Their legality is still questioned in some states. A case was argued before Iowa’s Supreme Court only yesterday. But how about their efficacy?
Researchers at the University of South Florida Public Health have released a study that shows a significant spike in accidents at intersections that use cameras to catch light runners. Why? Drivers are more likely to slam on their brakes when the signal turns yellow, causing tailgaters to ram into them.
The spike is not insignificant. The USF study focused on Florida, and found that traffic fatalities caused by red-light running were not increasing. In fact, they account for less than 4% of the state’s yearly traffic deaths. From the study:
"The injury rate from red-light running crashes has dropped by a third in less than a decade, indicating red-light running crashes have been continually declining in Florida without the use of cameras."
Is this study applicable only to Florida–with its high number of elderly drivers? No, similar studies in Virginia, North Carolina and Ontario found similar increases in crashes at intersections where cameras were installed. As for studies that show a decrease in accidents, many were funded by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, a trade group for the insurance industry. Insurers tend to profit from red light cameras, because revenues go up with increased citations and accidents.
Cities profit from them, too. And this explains why they are proliferating throughout the U.S. Is your city risking your life just to kick up a little scratch from traffic violations?
Sources: Scientific American, USF, Billings Gazette, Des Moines RegisterGo Back to Top. Skip To: Start of Article.