Study: Maryland county's red light cameras net $2.85 million, increase accidents
Anne Arundel County
in Maryland has been running five red light cameras for five years, during which period they raised a fat $2.85 million
in ticket revenue. Unfortunately, a comparison of accident statistics shows that the cameras have increased the rate of accidents.Immediately after installation, the cameras sparked a 40-percent increase in rear-end collisions, and never looked back, with five-year increases in accident rates far exceeding a 10-percent increase in traffic.
Unfortunately, this is hardly an isolated phenomenon. TheNewspaper.com reports similar results in the state of Georgia, where the city of Duluth's one and only camera is forecast to generate a whopping $1 million next year, at the cost of a 21-percent increase in accidents. A study by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution showed red light cameras were linked to an increase in accidents, injuries and revenues across the state, although there is early indication that the rate of serious accidents in intersections is falling.
Critics charge that cities are at best trading one kind of accident for another, and that the proliferation of traffic cameras is really just a money generator, while advocates maintain that they encourage safer driving.
[Sources: theNewspaper.com, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Peter W. 9:17AM (4/05/2006)
Meh, I live in Atlanta... and I used to live in Maryland, and the rules of the road are: if there is room for it, you go 10 over. Thus, seeing the shiny new "red-light camera" sign in conjunction with a yellow light has people twitchy with their left or middle pedal.
Frankly, I think trading "whoops, I was tailgating you and ran into your back-end when you slammed on your brakes for the yellow light" accidents are a lot less severe than "whoops, I tried to run the red light and accidentally T-boned you going 45 MPH"
Otherwise, Atlanta is starting to push ramp-meters little (red/green rocker lights designed to only let one car into the highway flow at a time) into the exurbs of various highways. I wonder how what sorts of accidents will result from those things.
Reply
jrhmobile 9:19AM (4/05/2006)
What we need are enterprising lawyers to take the private companies operating these cameras and their municipal accomplices to court and SUE THE PANTS OFF THEM for exposing the innocent motorists to these unnecessary and preventable risks.
Like the cheesy commercials say; "They've GOT TO BE MADE TO PAY!"
Reply
bernie 9:21AM (4/05/2006)
So next time you're driving your Mini and the light turns yellow, you have a split-second choice between getting that red light ticket and being rear-ended and instantly killed by the gum chewing blonde in her Excursion yaking on her cell phone.
So you say, oh - that's easy. Just floor it and pay the ticket. Reset the scenario now with 9 or 10 points on your license, or maybe you're already on probation.
Maybe the police need to monitor tailgating a little more. But that takes work and it's hard to prove, so they won't. They'd rather bust me in my G35 doing 83 in a 70 on a bright sunny day with nobody around.
Your tax dollars at work. LOL
Reply
Howard Kerr 9:35AM (4/05/2006)
To the first poster: Red lights at the entrance to freeways have been in place in California for decades...it doesn't seem to cause problems there.
As far as the red light cameras...I agree, you might prefer to be rear-ended than T-boned. I was t-boned by an idiot that "didn't see" that the light was red for him...I was afraid to get back in a car for days, much less drive. Just this week I saw SEVERAL cars just "sail" through lights that had gone red. As a pedestrian, I'm glad I didn't trust them to stop, but waited at the crosswalk 'til ALL traffic stopped.
As traffic becomes more congested in cities and more people feel entitled to run red lights, we will see more cameras and an increase in accidents. And as usually happens, the innocent will suffer along with the guilty.
Reply
Kowell 9:42AM (4/05/2006)
If people weren't taking all the reds there wouldn't be this problem in the first place
Reply
Carlos 9:43AM (4/05/2006)
I would accept more rear enders if it meant less broadsides.
Reply
klaatu 9:50AM (4/05/2006)
Bernie, I couldn't agree more.
Tailgating is pandemic and the cops do virtually NOTHING to keep drivers safe. I've put a warning sticker on the back of my Prius. "50 MPG. 0-60 in 10 seconds. WARNING TAILGATERS: 55-0 IN 35 YARDS."
So, if some pinhead slams into me, I'm going to sue the sh!t out of the state because I've written letter after letter to the Governor, State Police, etc., asking the state cops and county mounties and local yokels to enforce the "distance law" - to no avail.
