It looks like the red light camera kept these motorists safe.
I find it funny that when cities install red light cameras and the rate of accidents increase, we are told that they are “non-significant” rear end collisions. It looks like this “non-significant” collision happened when the first car, probably in the dilemma zone where a motorist has no good choice as to what action to take, made a panic stop to keep from getting a red light camera ticket. The second driver, knowing that the first was past the critical point, fully expected the first driver to proceed through the yellow light. Had the first driver proceeded, he would have received a red light camera ticket.
My guess is that nobody was hurt in this “non-significant” crash caused by a red light camera. The reason that I think nobody was hurt is because we are told that red light cameras will keep us safe. You see, the truth is that these red light cameras will not keep anybody safe. These red light cameras will not apprehend a bad guy that robs a bank, they will not push a pedestrian out of the way of a speeding car, nor will they render life saving care after the crash that they cause. The only thing that a red light camera can do is take a photo of the crash when it does happen.
On another note, I have received a few emails from another guy in the Canton, Ohio area that is also against the plans to install red light cameras and speed cameras in Canton, Ohio. Please visit his red light camera blog. Be sure to read his “about me” page. I get a kick out of how he chose his domain/username.
March 5th, 2009 at 9:13 am
The fact that Richard Retting is considered the scientific authority on automated enforcement drives people like Greg Mauz (author of “Camera Enforcement: Developing the Factual Picture”) around the bend, since the Institute is “wholly supported,” as its literature explains, by 79 auto insurance companies. Taking Retting’s word on the safety benefits of camera enforcement, say the critics, is a bit like trusting the Tobacco Institute that smoking increases lung capacity.
Curious about some of Retting’s crash conclusions, the National Motorists Association’s Jim Kadison secured accident data for the red-light-camera intersections Retting used in his latest Oxnard report. Retting had estimated that the use of red-light cameras had resulted in a tiny 3 percent increase in rear-enders at all signalized intersections. But after expanding the definition of an intersection to include 100 feet into the approaches, where rear-end accidents would logically occur, Kadison found that during the time of Retting’s study, rear-end crashes at red-light camera intersections increased from 18 (before installation) to 156, for a total rear-end accident increase of 767 percent.