a pause before the cross traffic light turns green (this is done in some places, but not in many others). Tragically, it looks like some cities are doing the opposite! Jeff Nolan points out that six US cities have been caught decreasing the length of the yellow light below the legal limits in an effort to catch more drivers running red lights and [increase] revenue."
Would these sneaky moves be grounds to contest the validity of all of the tickets given by traffic cameras in these cities?
-- Give me ambiguity or give me something else!
Quite simply, if they were there for safety, cities would put warning signs up at intersections that have cameras, people would slow down, less people would run lights, and less accidents would occur. I have never seen a warning sign at such an intersection, so their financial motives are pretty clear.
Airplane Photos, Airline News, Planespotting Guides
"In the 1980s capitalism triumphed over communism. In the 1990s it triumphed over democracy."
"Be light, stinging, insolent and melancholy"
Dallas recently installed red-light cameras. I'll testify that red-light runners were a major problem here, but I didn't support the cameras because of the potential for abuse. There was concern at City Hall, too, especially from the city's most with-it councilperson, Angela Hunt.
To the surprise of just about everyone, the cameras worked! People actually started slowing down in time to stop if the light turned yellow. The city became safer.
But there was an inevitable downside... the cameras' revenue no longer supported their operating cost.
Once again, the unexpected happened. Dallas did NOT tweak yellow light timing to generate more tickets. Instead, they turned off some of the cameras. Apparently, the contract with the third-party camera operator has a clause that reduces the monthly charge from $3,800 per camera to "a fraction" of that cost (blame the Morning News for failing to tell whether that fraction is 1/10 or 9/10). So they're turning some of them off, noting that "most motorists won't realize this and behave as if the cameras are operational."
Which is what we wanted all along.
The city of Dallas is mired in several messes of its own making, resulting in high-profile FBI probes and even a suicide pact between two of its best-known (and most-troubled) behind-the-scenes power brokers. But in this case, the city comes shining through. And the Rangers won a double-header last night, too. Wonders never cease.
More info available from the Dallas Morning News article.
More info NOT available from "theNewspaper.com", a self-described "journal of the politics of driving" that never hesitates to pass on a story of red light camera *abuse*. I sent a link to the DMN story, but it never showed up. Agenda much?
Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
Your idea is interesting, but do you actually have studies to back it up? At http://www.motorists.org/, they have links to studies that lenghthing yellow light time is sufficent to lower accident rates.
According to this site the legal yellow light times in the state of California are:
Posted Speed or Prima Facie Speed Minimum Yellow Interval
MPH KPH Yellow SECONDS
25 40 3.0
30 48 3.2
35 56 3.6
40 64 3.9
45 72 4.3
50 80 4.7
55 89 5.0
60 97 5.4
65 105 5.8
Sorry, the lameness filter prevents this from being easily read.
One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
When I was in Okinawa many years ago, I got a local drivers license. Learning their traffic customs was a real eye opener. The first thing I learned is that driving is not a right, but a privilege. The second thing I learned is there are no amateurs. Everyone is a professional driver and professional courtesy is required. As professionals and trained in moving traffic, they treated light a lot diffrently. The hardest thing to get used to was the courtesy at Right Turns (left turns for the US). If you waited for a light, the green meant go to everyone already in line. The greens were very short. On green the turn lane started and the light turned yellow and red right away and the other direction turned green. The turn lane continued to run the red while the green cross traffic professionally waited for the intersection to clear. It is illegal in Japan to proceed into an intersection unless it is safe to do so. This means wait for the turn lane to clear before entering the intersection. If you enter on a green light and hit someone making the turn, it's your fault for entering while unsafe to do so. The was normal, worked and prevented the overflow of traffic trying to get into a turn land from grid locking the straight traffic. There were few turning T-bone accidents. If you weren't in the turn line when it was green, you were expected to stop because the cross traffic was going to go as soon as the intersection was clear. Never try to catch up to a lane of turning traffic to squeeze on through because the gap will clear the intersection and the cross traffic will start.
It was professional, courteous, and efficient. Why can't we do it? No long amber or green is required. Professional drivers make all the difference. I loved it. Returning to the states was very scary as the traffic would launch at a green light regardless if the intersection was clear!... Intersections are very dangerous here. It's not the lights. It's the professionalism. On another note.. If picked up for intoxicated driving, you got your first phone call after a 3 day dry out period. They have very little problems with repeat offenders.
The truth shall set you free!