Tirekicking Today Editorial: Red Light Cameras work as promised, but can easily ensnare safe drivers, too

by James M. Flammang


When drivers spot this sign and light is changing,
some will speed up to get through, while others might
slam on brakes to avoid costly traffic ticket

Had your picture taken lately? If you've made an illegal right turn at an intersection that holds a red light camera, your face might well appear in a photograph that serves as evidence of misbehavior. Storming through the intersection after the light has changed to red will also yield a snapshot of your car and countenance. As a result, your daily mail might soon include a rather costly ticket supplied by the local authorities.

In some parts of the country, red light cameras seem to have emerged at every other corner. In other areas, they're far less common - at least for now.

Considering how many people have complained about receiving these photo-generated tickets, you'd think they'd be outraged by the presence and use of such devices. At least theoretically, after all, a flagrantly lawbreaking motorist could receive a stack of such violation notices after a single day's driving.

Evidently, they're more popular than they'd appeared to be. In a recent voter survey by Public Opinion Strategies, motorists expressed a surprising level of approval of the red light cameras. Some 45 percent of respondents said they "strongly support" the use of camera to detect red-light runners at the most dangerous intersections, and 24 percent "somewhat support" the devices. Only 18 percent said they "strongly oppose" their use. Even more interesting, almost half of respondents believe that other people in their state oppose red light cameras, in contrast to their own support.

When camera-detection devices first came to light, our position seemed clear. For years, this publication has taken an unwavering stance against radar detectors, which signal the presence of radar-equipped police cars ready to pull over speeders. Unlike many of our journalistic colleagues, we agree completely with the handful of cities, states, and Canadian provinces that have banned the devices.

Despite huffing protestations uttered by their advocates, radar detectors have one, and only one, purpose: to allow their owners to break the law with impunity. Worse yet, ultimately, they permit lawbreakers to go about their misdeeds smugly, often boasting how their use of detectors keeps them from being ticketed or losing their licenses. Thus, the worst offenders serve as role models of law-flouting, expecting to be admired for their allegedly clever avoidance of penalties for their misdeeds.

Speeding isn't really the issue. No, what troubles us at Tirekicking Today is the number of speeders who rarely, if ever, pay a penalty for placing pedestrians and other drivers in danger. If you're going to exceed the limit, you should be ready to pay the legal price for that choice, rather than trying to evade the law or - when caught - to lie and whimper your way out of any penalty.

Naturally, then, Tirekicking Today should be opposing the new devices, since they can keep violators from "getting away with" their misbehavior. Or, maybe not. Red light cameras are different. Yes, they warn drivers of nearby cameras that could soon send a photograph-derived ticket their way. But they're not hidden in any way, like a police car tucked in the bushes, waiting for violators to roar by. Instead, "Photo Enforced" signs with a traffic-signal icon clearly declare the presence of each red light camera.

If they only caught flagrant violators, we'd be totally in favor. But that's not necessarily the case. Normally safe drivers can also wind up with mailed-out tickets, simply because they misjudged the time when a green light would turn to yellow, then green. At the instant when that signal turns red, you'd better have your move completed. Yet, when approaching most photo-enforced intersections, there's no indication how soon that light is going to change.

Should you be ready to slam the brakes if it changes suddenly? Should you push on the gas if it looks like you're too close for the brakes to take effect in time? Should we have to think about this instant decision at all, every time we approach an intersection? If we have to worry about it every time, and possibly make an abrupt move in response, the safety benefits of red light cameras become a lot less certain.

Manufacturers of the cameras, and the municipalities that use them, say there's a built-in allowance for such uncertainties. Maybe so; but how much leeway is allowed? Is it enough to permit a sensible decision, in a fraction of a second?

Fortunately, there is a solution, though it's only employed at selected intersections, in certain areas. Countdown timers mounted on stoplights, which let both drivers and pedestrians know how soon the light is going to change, allow approaching motorists to make an informed choice without rushing. If that timer says the light will change in 2 seconds, prudence dictates stopping quickly - and you probably should have seen and acknowledged the timer sooner. But if it says 10 seconds, you can ease through in a fret-free state of calmness.

When all, or at least most, municipalities, install timers at their traffic signals, we will accept the value of red light cameras. Until then, like some cynical critics, we have to wonder how much of the rush to mount cameras is due to safety concerns, and how much to raising revenue.

That latter claim is commonly made by speeders, insisting that enforcement of speed limits is nothing but a revenue-enhancer for local government. They're wrong. Whine about speed traps all you like, but if you're going over the limit, you deserve to be pulled over and ticketed. Period. Claims of faulty radar guns may have had some validity years ago, when the technology was being developed. Today, they're little more than simpering pleas to avoid punishment for one's roadgoing crimes. All the more so for drivers who have a detector stuck on the windshield, which is ample evidence of their intent to violate the law and do so with impunity.

As soon as local governments get those timers installed, we'll put red light cameras in the same class as radar detectors. Until then, we'd better stay alert at every intersection, because even the most safety-conscious drivers can be trapped by those never-resting cameras.