The proliferation of traffic light cameras...

Didn't want to pollute artsoul's "proliferation of TV" thread, so I'll start this one.

I've noticed these things going up everywhere here, and personally find them to be a bit... questionable.

There are now 5+ intersections with these between my house and work (4 miles), and I've noticed some strange trends about them:
1. In several cases they're at the wrong intersection for what they are supposedly trying to solve... I drive this route every day during both rush hours and know which ones people run, and they're not on those intersections. People still run the dangerous ones, and people never really ran the other one anyway. In a few cases, they're not even on arterials... they're on little side streets with almost no cars.

2. In some cases, they've actually made it significantly more dangerous, IMHO.
For example, at one intersection (6-way and VERY large with 3 ways coming down hill toward the light) people now have started being so paranoid about getting a ticket that they SLAM on their breaks the second the light turns yellow (the intersection is so big that if it turns yellow you'll get snapped even though you entered @ yellow)... This has led to several accidents where the person coming DOWN HILL behind you can't stop, particularly if the road has ice or is wet or someone had an oil leak). People also try to fool the cameras by changing lanes IN the intersection (don't know if this actually works, but they do it), moving over on to other cars, or into lanes where cars are stopped for right-turners on the other side of the intersection.

3. In another case, the camera seems to just take random pictures in addition to the red light pics. I've been just sitting there at a red light with no traffic signal changes going on, and the camera across from me snaps off a few photos... this happens at this particular intersection regularly. At first I thought they were testing it, but 6 months on and it still takes your picture while you're just sitting there... why?

4. The flashes from these things can be quite blinding. My favorite one is in a spot that gets lots of fog... the intensity of the lights just makes the entire intersection glow, and if there are multiple cars it deems in violation it will take two pictures each... 4-8 flashes while people are coming down a hill that was blind before they add these things.

5. They're not context aware. They have no idea if the road is icy or wet or slippery, or if you're dodging a possible wreck situation be pushing through the light. Meaning, there are times when to be safe running the light is the right thing to do, but these things have no awareness of this. So... a safety decision gets you a ticket, when an attentive police officer would likely (hopefully) leave you alone.

What do you guys think?

Are they doing what they are supposed to be doing... making intersections safer?
(and I don't mean the conspiratorial or privacy-oriented stuff, which delves into politics and I don't want to go there... just the practical: do they actually serve their purpose of making intersections SAFER?)

- zevo

I agree.... tickets go down for running red lights at these intersections but rear end collisions increase. So basically, what was a minor problem...a few red light runners turns into a real traffic problem with collisions and the resultant injuries, lost work, repair costs, and of course....lawsuits.

The traffic camera companies make 80% or better of the profits in many cases..... so there's an incentive to write as many tickets as possible. Research has shown that the intersections actually become more dangerous due to people slamming on brakes to avoid the tickets....

I try to avoid the roads where I know they exist.

I did get a ticket on one camera in a neighboring town....... wet road...raining actually, and my rear tire went over the white "stop" line to avoid skidding.... when the camera took my picture, you could see I was backing up to the line.... my backup lights were clearly on. I called the city involved.... they said you can come down and explain your case to the officer in charge...which normally takes about an hour or two waiting in line and actually talking to the officer... include the driving time...you're easily looking at half a day to dodge a ticket with no guarantee they'll let you slide "this time".... verses paying $50 and no points on insurance or license..... write the check...it's less trouble.

3. In another case, the camera seems to just take random pictures in addition to the red light pics. I've been just sitting there at a red light with no traffic signal changes going on, and the camera across from me snaps off a few photos... this happens at this particular intersection regularly. At first I thought they were testing it, but 6 months on and it still takes your picture while you're just sitting there... why?

http://blog.wired.com/cars/2009/03/the-uninsured-m.html

In Chicago alone they calculate that could really make them a few hundred million a year, enough to seriously make it easier to balance the budget. Guess they will not hesitate.

I have to decide, multiple times a week (where I never had to before) whether to slam the brakes and possibly (to likely depending on the car behind me) cause an accident, or get a $124 ticket...

That's not simple to me... that's more complicated than it used to be.
Sure, it's usually because the guy/girl behind me is driving poorly (too close, too fast, not paying attention, etc.), but I can't do anything about that.

And the best part... only to drive to the very next intersection and stop at a green because there's always 4-6 cars that drove through that light to get into the mall, but couldn't get in and are blocking the primary route... no camera there.

And literally, I really do have to make this decision multiple times a week.
My commute is noticeably less safe now than before, and I take it quite seriously since half the time I'm either going to preschool with my son or coming home, and I take ferrying him around more seriously than almost anything else.

