What your town gov. does when traffic cameras start working too well?

"Last week, Dallas officials reviewed the numbers and decided that a quarter of the cameras they had installed to catch motorists running red lights were too effective. So they shut them down.



They are not alone. Faced with data showing that drivers pay attention to cameras at intersections 鈥?resulting in fewer ticketable violations and ever-shrinking revenue from fines 鈥?municipalities across the country are reconsidering red light cameras, which often work too well."



Is there a problem with town officials putting the public in danger for the sake of fattening their wallets? Should there be reasonable concern that the governing bodies involved in this article could care less about the safety of their public?...the media reporting on this article seems ok with it.



Source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23710970/What your town gov. does when traffic cameras start working too well?
that's one way to solve the problem.What your town gov. does when traffic cameras start working too well?
Traffic cameras are are constitutionally illegal.



Read the constitution. We have the right to face the witnesses against us who are accusing us of a crime.



How can we face a camera on the stand. The camera is not a person who can bring charges.



A cop with a photo is not a witness, he is looking at heresay evidence.



Plus how can we get a fair trial if the judge and the prosecution work for the same entity, The State of Texas?



Look it up man.... Too many laws. Numerous studies have proven that traffic cameras do not reduce accidents.



Shut em down. Shut em down now. We don't need big brother.





EDIT***

Here is the direct answer to your question, the only one I can think of to make sense.



"Those who would exchange freedom or liberty for safety deserve neither freedom nor liberty" - Benjamin FranklinWhat your town gov. does when traffic cameras start working too well?
Since the goal of installing the cameras was to increase compliance with the laws about stopping for lights, thereby decreasing accidents and improving public safety, it would seem to me that this is a stunning success. How is it not a good thing that they don't need to spend the taxpayers' money on monitoring these cameras any more?



Edit: You're not making much sense, actually. The cities have eliminated the cameras now because they have worked. That was the goal of the cameras in the first place. This is a win win situation. The public is safer now than before the cameras were installed, and the cost to the city is lower because they aren't paying for their operation.
I say shut them down too. They reduce jobs needed on the police force and are unfair. Its a money gimmick to bring in more revenue for a town. If I am to get a ticket I want to know then not three weeks later in the mail. What if someone else is driving your car think of the trouble it will cause someone to get it legally straightened out. Anyone that is for them has not had to pay one of those ridiculous tickets yet.