A few years ago several Texas cities jumped on the bandwagon and put up some red-light cameras. The cameras were viewed as a way to make dangerous intersections safer by letting the public know that they could get a ticket for running a red light even in the absence of an actual police officer. Since then it has become a hot political topic in the state. Two cities, Lubbock and Houston, installed the cameras but then took them down after only a short time. It makes me wonder if a few people with political power got ticketed.
But here in Amarillo the city commission stayed the course. They installed the red-light cameras in the five most dangerous intersections of the city, and never considered removing them. And it is working. In the fiscal year that ended in September 2009 there were 69 accidents at those intersections. The following year the number of accidents had dropped to 41 -- a forty percent drop. That's a huge effect, and it can be directly contributed to the red-light cameras (because the number of accidents at intersections without the cameras remained constant for both years).
In addition, the cameras have brought in about $2.1 million since being installed in 2008. The money not going to pay for the cameras operation has gone to improve traffic safety and to fund regional emergency rooms and services (which is exactly what the city said they would do with the money).
To put it bluntly, the red-light cameras have been very successful in preventing accidents (which is why they were installed). And less accidents means less deaths and injuries. That's a very good thing. Maybe it's time to consider installing the cameras in other city intersections -- at least the really busy ones.
Greedy lawyers dont like them. Thats what the controversy has always been about. No so many come to them to avoid the ticket and higher issurance charges now.
ReplyDelete