It's just about improving safety.
That's the mantra cities, towns, and villages and municipalities
around the state of Illinois repeat over and over again as the pretense
for installing red light cameras in their municipalities.
But according to a fantastic piece of investigative journalism by the Chicago Tribune,
many suburban towns are seemingly employing red light cameras for the
revenue only, with only a wink and a nod toward the safety aspect of
that equation.
This revenue over "safety" concept is not really breaking news to
any motorist who has been burned by a red light camera with with an
expensive, usually $100, ticket.
Tribune reporters Bob Secter and Jason George,
dig much deeper into the facts and numbers behind red light cameras in
Illinois, than anyone previously. And the data they uncover shows, in
many cases, some towns are choosing intersections more for the amount
of revenue they can produce, than for the number of crashes, injuries
and deaths the red light cameras were originally intended to prevent.
A Federal Highway Administration study from 2006 of red light
cameras, states these devices are "most beneficial at intersections
where there are relatively few rear-end crashes and many right-angle
ones."
The Tribune story points out that many suburban red light cameras
are installed to catch motorists making illegal right on red turns,
while not installing cameras at intersections to deter motorists from
more dangerous red light running behavior.
While, of course, motorists who do not come to a complete stop
before proceeding right on red, are in the wrong, very few accidents
occur in when a motorist blows through a red light. If an accident
occurs, it's usually minor compared to right angle (T-bone) collisions
which take place when a driver blows straight through an intersection.
It's when drivers runs a red light through an intersection, that the
potential for the worst and potentially deadly crashes occur.
The Tribune's investigation found one devastatingly embarrassing and juicy piece of information in their story:
The Tribune looked at accident records for 88 red light
intersections and they determined nearly all The Tribune reviewed
accident records for 88 camera-approved locations and found nearly all
had many more rear-end crashes than angle crashes. At some
intersections targeted for cameras, few accidents of any kind had
occurred.
So, when municipalities install red light cameras to snag right on
red violations, it is obviously not about safety as it is money.
Perhaps the most blatant example in the article, is an intersection
in Bellwood, where one red light camera generates $60-$70,000 per
month, capturing mostly non-resident drivers rolling through a red
light to enter the Eisenhower Expressway.
Bellwood's moneymaking champ of a camera at 25th and
Harrison churned out its first ticket in December 2006, just six months
after a new state law was signed giving the green light to red-light
cameras in the suburbs.
In his municipal league talk, McCampbell said he and other Bellwood
officials lobbied for the new law. He said the driving force was the
deaths of four people in a July 2005 crash that involved red light
running at Mannheim Road and Madison Street.
Bellwood has eight traffic cameras, but none at that intersection.
The Trib article points out at least six suburban intersections
where this corrupt model of revenue over safety is being employed,
including East Dundee, Schiller Park, Lombard, Elk Grove Village, Palos
Heights and Riverdale.
Columnist Dennis Byrne addresses this issue in a recent post at his blog The Barbershop and is generally supportive of red light cameras.
But, Byrne's view seems naive when one digests the data the Tribune
writers provide. These facts just objectify the gut feeling every
motorist has held since the first red light camera was installed.
It's about revenue...NOT safety.
Read this absolutely great piece, Red-light cameras raking in cash, in Sunday's Chicago Tribune.
1 Comment
Barnet said:
Regarding the law; the traffic hearing officer who decides guilt works for the same municipality which collects the revenue constituting a conflict of interest. Red Light Ticket Cameras (RLTC) are used to regulate public roads without being regulated themselves. They are not checked every day as RADAR and LIDAR devices are. They are not held to any known state or federal accuracy or testing standard as all other traffic signals are in the Manual for Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Drivers getting citations from RLTCs are barred from the Voir dire process to question the witness, in this case the RLTC. Since RLTCs have not met the level of prima fascia evidence motorists have the legal right of questioning the witness. Even parking tickets allow a reasonable appeal. For a court action to be a legal, the plaintiff to the action must first show legal damages (i.e. injury or financial loss) to have legal standing and to hold a party legally responsible. Traffic ticket courts and prosecutors do not do this. Since pictures and video images are not human witnesses there are no witnesses that can be questioned about the event, the case must be dismissed. RLTCs do not provide due process violating our 4th and 14th amendments rights under the US Constitution. Motorists.org
Leave a Comment?
What your comment will look like:
said: