Just Say No To Red Light Cameras

[Julie]

One tidbit that intrigued me–now I don’t remember which article I read it in–was that in one city (in NC?), red light running was also reduced at intersections other than those with the cameras. If that holds true, it might be that drivers generalize a change in behavior, rather than limiting their change in habits to just those intersections which are consistently enforced.

Share This

[datamuse]

What I took away from the Post article is that the results are more mixed than is apparent at first glance. I’d be interested to see what additional data collection and analysis brings.

As a D.C. native, I should maybe also mention some admittedly anecdotal characteristics of driving in D.C. Red lights have always been sort of treated as optional there and people drive pretty aggressively generally. The roads are much, MUCH more crowded than in Seattle.

Something the article didn’t address was whether the numbers of crashes at intersections with red-light cameras had really gone up, or if it was an increase in the number of crashes REPORTED. A camera that gets a picture of someone running a light can also get a picture of an accident. My point is that people who get into car accidents don’t always call the police.

It just seems weird to me that the installation of the cameras would correlate to an increase in crashes overall. I can’t see how one would cause the other.

Share This

[beachdrivegirl]

JoB I believe that the two major incidents in West Seattle on the front page of the blog (which i read all of the time) had nothing to do with the articles we are discussing. The two accidents were related to someone making an illegal turn which woudl happen regardless of the cameras imo and the other was on a side street with no stops, no lights, and no yield signs.

Share This

[B-squared]

Perhaps when the Red-light camera technology is more mature (or there is more competition), the prices will come down enabling the city to keep more of the money.

i am all for generating revenue off of the law-breaking citizenry. it’s a choice to not pick up after your dog, dump yard waste in a greenbelt, smoke too close to a door or run a red light. all of those behaviors are basically a wanton disregard for other’s in your community.

what i would like to know is if the count-down timers on the pedestrian signals has a safety effect. i REALLY like those and hope that they will soon replace all of the walk signals. i just wonder if the “don’t care about anyone but me” crowd just uses them to gage how fast they have to speed up to “make the light”.

Share This

[beachdrivegirl]

I would also wonder about the count down on the cross walk signals.

I am also a bit curious as to whether or not bus drivers would be cited for running red lights. My understanding is that not every driver is sited for running a red light. They view the footage and fine a certain % of the drivers. I work near teh bus terminal on fourth & am nearly run down by crazy bus drivers daily running red lights. If the city is investing in all of this technology will they be holding the bus drivers (and other city employees (mayor?) to a higher level of accountabilyt than they are held to today?

Share This

[JoB]

Julie..

i was glad to log on and find out that someone had actually read the article in the Washington Post…

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/03/AR2005100301844.html

this article also mentioned that there had been a similar increase in accident figures for all intersections in Washington DC.. not just those that had installed red lights.

The headline screamed one thing while the article itself was actually more balanced.

I am not sure why the idea that the end justifies the means has become so prevalent in our society, but too many people with agendas now feel that editing data to their advantage is ethical as long as it presents their argument.

Thus they talk about total numbers of accidents, not injury accidents and if they talk about the number of injury accidents, they lump strained necks with broken bones and paralysis…

More often than not when faced with any study these days, you have to look as carefully at what was not reported as what was…

and there is the point that the number of reported rear end accidents would rise at an intersection that tapes all of them…

But… one thing noted in the article really caused me to stop and think.

Fatalities had not gone down at lights with red light cameras… at least in Washington DC…

it is difficult to understand what that means out of context. Did fatalities remain level at the lights without red light cameras? did they rise with the number of accidents? Is the fact that fatalities didn’t rise more important than noting they remained the same?

And there is the larger issue that troubles me… why there are so many people running red lights and otherwise ignoring traffic laws in the first place?

Is it simply a matter of overcrowding? Are traffic rules obeyed more in less populated areas?

Is it attitude.. anything i can get away with is ok…or worse.. i am entitled to get where i am going as quickly as i can and it is other driver’s responsibility to get out of my way?

I don’t think we will ever have data that answers that question…

but it appears that those drivers who speak out most aren’t so concerned about the public safety issues of running red lights or speeding as they are about getting caught and ticketed.

that’s not a good sign.

beachdrivegirl..

you may be right about the cause of the two crashes pictured on WSB… but whether the images of side impact collisions come from running red lights or from illegal turns, the images graphically illustrate why side impact collisions typically cause more injury than rear end collisions… and that was my point.

Share This

[beachdrivegirl]

Thanks for clearing that up JoB. i guess I would want to see some photos from rear end collisions before making a judgement call on which is better/worse.

Share This

[JoB]

It’s amazing what you can find out if you really want to know.

on the Davis Law library website,

http://www.washingtonaccidentbook.com/library/

the first link is to a 93 page pdf detailing accident rates in Washington State by region in 2005.

http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/mapsdata/tdo/PDF_and_ZIP_Files/2005_Annual_State_Highway_Collision_Data_Summary.pdf

The have looked at regions, types of accidents, the drivers, road conditions and vehicles… really a storehouse of data.

it will be years before red light camera data appears there… but i am certain they will be reporting it once it is available…

You will be glad to know that Washington roads are safer than the national average and that fatalities here had decreased by 5% in 2005.

there were more accidents per driver in urban areas than in any other population category… and more of those occured on minor arterials than on major arterials… though fatalities were evenly split between minor and major arterials…

We need to be really really careful on those minor arterials.

In our region.. the NW part of Washington which includes the greater Seattle Metropolitan area…

the leading collision type was rear end… it occured more than twice as often as all other collision types.

It should be no surprise that speed was the number one cause of accidents.. 33%

followed by following too close and failure to yield at 17% each…

Speed was also one of the causes of more fatal collisions 20% the other being over the centerline 20% followed by DUI Alcohol 19%. Failure to yeild 5% disobey signal 5% and DUI drugs 3%

the fatality statistics for following too close (rear end collisions) were apparently not statistically significant enough to report… they may have been lumped in other… 19%…

i don’t know if other includes those accidents that couldn’t be designated as a single cause or not.. but i would suspect that multiple car fatalities would be difficult to label as to cause… so i suspect that is where they are.

There is a breakdown as to the types of injuries in the report as well…

but the saddest information i found was that the highest number of fatalities was due to people hitting the concrete center median.

It turns out the life you save by slowing down is likely to be your own.

Share This

[Anonymous]

I don’t recall anyone questioning that side-impact collisions were less dangerous than rear-end collisions in this discussion.

I’m glad that TR and Patrick brought updates on those 2 crashes from a year ago to us here on the blog, but I don’t see how they relate to the discussion here.

Share This

[Julie]

JoB, it’s interesting that Washington DC showed an increase in accidents in general (not just at the camera intersections) but Oxnard, CA, and Fairfax, VA, showed a decrease in general (not just at the camera intersections).

I wonder what’s the difference? Different study methodology, different driving cultures, difference in the implementation of the cameras?

Share This

[JanS]

I guess I see things differently..if we’re gonna be talking cams, and red lights, and speeding…and accidents…then the type of accident fits in…it was brought up early in the discussion…which I find very interesting. It’s definitely made me think some.

Share This

[JoB]

Julie..

i think it is a difference in the attitude…

i hate to generalize here but there are two very large populations in Washington DC that both operate from a basis of privilege… politicians and their attendant staff and lobbyists and drug dealers and their attendant staff.. i am not sure they have lobbyists:)

Washignton DC has long been known as a town where it is a lot safer to take public transportation or maybe a cab than to rent a car… drivers are incredibly aggressive there…

and i think too many of them either get out of their tickets or simply ignore them since they would be the least of their legal woes…

Drivers in larger population centers in california are also pretty aggressive but traffic fines add up pretty quickly and the cost of living there is pretty high.

that’s just my take though… no insult intended to anyone who happens to live and drive in Washington DC.

I have no doubt they are tougher than i am if they drive there ;->

Share This

[Julie]

It’s an attractive suggestion, JoB, but without data, it’s just an assumption. I would first want to rule out differences in study methodology and implementation.

Share This

[Anonymous]

Just wait until surveillance / target acquisition drones move from all-military application to civilian ones. Give it 3-5 years. You won’t even be able to see the flash like the red light cams, you’ll just get the citation in the mail (or maybe via email!).

Share This

[JoB]

Julie…

you are absolutely right..

i said it was what i think and not what i know…

it would be interesting to compare the methodology.. you would be more likely to find the explanations there…

but i still don’t drive in DC ;)

Share This

[datamuse]

that’s just my take though… no insult intended to anyone who happens to live and drive in Washington DC.

No, that’s pretty accurate…and I speak as someone who grew up there, as I commented previously. :) You have to drive aggressively, just to avoid becoming road paste. When I moved to the northwest it took me awhile to adapt. (Though the general inability to merge properly around here still drives me crazy, after 13 years…but that’s a separate rant.)

Like I mentioned previously and other posters have commented, I’d really like to see the study, the data, the criteria for inclusion, and all that good meaty stuff. WaPo is my hometown paper and I sort of correct for bias as an automatic function; this article’s pretty good but it can’t cover everything and I was left curious rather than satisfied when I finished reading it.

I will say that I’ve encountered more aggressive driving around Seattle of late, especially on the highways…and trust me, y’all don’t want to start driving like they do in D.C. I left that place for a reason. (Although, as a sidenote, let me observe that if you lack excitement in your driving life, driving in Greece will provide all the excitement you need and then some. Just riding in a taxicab is a thrill on par with a roller coaster ride. If you like that sort of thing.)

Share This

[alki_2008]

Wow, I read ‘judgmental’ all over this comment: “but it appears that those drivers who speak out most aren’t so concerned about the public safety issues of running red lights or speeding as they are about getting caught and ticketed.”

I recall someone “speaking out” in the NC(?) article had said he never got a ticket, but I guess that he doesn’t care about public safety at all…just about continuing his ticketless record?

I don’t recall reading in this thread that people don’t want to get tickets…but whether (1) so much of the red-light fines should go to the camera companies instead of the municipalities and (2) whether speeding cams really help to reduce accidents or contribute to increased rear-end accidents.

Too often in this forum do I see judgments, based solely on presumptions, about people’s intentions and personalities. Ugh!

Back on topic – there is just way too much data to ever come to a complete consensus or identification of cause-and-effect. Fatality statistics alone don’t work because safety equipment has improved over the years (side air bags at sides, seatbelt laws, etc)…and there are some causal behaviors that didn’t exist just a few years ago (cell phones, in-dash entertainment, etc).

Share This

[JoB]

alki-2008..

Geeze Louise… it’s too easy to take offense when none was intended.

It was never my intent to label any concerned WSB poster as a big whiner only griping about getting tickets.

i thought i wrote that comment in context… with articles concerning red light cameras, (I’m not going to go back to look).

In any event.. that interpretation of my words tastes bad.

I too am concerned about the financial agreements surrounding the red light cameras, but certainly not enough to pull the cameras because the city might not be getting enough of the revenue.

Anything that encourages a driver to think twice before running a red light is likely to save lives. The life saved may very well be someone i know and care about.

As for the speeding cams, my experience with them was vastly different than New Resident’s.

If the speeding cams were responsible for the reduced speed on Arizona freeways while i was there, i approve heartily. I have only the warnings from family and friends to support my belief that they were. But, my experience was that traffic was moving at the speed limit… something which didn’t occur while i lived there and has never occurred any other time i have visited.

At the least, the warnings i received would indicate that the speeding cams increased public awareness of the dangers of speeding.. even if the danger foremost in their mind was an unexpected ticket.

That can’t be a bad thing.

Share This

[Anonymous]

And the article I linked proved that people slam their brakes on when approaching those speed cameras.

So, are they reducing speed in AZ? No, they are increasing rear end collisions.

Share This

[JoB]

NewResident..

While articles may corroborate your experience, they prove little unless they are backed by hard evidence.

The speed cameras haven’t been on Arizona Hiways long enough for drivers to become accustomed to the changes in driving patterns they produce or to gather long range data.

Any time you follow another car too closely, you run the risk of rear ending them.

I suspect it will take a while for drivers to learn to leave adequate space to compensate for possible erratic behavior between themselves and the driver ahead, but i am sure the learning curve must be getting shorter every day.

It will be interesting to see what speed monitoring and accident data indicate after a year or two.

there is no question, at least in Washington, that speed is the number one factor in traffic fatalities.

Share This

[Julie]

Perusing the House transportation bill, I happened upon the following, which may be helpful to those who are primarily concerned with the allocation of revenue from automatic traffic cameras:

Sec. 710(i): “If a county or city has established an authorized automated traffic safety camera program under this section, the compensation paid to the manufacturer or vendor of the equipment used must be based only upon the value of the equipment and services provided or rendered in support of the system, and may not be based upon a portion of the fine or civil penalty imposed or the revenue generated by the equipment.”

I thought this was also interesting: “However, the amount of the fine issued for an infraction generated through the use of an automated traffic safety camera shall not exceed the amount of a fine issued for other parking infractions within the jurisdiction.”

I think (I haven’t read the whole bill carefully, my primary interest in the bill not being these cameras, so I’m not sure about this) that these sections specifically apply to pilot programs. My first thought is that it seems odd to limit a moving violation fine in this way. Surely a fine for a moving violation should be far more than for a parking infraction? But perhaps it was a sop to opponents of the automated systems.

If anyone is motivated to dig deeper, the bill is here:

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2009-10/Pdf/Bills/House%20Bills/1314-S.pdf

Share This

[Author]

Posts