Since Michigan is a "no fault" state, I apparently can't sue the pinheads driving 2 feet from my bumper, (SUV headlights in my rearview mirror, they're obviously upset because I can't go any faster - of course the traffic in front of can't either....) so I'll end up suing the state. But perhaps I could sue the sh!t out of the organization that provided him or her drivers training, in addition to the state. And, I've never sued anyone and don't like flippant nonsensical lawsuits at all. But I'm ready to get a lawyer if someone slams into me from behind.
When I was teaching my youngest son to drive, we were going along on US 31 here in northern Michigan and I saw 3 cars coming the other way - just the 4 of us on the roadway at that moment, within sight, anyway.
Some hapless sap was being tailgated SO CLOSELY by a cop that it looked like he had about 3 feet or less between them. That was bad enough.
But the cop was being tailgated by some moron at a distance closer than the cop was tailgating the car in front of him.
I was not sure which of the two were more STUPID and IGNORANT - the cop or the guy tailgating the cop. Or, was it a tie?
Maybe we need some police training to show the cops HOW TO DRIVE WITHIN THE LAW and provide an example, too?
Just as a side note, my youngest son wishes to become a police officer. Hopefully one day, he'll actually be able to give out tickets for following too closely. He's been literally run off the road several times - twice in one day, in fact, by people here in Michigan who also don't understand the concept of actually STOPPING at those funny red octagonal signs?
Hopefully some day, he'll be in an unmarked cop car and when that happens, he's going to have one busy day at work.
Reply
Gary 9:54AM (4/05/2006)
The problem has a simple solution.
The timing needs to proportional to the size of the intersection and the given speed limit. People need to be able to concentrate on stopping or proceeding and not worrying about a ticket.
By making the yellow lights longer, people will have a fair amount of time to proceed or stop safely, without flooring it or slamming on the brakes.
Keep the cameras in place as they will then catch the people who are blatently running the lights.
Nothing is perfect and there will still be problems, but this solves the biggest issues.
I think the government is in the business of entrapment then anything else with the current setup.
Reply
Bigel 9:54AM (4/05/2006)
But see Carlos, that's the problem: In the studies cited, net injuries doubled, rear-end accidents doubled, but t-bones stayed relatively the same (22 vs. 18).
Reply
doug 10:06AM (4/05/2006)
So who is at fault for the accidents? The driver planning on running the light, the driver behind who wasn't paying attention, or the greedy government? Maybe the gov't should put up signs "traffic camera in use" at these intersections. We get warnings for curves, railroad tracks, schools, blind driveways, etc., why not for these cameras?
Reply
frank d 10:18AM (4/05/2006)
I couldn't agree more with Bernie: " Maybe the police need to monitor tailgating a little more. But that takes work and it's hard to prove, so they won't. They'd rather bust me in my G35 doing 83 in a 70 on a bright sunny day with nobody around. "
There are most often multiple aspects that lead to accidents.
A good driver drives with a safe driving attitude: drives alert & awake, keeps safe distance, drives at safe speed according to traffic & road conditions, always takes care when approaching an intersection, no improper lane changes, uses turn signals, etc.
In Europe where camera installations at the so called " black spots " (n fatalities / year) and the creation of roundabouts have lead to a drastic reduction in fatal & severe accidents. Anywhere from 30% to 100% drop in fatalities. So while there may not be an overal reduction in accidents - as more smaller accidents may occur - they do help save lives.
A speed / red light enforcing camera should not be blamed for an accident, rather the tailgating driver for not keeping safe distance.
Consider this: If a kid darts on the street behind his/her ball, driver A slams on the brake to avoid the kid and manages to do so, but driver B slams into driver A. Then driver A should be commended for safe driving and B is liable for the damage as he/she did not keep safe stopping distance.
I honestly am surprised there are only as few fatal accidents as there are. No matter when I go on the highway, I see people drive 70-80mph without as much as a CAR length between them and the car in front of them. Same goes on local roads with 55mph speed limit. Even in the rain & snow!!! Forget the two-three second rule (or a distance in meters equal to the # of km/h you are driving)
I think it is all about education & personal attitude to drive safe and return home safe. Many people seem to drive totally oblivious to the danger they put themselves and others in. Maybe everybody needs to go on a patrol a few times with the police or ambulance services.
Just to clarify while I do like red light cameras (as nobody should run red, and I see at least on person a day running red here in this small town), I dislike speeding cameras. 10mph faster is not inherently unsafe. I've been the easy subject of a speed trap on a rural road on a dry quiet Sunday morning without so much as a second car on the road. Sure, I was not paying attention to my speedometer ... but did I endanger anybody? Not a snowballs chance in hell. But, that's what you get for driving safer and more defensive then most other people. You'll get caught by yourself when nobody is around.
