More red light cameras, less sense
December 31st, 1969
It seems these days that red light cameras, speed cameras and other such devices are on the rise, and of course the issue of revenue raising is brought up time and time again by motorists. Usually the politicians will deny this, claiming that the primary purpose of the cameras is to increase safety by acting as a deterrent to dangerous driving. But studies in Australia by two independent institutes, as well as studies done in Canada and the United States reveal alarming statistics – alarming for the politicians anyway. It seems as though red light cameras are not only ineffective in reducing dangerous driving and crashes where they are installed, but instead increase the number of accidents by not insignificant amounts.
A 1995 study in Australia that examined statistics for 5 years before the introduction of red-light cameras and 5 years after the introduction of them revealed that “the installation of red light cameras at these sites did not provide any reduction in accidents, rather there has been an increase in rear end and adjacent approaches accidents on a before and after basis and also by comparison with the changes in accidents at intersection signals. There has been no demonstrated value of the red light camera as an effective countermeasure.”
Click ahead to read the rest of this entry.
A Canadian study in Winnipeg completed in February this year confirmed this conclusion, stating that injuries had increased by 64% since the introduction of red-light cameras.
It seems that red-light cameras are instrumental in increasing the number of rear-end crashes, as revealed by a study done in the US state of Virginia, as well as a study undertaken by the Washington Post, which outlined that rear-end crashes had increased between 50% and 71%, and that injurious and fatal crashes had increased by 81%.
While there was no reason given for why there might be more rear-end crashes due to red-light cameras, one of our own theories is that maybe drivers are rushing to get through a yellow light, noticing the ‘red-light camera’ signs, and slamming on their brakes to avoid the fine, causing the car behind them to rear-end them.
So, with all the evidence in place against red-light cameras, and the politicians’ saying that they are not for revenue raising but rather for our own safety you would think that red-light cameras would be removed, or at least phased out, right? Wrong. It seems that even more red light cameras are being put in place, and once again the politicians are saying that it’s for revenue raising our own safety.
[Source: News.com.au]
It seems these days that red light cameras, speed cameras and other such devices are on the rise, and of course the issue of revenue raising is brought up time and time again by motorists. Usually the politicians will deny this, claiming that the primary purpose of the cameras is to increase safety by acting as a deterrent to dangerous driving. But studies in Australia by two independent institutes, as well as studies done in Canada and the United States reveal alarming statistics – alarming for the politicians anyway. It seems as though red light cameras are not only ineffective in reducing dangerous driving and crashes where they are installed, but instead increase the number of accidents by not insignificant amounts.
A 1995 study in Australia that examined statistics for 5 years before the introduction of red-light cameras and 5 years after the introduction of them revealed that “the installation of red light cameras at these sites did not provide any reduction in accidents, rather there has been an increase in rear end and adjacent approaches accidents on a before and after basis and also by comparison with the changes in accidents at intersection signals. There has been no demonstrated value of the red light camera as an effective countermeasure.”
Click ahead to read the rest of this entry.
A Canadian study in Winnipeg completed in February this year confirmed this conclusion, stating that injuries had increased by 64% since the introduction of red-light cameras.
It seems that red-light cameras are instrumental in increasing the number of rear-end crashes, as revealed by a study done in the US state of Virginia, as well as a study undertaken by the Washington Post, which outlined that rear-end crashes had increased between 50% and 71%, and that injurious and fatal crashes had increased by 81%.
While there was no reason given for why there might be more rear-end crashes due to red-light cameras, one of our own theories is that maybe drivers are rushing to get through a yellow light, noticing the ‘red-light camera’ signs, and slamming on their brakes to avoid the fine, causing the car behind them to rear-end them.
So, with all the evidence in place against red-light cameras, and the politicians’ saying that they are not for revenue raising but rather for our own safety you would think that red-light cameras would be removed, or at least phased out, right? Wrong. It seems that even more red light cameras are being put in place, and once again the politicians are saying that it’s for revenue raising our own safety.
[Source: News.com.au]
A 1995 study in Australia that examined statistics for 5 years before the introduction of red-light cameras and 5 years after the introduction of them revealed that “the installation of red light cameras at these sites did not provide any reduction in accidents, rather there has been an increase in rear end and adjacent approaches accidents on a before and after basis and also by comparison with the changes in accidents at intersection signals. There has been no demonstrated value of the red light camera as an effective countermeasure.”
Click ahead to read the rest of this entry.
A Canadian study in Winnipeg completed in February this year confirmed this conclusion, stating that injuries had increased by 64% since the introduction of red-light cameras.
It seems that red-light cameras are instrumental in increasing the number of rear-end crashes, as revealed by a study done in the US state of Virginia, as well as a study undertaken by the Washington Post, which outlined that rear-end crashes had increased between 50% and 71%, and that injurious and fatal crashes had increased by 81%.
While there was no reason given for why there might be more rear-end crashes due to red-light cameras, one of our own theories is that maybe drivers are rushing to get through a yellow light, noticing the ‘red-light camera’ signs, and slamming on their brakes to avoid the fine, causing the car behind them to rear-end them.
So, with all the evidence in place against red-light cameras, and the politicians’ saying that they are not for revenue raising but rather for our own safety you would think that red-light cameras would be removed, or at least phased out, right? Wrong. It seems that even more red light cameras are being put in place, and once again the politicians are saying that it’s for revenue raising our own safety.
[Source: News.com.au]
More from MotorAuthority
-
11/06/2009
Opel Boss Carl-Peter Forster Calls It Quits
Carl-Peter Forster, GM group vice president and president of Opel, will be ...
-
11/06/2009
GM Czar Lutz Heading Back To Europe--To Opel?
GM's sudden decision this week to reverse path and keep Opel rather than ...
-
11/06/2009
Toyota To Put 2010 4Runner Through The Baja 1000 Wringer
Toyota's involvement in motorsports has been a hot topic this week with ...
More from High Gear Media
-
TheCarConnection.com | 11/07/2009
Driven: 2010 BMW ActiveHybrid X6
BMW's X6 "Sports Activity Coupe" is a car of contradictions. Our review ...
-
TheCarConnection.com | 11/06/2009
Opel CEO Calls It Quits, Rolls-Royce Hybrid: Today’s Car News
It’s official. The boss of Opel, Carl-Peter Forster, will be leaving ...
-
TheCarConnection.com | 11/06/2009
2010 Ford Focus
2010 FORD FOCUS STYLING | [6 out of 10] Kelley Blue Book: "Improved ...



Comments (0 total)
Meet the top commenters on the LeaderboardPost a Comment
Sign In |