Slashdot Mirror
Study: Red Light Cameras Don't Improve Safety
An anonymous reader writes: Ars Technica summaries a study by the Chicago Tribune (paywalled) that found red light cameras do not improve driver safety. "[W]hile right angle crash incidents have been reduced, rear-end crashes that resulted in injuries went up 22 percent." Chicago officials recently claimed that the cameras led to a 47% reduction "T-bone" injury crashes, using that statistic as evidence that the program is worthwhile. But the study's authors, who "accounted for declining accident rates in recent years as well as other confounding factors, found cameras reduced right-angle crashes that caused injuries by just 15 percent."
They also noted that the city chose to install many cameras at intersections where crashes were rare to begin with. Chicago has raised roughly $500 million from red light camera tickets since 2002. "[O]fficials recently admitted to the city inspector general that they had quietly dropped the threshold for what constitutes a red light camera ticket, allowing the tickets even when cameras showed a yellow light time just under the three-second federal minimum standard. That shift earlier this year snared 77,000 more drivers and $7.7 million in ticket revenue before the city agreed to change the threshold back.
They also noted that the city chose to install many cameras at intersections where crashes were rare to begin with. Chicago has raised roughly $500 million from red light camera tickets since 2002. "[O]fficials recently admitted to the city inspector general that they had quietly dropped the threshold for what constitutes a red light camera ticket, allowing the tickets even when cameras showed a yellow light time just under the three-second federal minimum standard. That shift earlier this year snared 77,000 more drivers and $7.7 million in ticket revenue before the city agreed to change the threshold back.
I live in San Diego, some of the time, and similar results were posted here, too. The increase in rear-end collisions from people slamming on the brakes negates any benefit from reduced T-bones.
San Diego also reduced yellow light times, sometimes to below the legal limit, in order to boost revenue.
A judge looked at the program in 2001, said, "That's bullshit", and banned it for a year, and then the government finally ended it on its own in 2013.
They did if they were expecting a standard yellow light, then it changed red in 2.5 seconds instead of the federal minimum of 3 seconds and slammed on the brakes to avoid running the red light. And 3 seconds is the minimum. It needs to be even longer on fast roads.
Generally, the yellow light should last a bit more than 1 second per 10 miles per hour. A 45mph road should have a yellow light that lasts about 5 seconds. But it's not required to be 5 seconds. It can be as low as 3 seconds. And many cities got caught going below even that minimum requirement at intersections with cameras. So people who drive that road know they have to stop fast on a yellow even if they can't do it safely. They have to balance the will get a ticket or might get rear ended.
the institute of No Shiat Sherlock.
It isn't really that obvious. There was an overall 5% increase in injury accidents at the intersections with cameras. But they did not mention the severity of the injuries. T-bone crashes (which were reduced) are likely to result in more severe injuries than rear-end collisions (which were increased). There were other complications: Most of the additional accidents occurred at intersections that were poorly chosen because they previously had few accidents. So it is possible that cameras improved safety at intersections with a history of accidents, and could improve safety overall if they are only installed at those intersections. Another issue is the yellow light duration. Longer yellows leads to fewer accidents, and some cities installing cameras also shorten the yellow light duration to increase revenue. It isn't clear if yellow light duration was decreased in the intersections studied.
The study shows that cameras can increase accidents, but it doesn't show they always increase accidents. If they are used more intelligently, they could be a net benefit.
Another issue is the yellow light duration. Longer yellows leads to fewer accidents, and some cities installing cameras also shorten the yellow light duration to increase revenue. It isn't clear if yellow light duration was decreased in the intersections studied.
Actually, it's right in the summary:
[O]fficials recently admitted to the city inspector general that they had quietly dropped the threshold for what constitutes a red light camera ticket, allowing the tickets even when cameras showed a yellow light time just under the three-second federal minimum standard. That shift earlier this year snared 77,000 more drivers and $7.7 million in ticket revenue before the city agreed to change the threshold back.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Automatic speed/red light cameras
Distracted driver legislation
M.A.D.D.'s push for DUI BAC change below 0.01
All these make alarming claims about carnage on the roads requiring onerous legislation, but if you check the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) stats you can see that driving is safer now than it has ever been. There is no need for these laws. There are less injuries and fatalities year after year despite more cars on the road and more total miles driven.
At the start of this year Long Island's Nassau county installed school speed zone cameras. Doing 22 mph in a 20 meant a ticket. All the claims by the politicians about "think of the children's safety" was bullshit. Most areas that they were installed in had no history of accidents involving schoolkids. The main reason was the millions in revenue they were licking their chops over. The local public went ballistic (some people were receiving multiple $80 tickets in a short span of time), and there were many demonstrations against them that was aired on the local news station. Promises of larger signs, flashing lights when active were made (people were being ticketed at times when schools were closed and even on weekends). Finally now they're all being taken down, most tickets were negated and refunded, and all the cost to install and remove them are costing local taxpayers. Neighboring Suffolk County announced that they won't be going ahead next year with a similar program, mainly due to all the negative public reaction.
