Yesterday, we reported that Dallas, TX is having problems with its red-light camera revenues. Apparently, Orlando, Florida's town fathers don't read TTAC. WFTV reports that city commissioners have approved a contract to pay a Georgia company $500k a year to install and maintain red-light revenue raisers at ten different intersections. "We're really doing this as a means of public safety," Mayor Buddy Dyer insists. "And most of the statistics show many accidents are caused by running red lights." Really? I don't think so. Anyway, if it's all about the children, why does the deal hinge on whether or not cities will be allowed to issue tickets to those caught by the cameras? In fact, if the laws aren't changed, the cameras won't be installed. Perish the thought.
Mayor ought to know better spouting stats like that – traffic crash causes are easily pulled up by computer in Florida. Looks to me like the #1 contributing factor is the same as when I used to write these up – Careless driving. Disregarded traffic signal is incredibly low. Now, it might be different for a particular intersection, but I bet it still holds true.
http://www.flhsmv.gov/reports/crash_facts.html
The most common type of accident is rear-ending. If anything, the number of rear-enders will go up with red light cameras; therby, increasing the number of accidents. I will say that the deadliest category of accident is a “T-bone”, one where the car is struck from the side, which is the type of accident that occurs when people run red lights. At least this is what I heard at a Driver’s Safety Course I was required to attend last week as part of my job (I drive a Company car on occasion). The instructor did say that “Driver Inattention” was the most common cause for an accident (I believe it was around 50% based on accident reports filed by police officers) and would be even more common in his experience, except officers are discouraged from checking that box on the accident form.
Then why do we keep hearing the cops say the leading cause of accidents is speed.
Well, they said that when they dropped the speed limit on my local freeway from 70 down to 60, then patrolled the hell out of it.
But then I keep hearing the media saying the leading cause of accidents is DUI.
Well, the legislators say that when they keep lowering the BAC by another point or two.
But now I hear the leading cause of accidents is red light runners.
Well, that is what the mayor says when he installs his new revenue generators, er red light cameras.
Lather. Rinse. Repeat.
–chuck
http://chuck.goolsbee.org
I’d favor to say that much more than 50% of wrecks are caused by a driver not paying attention, at least around here. Maybe around 80%?
A quick search of a local paper’s online postings shows plenty of wrecks, most described by a car veering into the wrong lane, a car flat-out driving on the wrong side of the road, someone riding on the roof of a car and dying, a man “veering” into a utility pole, swiping a guardrail, etc.
I could continue, but it starts to get depressing.
Actually, the only “legitimate” accident I saw was when a light pole got struck by lightning and fell on one of our highways. One of the few cars that ran into it was a close friends’ family – fortunately, the driver was smart enough to leave the wreck uninjured, and his family in tact. Aside from that, every other wreck read about was caused by some idiot doing something stupid..
-I witnessed one a few months ago where someone decided to try and take a Left onto one of our whole 3 main (read: BUSY) roads. She looked at the lane she was turning into, gunned it without even glancing at the oncoming traffic, and was t-boned by someone travelling at speed (45-50mph). All she had to do was LOOK to see the 15 of us coming at her… I got a nice view of her back left tire rolling in the middle of the road.
Orlando is different than other US cities. Half the traffic is “too-slow” tourists, and other other half is “too-fast” locals. This makes it quite dangerous, in my opinion. Red light cameras might actually help equalize the flow.
If it was truly about public safety, then we would use more round-abouts instead of stop-signs and lights in the US. Most collisions in round-abouts are side-to-side, versus head-to-head or T-bones.
That, and the fact that roundabouts create smoother traffic flow, less pollution from idling motors, etc, etc.
Maybe they should be called yellow-red light cameras because that is who they target, the people on yellow to red. Everyone knows traffic doesn’t move until the other side gets a green, and that is about .5 seconds after the light is red, and nothing enters the intersection fast enough to clip anyone going through the end of the light.
That’s only partially true. We have plenty of intersections with no delays between the lights at all, around here. I mean none..
Most of the “important” intersections have .5 to 2 second gaps, but the smaller, less important ones almost switch to green before the red light kicks in – you have to be very careful around these lights.
Of course, the 2 second gap at the other lights tends to let people think that running the red light is completely OK, so those end up being just as dangerous.
That’s only partially true. We have plenty of intersections with no delays between the lights at all, around here. I mean none.
We have one like that around here at the bottom of a freeway off ramp. The CHP officer doing our training would have agreed with your first post. He also estimated that plain distracted driver probably accounted for at least 80% of the accidents with no or little contribution from vehicle malfunction, road conditions, etc.
Look at http://www.motorists.com for a lot of studies that show red light cams cause accidents.
A well engineered intersection has few red light runners.
Shorten the yellows and watch the money roll in.
If the revenues drop, the yellows magically shorten.
You get the idea.
The National Motorists Association, whose website speedlaw mentions, operates under the guise of promoting the average motorist’s best interests. It touts itself as a voice for the common man (and woman) against the arbitrary dictates of state and local government with regard to traffic laws and regulations. In reality, it is an anti-scientific organization that would like to take highway safety back to the dark ages of the 1950s when all we did was exhort drivers to “drive carefully.” Didn’t work then, won’t work now.
One technique the NMA uses is the “Big Lie.” That is, they repeat an untruth over and over to the point that the average reader will believe it’s true (like localities playing around with yellow light timing, nevermind the serious liability problems that could arise because of such “tinkering”). And unfortunately, the average enthusiast WANTS to believe this drivel.