One last note. There have been developments to measure tailgating distance & ticket the offending drivers, but I don't have any details on it if it actually has been put into practice anywhere. I would support such cameras, but what happens when a driver jumps into the safe distance zone you keep? In my experience you will have anywhere from one to three cars jump in there :(
Reply
NoVA 10:30AM (4/05/2006)
There is an article in one of the car magazines about 2 years back citing a case right here in NoVA. They put up a red light camera at a busy intersection and the nearby hospital started to get flooded with rear-ended victims. Guess what, they went back and did a proper traffic study and lenghthened the yellow to red timing for another ~3s, the rate of rear end collisions (and red-light runners) at that location dropped drastically and VA went away with red light cameras all together about a year ago. Check with your local governments, you will be surprised that in most cases, they put up cameras without conducting any engineering study or impact survey. It's all about what goes into the county coffer.
Reply
Dustin Tarditi 10:31AM (4/05/2006)
Unless the citizens make it painful to keep the lights in place (its revenue without tax hikes) they're likely to stay... next is, of course, speeding camera implementation like in the UK.
The unfortunate trickle-down is that you may be involved in an accident at a red light camera location, but you also pay (eventually) for insurance premium increases due to higher cost in your area.
Either way, we lose.
Reply
Neil F 10:36AM (4/05/2006)
Root problem: drivers' faulty logic, bad habits, and poor skills. Accelerating when entering intersections? Not wise in the base case. Everyone should try a basic "test" for whether or not they'd execute a maneuver: "would I do this if a cop were watching me?" (story about cop tailgating notwithstanding.) If "no," then DON'T DO IT.
Reply
MadTxn 10:36AM (4/05/2006)
The problem with these cameras is that they don't get the people who cause the BIG t-bone accidents. There is very little chance of someone getting t-boned by someone who crosses in the middle of a yellow light. Those people who run the light 5 seconds AFTER it turns red are the danger. And the cameras don't get them.
Reply
Brett 10:49AM (4/05/2006)
The solution is real simple: get an obscuring license plate cover. You won't get any tickets, and you don't worry about some bonehead rear ending you. Just downshift and make the intersection while its yellow. There's a delay between your red light and the crossing traffic's green anyway.
Reply
phil 10:55AM (4/05/2006)
I don't know why this is such a big deal. Drivers just need to adjust their speed and allertness when coming up to intersections. It really is not difficult. And does it really kill you to slow down and stop at that yellow light instead of trying to blast throught it?
Reply
Glenn 12:33PM (4/05/2006)
A proper driver's education system in the United States emulating what takes place in Great Britian would go a long, long way towards improving initial driving standards, and would keep a lot more kids alive.
For one thing, fully 55% or so of testees FAIL the extremely tough British test the first time through, and 70% of retestees fail, and there is a time-frame during which you cannot retest after a failure.
Drove in the UK for 2 1/2 weeks last year on vacation, I think I cursed out maybe 6 drivers TOTAL in perhaps a thousand miles of driving or more.
I probably curse at 6 drivers in one 35 mile commute here in Michigan (back & forth to work).
When I lived in the UK, I had to "unlearn" driving in order to pass the Brit test, which put me in a disadvantage. I was also in my late 20's instead of younger years. I passed first time.
Go to this website, click on "practice test" and see how you'd do in the UK (don't worry if you don't do so well, some of the rules of the road are actually different).
http://drivtest.carltononline.com/test.htm
Reply
Fabulo 12:34PM (4/05/2006)
Gary has a good point. Unfortunately, my experience is that in intersections fitted with those camera get the yellow light time reduced, not increased. The yellow light in those is exactly the time for you to clear the intersection doing to speed limit. Too bad if there is traffic and the rate is slightly slower. You'll get caught in there when it turns red.
The whole point is to raise money. It costs close to nothing, is pretty near infinitely scalable (just fit more intersection) and it is extremely profitable.
Reply
Howard Kerr 1:09PM (4/05/2006)
It's my experience that yellow light times have been decreased at nearly all intersections that have left turn lights. Apparently, someone/somewhere thought this was better than making the period for a complete red to red cycle longer. Green lights are a tiny bit longer now, at the expense of yellows.
Perhaps they might want to try what I first saw in Iceland and have seen in other countries in Europe. That is, make the yellow flash faster the closer it gets to going red. Wait, that probably won't work as many people here "breeze through" the RED light without even slowing down.
Reply