Alliance, Conservative, Republican, GOP, Libertarian, New Media, Right of Center, Constitution Party, Blogging, Vlogging, Podcasting, Tennessee, Politics

The Tennessee ConserVOLiance

An Alliance of Right-of-Center New Media activists in Tennessee

The Tennessee ConserVOLiance header image 2

Lights, Scameras and Government Action

March 11th, 2008 · 5 Comments

Ralph Bristol’s show this morning spent a fair amount of time on the issue of Metro considering the installation of cameras on certain traffic lights. You know the ones. If you run the light, the camera takes a picture of your vehicle’s license plate and they mail you a ticket. Murfreesboro and Gallatin already use the things and Nashville is considering it.

I think it’s a bad idea for several reasons.

First is the problems they say they are looking to address. The biggest one is safety. People running lights can cause accidents. But do we need cameras that issue tickets to solve the problem? Not really. Metro could reprogram their lights to not have the green light come on until 2 or 3 seconds after the red light came on for the cross traffic. Accidents would be reduced or eliminated and there’s no need for cameras as traffic cops. As it is now, the cameras actually have been shown to cause a decrease in the number of crashes due to red lights being run and a corresponding increase in the number of rear end crashes as motorists stand on the brakes at the camera controlled intersections to avoid the ticket and are hit from behind.

Secondly is the cost. Many cities are choosing to get around the purchase price by either leasing the cameras from the companies or by splitting the revenue from the tickets. You can see where this is going. In order for the city to afford the cameras, they have to get tickets from the cameras - LOTS of tickets. If it is a lease arrangement, the leases can be several thousand dollars per month per camera. At $50 per ticket, a smallish lease of $4,000 per month would require 80 tickets per month - almost 3 per day, every day - just to break even. In the event there is a revenue sharing arrangement, for the city to make up the revenue they are losing, they’ll have to write twice as many tickets as before. Finally, should the city choose to buy the cameras outright, there is the cost of the camera (tens of thousands of dollars), followed by installation and maintenance (thousands more). Think of the number of tickets needed to continue to break even. The camera companies sell the systems with the assurance the equipment is 100% violator funded. The almost universal objection to the cameras are the ease with which the number of violators can be manipulated upwards. A couple of tenths of a second shaved off the time the light is yellow creates more tickets which equals more revenue. What government will be able to resist?

Thirdly we have the Constitutional arguments against the cameras. Not only can the cameras be wrong, they cannot be in court to testify against you. Thus no violator gets the benefit of their right to confront their accuser as they do with officer generated citations. Further, the camera does not take pictures of the actual driver of the vehicle. It captures the license plate and the ticket is mailed to the registered owner of the car. Kids, employees, relatives, neighbors - anyone who has a chance to borrow a vehicle, even with permission, can earn the owner of the car a fine. That many states decline to put points on the driving record of owners so cited means they understand this problem but don’t care. The money is too good.

There are more arguments against the cameras. I’ve included some links that point them out at the end of the post. But the biggest argument against them is that the government is involved in administrating the program. If that doesn’t frighten you, consider this. Daylight Savings Time began here in Tennessee in the early hours of Sunday, March 9. That was almost 72 hours ago. The traffic lights in Hermitage that are on timers that turn them from cycling to blinking and are set to begin blinking at 11PM in the evening and stop at 6AM in the morning - you know, for traffic safety and convenience. Those lights are still not changed. Not in my neighborhood, at least. They’re still on CST. Remember? The government is involved.

Lights, Scameras and Government Action! Nashvillians, call your council members and tell them you don’t want red light cameras. You’ll be safer and wealthier for it.

Blue

For more information, please see:

On the Use of Surveillance Cameras
Curtailing Carnage at the Traffic Light: Are Cameras the Answer?
Police Want Millions for Red-Light Cameras


Tags: Blue Collar Muse · Insurance Issues · Local Politics · Roads & Bridges · Spending

5 responses so far ↓

  • 1 Volunteer Voters » It’s About The Money // Mar 12, 2008 at 5:51 am

    […] Blue Collar Muse doesn’t believe that red light cameras are needed to achieve municipalities stated aim of reducing traffic accidents: People running lights can cause accidents. But do we need cameras that issue tickets to solve the problem? Not really. Metro could reprogram their lights to not have the green light come on until 2 or 3 seconds after the red light came on for the cross traffic. Accidents would be reduced or eliminated and there’s no need for cameras as traffic cops. As it is now, the cameras actually have been shown to cause a decrease in the number of crashes due to red lights being run and a corresponding increase in the number of rear end crashes as motorists stand on the brakes at the camera controlled intersections to avoid the ticket and are hit from behind. […]

  • 2 davisjb (2 comments) // Mar 12, 2008 at 3:13 pm

    We have these cameras set up in Kingsport (at least 8). And Kingsport is not a big city. What they are doing here is having a company set them up and splitting the money from the tickets with them until the camera is paid for. They plan on increasing the number of these things as time goes by.

    The way the ones around here work is .5 sec. before the light turns red it snaps a photo if a car is in the intersection.

    I have seen first hand what this causes. It is not unusual to stop at one and see cars sliding everywhere. I have witnessed several wrecks as a result of these cameras. You should see a semi try to get stopped before hitting a car that slides in because of one.

    If you do not want these in your town, you had better stop it before it starts. There have been several articles in the paper about how much they are bringing in from the tickets. And you all know how hard it is to stop them once they are bringing in the dough.

  • 3 Blue (33 comments) // Mar 12, 2008 at 4:09 pm

    JB -

    Exactly! These things are little more than thinly veiled revenue sources. That they are installed and sold as public safety precautions is disingenuous in the extreme!

    If you don’t want them, you better start fighting now!

    Blue

  • 4 The Tennessee ConserVOLiance // Mar 17, 2008 at 10:43 am

    […] What is the purpose of those cameras discussed here? […]

  • 5 Pete (1 comments) // Sep 22, 2008 at 1:41 pm

    I had noooo idea it was like that. I mean we here in the Quad Cities Area have camera’s too! There are many who disagree with the cop cams. Maybe if they took the money to hire new cops and or pay the ones they have to provide more service to the community the money would be spent wisely. Your idea of the lights not changing from one color to another for a few more seconds makes better sense!
    Great topic!

Leave a Comment


Comments links could be nofollow free.