Are red light cameras really just a hidden tax?
Across the country, more and more intersections are sporting cameras designed to catch vehicles running red lights and reduce traffic accidents.
In Ottawa, for instance, there are 33 red-light locations (it's a $325 fine) with 15 cameras on rotation.
The city decides when to rotate cameras based on road construction,
damaged camera housings and the number of crashes at the intersections.
But are these robotic photographers really up to the task of prevention or are they simply municipal fund generators? After all, the revenue isn't insignificant.
Which explains why local councillors are upset by being unable to collect on about 1,500 tickets because the violators were driving non-Ontario vehicles.
The most persistent argument in favour of red-light cameras is their "halo effect," a theory suggesting that motorists afraid of being ticketed will drive more safely everywhere.
And there are certainly studies that have report a significant drop in overall accidents since the implementation of the red light cameras. However, critics argue, rear end crashes increase at the same time.
Red light cameras do nothing more than unfairly “tax” by random
selection and don't actually reduce traffic accidents, says one disgruntled driver.
What’s the problem, you ask? All cameras are announced by signs. Police officers don’t have to be at every corner. Red-light runners caught by camera lose no demerit points. Their fines ease taxpayers’ burden.
But some people still feel that the lights are rigged, prompting one California senator to introduce a bill which would prohibit cities or counties from using the cameras purely to raise cash, make it easier to get wrongfully issued tickets dismissed and eliminate so-called "snitch" tickets that threaten drivers with penalties based on sketchy information.
What do you think? Are red-light cameras an effective deterrent or are they simply another municipal money grab?
By Gordon Powers, MSN Money
Posted by: mascaren | Sep 18, 2012 10:49:06 AM
I believe the cameras are rigged and so is the traffic court system in the GTA.I got photographed by one of these cash-cows in Peel region a couple of years ago,on a snowy winter morning at 6:30 a.m.The camera caught me crossing the line on an an amber 0.04 secs after the light changed,and it is an extremely wide intersection.
I went to the traffic court to fight it,but was advised by the court clerk not to try that,as I would get fined a lot more??!! Easy money for Peel region.
Over all they serve their purpose,as lately the red light does not seem to stop people going through it.
Posted by: Troy Jollimore | Sep 18, 2012 11:30:58 AM
As someone that routinely drives slightly above the posted limits (safely), but tends to obey red (and even yellow) lights, I'm actually in favour of speed and red-light cameras. There's a line between 'driving for conditions/common sense' and 'flouting the law'. I beeped my horn at two 20-ish guys running the red light well AFTER mine had turned green. They just sneered at me and gave me their middle-fingers.
As long as the triggers are set to catch the worst offenders, and not everybody that can't stop for the yellow, it should be fine. But like drivers, the politicians will start abusing the system to rake in more cash as well. It's not about safety, it's about the money.
Posted by: SP | Sep 18, 2012 12:50:27 PM
Are red light cameras really just a hidden tax?
Is Water wet?
.
These and other tough question will continue to perplex people for years. (Satire)
Posted by: Remshag | Sep 19, 2012 12:34:21 AM
Why mess with the orange light? Just have a green and red light. Think of how much "easy" money that will drop into the politico's hands.
Posted by: gb | Sep 19, 2012 1:25:42 AM
ok then, if its not a tax grab, then donate all the extra cash to charity. No,
I didn't think they'd go for that. They NEED the cash to pay for the bloated gov over spending.
Posted by: Jay | Sep 19, 2012 1:35:57 PM
Well, I always stop for red lights, without exception. I also stop for yellow, although that has caused several people to rear end me in the past (100% their fault of course). So as far as I am concerned, I couldn't care less about whether or not there are hidden cameras.
Posted by: Mr. Negative | Sep 19, 2012 3:02:46 PM
of course it is. So are setting up speed traps and every other ticket given out.
If they want to prevent accidents - have a cop car in plain site - the traffic will all of a sudden come to a hault - heck, they don't even need to have officers in the cars.
Posted by: Troy Jollimore | Sep 20, 2012 8:34:38 AM
Actually, I've noticed a few instances lately where these types of offences are committed RIGHT IN FRONT OF a marked police cruiser... with no action taken.