4 ms·

>I like that idea but I do worry about it causing rear-end collisions. Chicago had a pretty significant red light camera deployment about six or seven years ag

>I like that idea but I do worry about it causing rear-end collisions. Chicago had a pretty significant red light camera deployment about six or seven years ago. Drivers used to be okay with blowing through a red that was a yellow a moment before in the past. Now everyone slams on their brakes when they see a yellow. According to time.com, "a 22% increase in injuries from rear-end accidents." So yes, you can expect more rear end collisions and injuries when traffic light enforcement automation breaks up traditional driving habits. Arguably, its okay to speed. Say doing 50 in a 40 when there's no traffic, like late at night. Why do we need a system to enforce this? I wish there was more fuzzy logic applied to traffic systems. Say a peak hours vs non-peak hours speed limit. Longer yellows during rush hour when everyone is stressed and potentially distracted. Instead we get hard and fast rules for all conditions, which doesn't make much sense. http://time.com/3643077/red-light-cams-rear-end-collisions-chicago/ http://time.com/3643077/red-light-cams-rear-end-collisions-c...

bryanlarsen 11y ago
You omitted the fact that it reduced injuries by 15% from side-swipe collisions. The Time omitted the fact that side-swipe collisions tend to have more serious injuries than rear-end collisions. They also failed to mention that red light cameras reduce the number of pedestrian and bicycle collisions.
- drzaiusapelord 11y ago
  The article certainly mentions the holistic view here: "Taken together, the study shows a statistically insignificant increase of injuries by 5%." Time's source is the Tribune: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/watchdog/redlight/ct-red-light-camera-safety-met-20141219-story.html#page=1 http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/watchdog/redlight/ct-red-... Emanuel has credited the cameras for a 47 percent reduction in dangerous right-angle, or "T-bone," crashes. But the Tribune study, which accounted for declining accident rates in recent years as well as other confounding factors, found cameras reduced right-angle crashes that caused injuries by just 15 percent. At the same time, the study calculated a corresponding 22 percent increase in rear-end crashes that caused injuries, illustrating a trade-off between the cameras' costs and benefits. The researchers also determined there is no safety benefit from cameras installed at intersections where there have been few crashes with injuries. Such accidents actually increased at those intersections after cameras went in, the study found, though the small number of crashes makes it difficult to determine whether the cameras were to blame. >They also failed to mention that red light cameras reduce the number of pedestrian and bicycle collisions. From what I can tell, no one has done a study on that and it sounds questionable to me to see any results there. In fact, Chicago has a big problem with cyclists hitting pedestrians since it added so many bike lanes. But that's a discussion for another time I suppose and a problem that'll probably take care of itself as cyclists and pedestrians get used to each other.
  - bryanlarsen 11y ago
    Still no mention of injury severity.

bryanlarsen 11y ago

You omitted the fact that it reduced injuries by 15% from side-swipe collisions. The Time omitted the fact that side-swipe collisions tend to have more serious injuries than rear-end collisions. They also failed to mention that red light cameras reduce the number of pedestrian and bicycle collisions.

drzaiusapelord 11y ago
The article certainly mentions the holistic view here: "Taken together, the study shows a statistically insignificant increase of injuries by 5%." Time's source is the Tribune: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/watchdog/redlight/ct-red-light-camera-safety-met-20141219-story.html#page=1 http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/watchdog/redlight/ct-red-... Emanuel has credited the cameras for a 47 percent reduction in dangerous right-angle, or "T-bone," crashes. But the Tribune study, which accounted for declining accident rates in recent years as well as other confounding factors, found cameras reduced right-angle crashes that caused injuries by just 15 percent. At the same time, the study calculated a corresponding 22 percent increase in rear-end crashes that caused injuries, illustrating a trade-off between the cameras' costs and benefits. The researchers also determined there is no safety benefit from cameras installed at intersections where there have been few crashes with injuries. Such accidents actually increased at those intersections after cameras went in, the study found, though the small number of crashes makes it difficult to determine whether the cameras were to blame. >They also failed to mention that red light cameras reduce the number of pedestrian and bicycle collisions. From what I can tell, no one has done a study on that and it sounds questionable to me to see any results there. In fact, Chicago has a big problem with cyclists hitting pedestrians since it added so many bike lanes. But that's a discussion for another time I suppose and a problem that'll probably take care of itself as cyclists and pedestrians get used to each other.
- bryanlarsen 11y ago
  Still no mention of injury severity.