Houston Coalition Against Red Light Cameras

1.     It is a fact that RLCs reduce violations, but this does not decrease accidents.  The reason for this needs further study.  The theory is that RLCs primarily ticket the wrong people.

See the “Accidents” page.

2.     The basic problem is that revenue inspired law enforcement encourages overzealous measures.  Ideally the amount of revenue raised should reflect the seriousness of the violation.  RLCs generate a lot of revenue that is way out of proportion to the seriousness of the violation.  Using RLCs to enforce the full stop requirement when turning right on a red light generates much more revenue than the straight-through violations, but urban right turn violations are only one-eighth as likely to cause an accident.  IIHS makes no mention of this abuse.

ftp://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot-info/trf/crash_statistics/2008/2008_19.pdf

3.     The increase in rear-end collisions accounts for the greater number of crashes after RLCs are activated.  This is a result of asymmetric driver reaction to yellow lights - those in the know often jam on their breaks at every yellow light, while those not in the know do not.  This split second of confusion causes rear end accidents which can be very dangerous.  In other words, when a driver approaches a traffic light that just turned from green to yellow his stop or go situation is like a no-win crap shoot.  If his guess is wrong he will either get a ticket or he will increase his risk of being rear-ended. If his guess is right he just gets another chance to guess again at the next RLC.

4.     Some five years ago the National Motorists Association offered a $10,000 challenge to any community that is willing to try proving that red light cameras are more effective than other engineering measures in reducing violations. To date here have been zero takers.

http://www.motorists.org/photoenforce/home/10000-ticket-camera-challenge/

5.     The way RLCs are set up, even good drivers will eventually get a ticket.  An experienced driver will approach an unfamiliar RLC traffic light at a slower than normal speed.  This gives him a better chance to avoid a ticket, but it does not guarantee that he will not get one because when the light turns yellow he has no way to know precisely where he is in relation to the  decision point.  He is still subject to the risk of making a wrong stop or go guess.  The only way of being 100% certain that you will not get an RLC ticket is to have the good fortune of being stopped (perhaps in heavy traffic) when the light turns yellow and then deciding to remain stopped or slowly moving up to the intersection without making any attempt to beat the red.  Wrong guesses by all drivers even good ones are, given enough time, inevitable.  Since a driver’s location in relation to the decision point is a random event when a green light turns yellow, wrong decisions to keep going will also be random.  These violations occur very early in the red cycle and are not significant causes of accidents. They also account for up to 85% of the RLC citations issued.  Thus strict enforcement of the red light law using RLCs makes no allowance for human limitations and are predominately a pernicious method of taxation by random selection.

Also see the “Accidents” page.

6.     One thing RLCs do well is provide valuable photographic evidence for assessing fault when an accident occurs.  If this were their sole use, no one would object.