In driving, the proper course of action is to do what is the most safe, NOT what is the letter of the law.
Going 55 in a 55 zone when everyone else is going 80 or more is not safe, though the strictly legal thing to do. Doesn't make speeding alright, but in that case you really don't want to be the odd man out... (this doesn't happen in my current town, but it happened so much in my home town that I basically stopped driving on those roads because everybody going 80 comes with its own set of obvious safety issues).
Slamming on your brakes and sliding is not safe (we get A LOT of rain), particularly since you've effectively lost control of your vehicle @ an intersection where pedestrians are standing around), but you're technically supposed to stop, right?
Slamming the brakes in front of a truck that take 6-times as much space to stop is nearly suicidal, but you're not supposed to run lights, so being dangerous is the proper course of action?

I'm waiting for the first case of school children getting killed because someone dropped their brakes @ a camera'd light, only to cause the vehicle behind them to swerve and hit the kids, or not swerve and throw debris into the crowd.

It wouldn't bother me as much IF the camera installations made sense, but here they just don't.
None of the intersections that had major traffic issues (blocking green roads because the stuck themselves in the road, multiple accidents, bike lane crossings, etc) have lights... they're appearing in really odd spots.

If the idea is to make the road safer for drivers and walkers and bikers, why aren't they strategically placed for solely that purpose?

- zevo

You know, to me, the way to save lives on the road is to properly train, and periodically test (not just once for life), drivers... and then make sure that people follow the training, else possibly lose the PRIVILEGE it should be (though it's generally seen as a right).

That's tricky, of course, because it takes time, and changes in public policy beyond just the drivers... for example, what do you do when you allow fewer people to drive in a city with horrible transportation alternatives (I've lived in a few, though thankfully here I could go without a car if I didn't have to take my son to preschool, and I could TECHNICALLY do that).

This sort of takes the conversation in a different direction, but it's certainly related.
For example, the vast majority of the times I have to decide between possible ticket or dangerous stopping is not because the roads are wet or icy... it's because there are people behind me following to closely or speeding. Remove that variable, and it would dramatically simplify the decision. If I have to slam on the break and only encounter a bit of personal discomfort, but NOT cause an accident, I'll do it more often than not.

But, I have to drive surrounded by people who don't seem to know what they're doing, frankly. Following too closely, abrupt lane changes, failure to signal... simple, simple things that set up a context wherein a context-free enforcement makes me the victim, or an instigator.

Again, where I am now, it's not as bad. People drive better here, on average, than other places I've been.
But goodness, there are two cities I've lived in (won't say which ones here) where literally there was ALWAYS someone 1 millisecond from my rear bumper... 100% of the time... no exaggeration. No one ever signaled. Everyone ran lights and in one of the cities every light was this nightmare scenario where people crossing one way would get a yellow, so they'd fill the intersection and block the other direction... for the entire duration of their green light, until they got a yellow, and then they'd do the same thing... it was just plain bizarre. Literally going 3 miles would frequently take 45 minutes to an hour UNLESS you did what we really don't want people doing and drive through the surrounding neighborhoods.

It literally factored heavily in my decision to leave, as I found everyone there to be almost brain dead (and blind) drivers... like the literally had no idea why traffic was so bad, yet everyone complained about it... constantly. And it was obvious.

Good driving practices should be drilled in heavily before anyone takes the road, IMHO. And frankly, retesting periodically, though inconvenient, just seems to make sense to me (though there seems to be all sorts of debates about this). And frankly, again, there are driving infractions for which the consequences are so severe as to make ever allowing the individual to drive again, or not letting them drive again for a VERY long time, seems obvious (such as drunk driving).

That last one, I'm always impressed with, when I visit our family in Japan.
Drive drunk, get caught... NEVER drive again.
Doesn't make their roads a happy, happy fun-ville, but none of my relatives there will drive even after a very small quantity of alcohol... they're petrified of it. But then again, there's an infrastructure built up allowing them to NOT drive, still get around, and even have their car drive to their house behind the cab carrying them (always thought that would be a good business, actually).

I just think there are a variety of real, lifestyle, driving-style things we could do to take care of the real problem that these cameras are meant to do for us, without context.
A band aid on a gaping wound of other issues at the root of the problem.

I've driven A LOT... literally well-over a million miles, and most of it within urban centers.
I'm not perfect (no one is) but I definitely understand defensive driving. We don't spend nearly enough time training for that. I didn't get any when I was prepping for the test, and I've never been tested again. I learned the hard, and unfortunate, way.

- zevo

I heard some stiff suits from my city on the radio this AM saying that it's all about increasing public safety.

That may be; I suspect that it's about revenue.

They got my $97 when I was following my girlfriend to a place that I didn't know the address to - light turned yellow, she decided to gun it - now, I'm following her, so I kind of had no choice but to try & make the yellow, too. The camera caught me as it turned red.

I am guilty, no denying it, so I paid my fine. Still sucks, though! : )

This was big in the news in Italy a while ago:

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/26/2672.asp

Way too many laws and tons and tons more being proposed.

It's not just traffic lights anymore.

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/arizona-speed-cameras-under-attack/

Lothar and the Hand People tried to warn us, but we wouldn't listen.