Red Flag for Red Light Cameras

FrontBurner | Trey Garrison:

“Are we under any illusion that red light cameras are about anything other than revenue generation?”

Ed Cognoski responds:

Red light cameras are about safety, first and foremost. According to a recent story in The Dallas Morning News:

"Of the more than 200 municipalities in 23 states and the District of Columbia that have installed some form of the technology, most have charted significant drops in violations and serious accidents, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety and interviews with other traffic experts."

As for conventional wisdom that red light cameras are about revenue generation, a simple look at the books dispels that mistaken notion. Garland, the first city in the area to install red light cameras, is at the break-even point of revenues and costs. University Park, which installed cameras only this February, is running a $39,000 deficit.

"Costs are an issue in Garland. ... Officials say the initiative there is a victim of its own success: As violations have fallen because of the cameras, so, too, have the revenues used to sustain the cameras. ... Garland plans to decommission five of its 12 cameras ... to keep the expensive program afloat."

Mr Garrison's inherent distrust of government is the only illusion at work here. Government officials who think red light cameras are a gold mine for public coffers are sadly mistaken. Citizens who resist cameras because of distrust of government picked the wrong government program to fear. The fact is that red light cameras reduce violations, reduce accidents and save lives.