Red Light Cameras

Holy crap! How many accidents do we have at an intersection that we need to start issuing automated tickets by computer? If there are THAT many, it would be obvious and the traffic engineers would change the operation of the intersection. How unsafe are we?

How many months or years do the cameras need to stay active to have an impact on drivers' behavior, which is the goal, of course. After all, this is only about safety.

Is there a big sign a block or two in front of the camera or just a small one that would influence the drivers' behavior? If this is about reducing accidents at this particularly dangerous intersection, then drivers should be told in advance to adjust their behavior to AVOID ACCIDENTS, not the 100 dollar ticket that pales in comparison to the cost of an accident. If it's about safety.

If after a year there is a downward trend in violations, will the government agree that the goal of reducing risky behavior has been accomplished and take down the cameras? What IS the specified goal in terms of reduction of accidents or number of red light violations? Certainly we are not taking our citizens' money without having a goal for accident reduction. Safety First!
-or-
If after a year there has been almost NO change in accidents, will the government agree that the cameras are ineffective at improving safety and remove them? If we are no safer, then why should we send half our money to Redflex in Arizona?

As has been said from the beginning "this isn't about the money: it's about safety." So if no or only small safety gains can be shown after all this time, we can conclude that the cameras are not effective at improving safety. So take them down. If the city isn't measuring and acting on the data obtained from the cameras, then how do we know if we are any safer? If it's about safety.

I really don't like it when people lie to me. And when a politician does it, then you can bet it's about money or influence. I subscribed in November 2007 to Yahoo Alerts which sends me every article about red light cameras in every newspaper in the US.

NOT ONCE in over 3,000 articles has a politician or law enforcement officer stood up and said "We don't exactly know if any of these cameras will dramatically reduce accidents. But we do know that if we generate just 20 tickets a day at 100 dollars each, one camera can generate $730,000 a year that we have no other way of raising."
-or-
We can collect $730,000 while eliminating (say) 6 accidents, saving the insurance companies almost (what?) $200,000. That is an even worse return over the past year than my IRA.

I'm trying to follow the money (as Deep Throat taught us during Watergate), and it all leads to city hall. So find out WHO is doing WHAT with YOUR money. If this is just a back-door tax then it should be repealed until approved by the voters.