I'm just wondering people take on it.
I know of several intersections in DC that have frequent accidents that have no cameras.
I also know of a few steep hills that have speed cameras a the base of the hill where few accidents happen, Hmmmm.Traffic cameras, Are they about safety or Money?
It depends on the type of traffic they're monitoring.
Speed cameras, or "electronic speed bumps" as I call them, have the potential to cause more accidents than prevent accidents because they interrupt the consistent flow of traffic. People who speed know where the cameras are will speed and then brake sharply to get to the speed limit as they approach the cameras. Other travelers will slow down to 15 mph below the posted speed limit. A third group will be traveling with the majority of drivers, going with the flow of traffic and try to stay close to the posted speed limit.
Going slower than the flow of traffic can be a bigger traffic hazard than people who are speeding through traffic-- in instances where traffic is slower, other drivers often change lanes to go around these slower drivers. Sometimes, they change lanes without looking. When people are speeding, they don't take into account the possibility of lane changes from other drivers-- they're going too fast and create a potential hazard because they're changing the dynamics of the traveled way (that is the area where cars are on the road).
In these areas near speed related traffic cameras, you're basically merging the extremes of all these different types of drivers in one little area which creates a huge potential for accidents. I'm actually surprised there aren't more accidents in the areas immediately before the cameras, but I attribute that to the local population knowing where the cameras are and making sure they're operating their vehicles within legal parameters.
That right there is why I believe speed cameras are revenue generating cameras. (Of course, this is only when I consider divided roadways. I haven't decided how I feel about speed cameras on undivided roads.)
On the flip side, I believe the red-light cameras are more about safety because people getting caught at these cameras are interrupting the flow of traffic in the opposite direction and are potentially putting a greater number of lives in worse jeopardy. Accidents caused by red-light runners usually aren't run-of-the-mill fender-benders. These accidents result in more severe damage to persons involved in the accident as well as vehicles involved in the accident. They're much more tragic. So, in this case, if a traffic camera keeps people from running a light, I can see how it encourages safety.
it's all about the money, never about safety. They only use that to pull the wool over the public eyesTraffic cameras, Are they about safety or Money?
its like having a traffic cop with no car/salary/benefits/all just cash coming in/i would like to own a few/in the usa its the money/just give me the money
its bothTraffic cameras, Are they about safety or Money?
you just need to ask your self this question ( if it costed them more money would they still put them up???
Traffic cameras are about safety. They could also be about catching people speeding, running a red light, or looking at the license plate.
On paper its for safety but in reality its all about the money generated.....
both
They are supposed to be about safety. Communities that install them in hopes of raising more money are soon disappointed when drivers stop running the lights and revenue falls off sharply. However, they have been proven highly effective for stopping red light runners and they do the job far more cheaply than posing a police officer full time at the intersection. For more information, read the following articles:
http://www.nationalsafetycommission.com/鈥?/a>
http://www.nationalsafetycommission.com/鈥?/a>
Well your statement after your question should tell you that cameras work, it is about safety, but if local governments can make a buck off the ******* that don't believe in safety, well GIT-R-DUN
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment