Wednesday, August 18, 2010


There is a great deal of interest and approval for the requiring the installation of breath activated ignition locks on the cars of DWI offenders. Using technology to solve a problem, add to the safety of the public and reduce crime is a good thing. The same approval is not seen regarding the cameras that take pictures of people going through red lights and stop signs.

Complaint One seems to be that the cameras are a way for municipalities to raise money. So what? People who do something that they should not do are fined. Good. We need more of that.

Complaint Two acknowledges that the cameras lower the more violent T-Bone accidents but note that cameras increase rear end accidents. That would be because many people assume a yellow light means “speed up and go through it” and as a result they hit the guy who in front of them who actually stops. Rear end accidents are the fault of the guy in the back. You are supposed to be far enough behind the car in front that you can safely stop no matter what. In addition, if we cannot rely on the other guy to drive properly - things like stopping when appropriate, staying on the right side of the road, not tail gating and speeding – we are all at risk.

Complaint Three is astounding. A former judge is suing on Constitutional grounds because his wife got several tickets and he cannot cross examine the camera. He is wasting tax money.

No comments:

Post a Comment