Posted by kallahar on May.14.02 at 09:10 am PDT.
kallahar writes Slashdot has a discussion about an article in The Weekly Standard. Here are some quotes:
"[San Diego's act of] planting a red-light camera at an intersection where no accidents had occurred for years. But that didn't stop the camera from generating 2,000 citations per month, until engineers realized the yellow light was more than a second too short. When they increased it, the number of citations dropped to fewer than 300 per month."
"While safety Cassandras love to say that accidents increased from 1992 to 1996, they conveniently select those years as bookends since 1992 was an aberrantly low-accident year, and in 1996 accidents were nearly as high as they've ever been. But when considering the fatality rate per 100 million vehicle miles traveled, that number has declined or held steady every year since 1977. And since 1988, injury rates per 100 million vehicle miles traveled have declined or held steady every year except two (in 1994 and 1995)."
"Red-light-camera intersections tend to see increases in rear-end accidents from people slamming on their brakes to avoid being ticketed."
"Retting had estimated that the use of red-light cameras had resulted in a tiny 3 percent increase in rear-enders at all signalized intersections. But after expanding the definition of an intersection to include 100 feet into the approaches, where rear-end accidents would logically occur, Kadison found that during the time of Retting's study, rear-end crashes at red-light camera intersections increased from 18 (before installation) to 156, for a total rear-end accident increase of 767 percent."
"Drunk drivers should logically be the most enthusiastic boosters of camera enforcement--since a red-light-camera-monitored intersection ensures no cops will be present."