Holy crap! How many accidents do we still have at camera intersections that we still need to issue cybertickets by computer after all this time? If there are THAT many accidents, it would be obvious and the traffic engineers would change the operation of the intersection. How unsafe are we? How many accidents occurred at those intersections over the past year? How much damage, how serious the injury?

If we issue 1,000 tickets a month to get $100,000, would that cost to drivers be enough to cover all the damage for every accident that would have occurred at that intersection last month had the cameras not been there? Or has the cost of our car insurance dropped due to higher safety records?

I am asking for a simple cost-benefit analysis: not some emotional argument or absolutist declaration. If the benefits outweigh the cost, then by all means install the cameras at the 25 most dangerous intersections. If not, then why are the cameras there?

Finally, we can ask under the Public Information Act for
--historic accident data for each intersection,
--the actual speed at which the camera decides to take a picture,
--the duration of the yellow light,
-- the number of camera shots versus the actual number of citations mailed,
-- the list of license plates that are not issued tickets if they are photographed.