They changed the duration of the yellow light to under 3 seconds. Three seconds is the minimum duration as per federal law. So they were catching people going through a red light that should not yet have turned red. When they got caught they had to restore the yellow light to 3 seconds.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
The original red-light camera trial was in Scottsdale Arizona. The city farmed out the study to a university research group, and the cameras were installed at a random selection of the worst red-light-accident [1] intersections. The trial was publicized and ran for several years. The timing of the lights was not changed.
The conclusion of the trial was that the cameras reduced both accidents and injuries. Scottsdale then ran the cameras for years with general public approval, in part because the city has some pretty rational traffic ordinances (like raising the speed limit if most people are going faster anyway) and an open set of books on the program.
The cities that treat red-light violations as a revenue source and especially those that cut yellow times to increase red violations have only themselves to blame for poisoning public opinion. If anything, cameras should be paired with longer yellow times.
Scottsdale is strange that way. They also did studies that showed that traffic flows better and reduces accidents by having left turn after green rather than before. Those results have been mostly ignored by other cities.
PS: I've seen some of the footage from the cameras, by the way -- one truly amazing one of a guy who totally spaced and drove right through an intersection well after cross-traffic was flowing but amazingly managed to miss all of it. Hard to believe.
[1] Skip the joke. It's ancient.
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
I live in Chicago and have followed this story as it was happening. The yellow light time didn't decrease, just the time when the cameras went off. The government has a standard of 3 seconds for a yellow light, but it also has a legal limit do the variation due to hardware accuracy. That limit means that legally a yellow can go for 2.9 seconds (or something similar) to account for hardware that doesn't hit exactly 3 seconds every time. The red light camera company began using this slightly lower limit as their standard, instead of 3 seconds. That is what caused the increase in the number of tickets. When they got caught they admitted that the city asked them to use the lower standard and then it was changed. I believe the courts upheld the tickets that were issued in the end, since technically they met the federal standards.
RIVER NORTH — Some of Chicago's yellow lights are too short, according to an administrative law judge who said he's thrown out "60 to 70 percent" of red-light camera tickets he's come across recently because of the discrepancy.
The city uses the state and federal standard of having yellow lights display for a minimum of three seconds at intersections. But an administrative law judge, who hears appeals from motorists ticketed by red-light cameras, said during a hearing this week that he has seen evidence that yellow times are slightly beneath that at some Chicago intersections with red-light cameras.
Over the objections of the city, Fagel was allowed to present his video evidence on two of the red-light tickets that he said showed yellow light times slightly under three seconds.
Judge Robert Sussman dismissed the two red-light camera tickets and then surprised the hearing room by saying the Department of Administrative Hearings was seeing a large volume of red-light camera violations that listed a yellow light time of under three seconds.
"We're having a big problem with these yellow lights," Sussman said. "Sixty to 70 percent are coming up under three seconds."
Sussman said he has routinely thrown out any ticket for which documentation shows the yellow light lasted less than three full seconds. And he said he will continue to do so until the timing is fixed.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
I don't care if you hit a brick wall. if you get rear ended, the guy was too close to begin with. That's what the insurance companies say, and I agree.
You are amongst the worst problem drivers. The holler-than-thou premise that since the driver behind you is unsafe, you possess the right to cause an accident, potentially injuring the other party, other 3rd parties in opposing traffic, yourself, nearby pedestrians, and cause damage to your vehicle, the poor driver's vehicle, and any nearby 3rd party property damage is not only inhumane - potentially murderous - but also illegal. Failing to avoid an accident that is within your control to avoid is illegal. If you know that slamming on your brakes, or driving into a brick wall, will cause an accident, you are liable, and at least partly at fault.
I don't care what your insurance company thinks... your number 1 duty as a human being driving a car is avoiding accidents. you're not really supposed to cause injury to someone to appease some sense of self-righteousness, some "I told you so" mentality, nor some pencil-pushing insurance agent.
The primary rule of driving is to avoid an accident at all costs. Leave cushions on at least one side, pull over and let tailgaters pass, know the speed and location of every car around you.
If I have to run a red light because I'm being tailgated, that'll be on the photo... my ass is covered. Even if it isn't, I will pay the ticket before intentionally causing an accident. If I have to enter a breakdown lane, or opposing traffic lane, tailgate someone else, cut off a car hiding in my blindspot or drive off the road to avoid an accident, that's what's happening. After 2 million miles of professional driving and a half million or so of personal driving, I've never had an accident, at fault or not. I've had 3 tickets in 25 years and not one of them stuck after court, 2 of them were thrown out as a direct result of proof that I was avoiding an accident at the time. I really don't care about your insurance company's opinion, it's about lives and livlihoods in the real world.