4 ms·

How is it an injustice to make people pay when they make our roads unsafe? People drive reckless, ignore speed limits, race over intersections in the last poss

How is it an injustice to make people pay when they make our roads unsafe? People drive reckless, ignore speed limits, race over intersections in the last possible moment, ... ... and then it's an injustice when someone fines them?

erentz 10y ago
Chicago seems to have also reduced the amber phase to an absolute minimum also in order to increase the likelihood of someone hitting a red. This is anecdotal, but go there and see. And this seems to contribute to some of the very scary driving behavior you see in Chicago so it's likely that in fact this is causing accidents more than punishing bad drivers.
TulliusCicero 10y ago
It's not an injustice inherently, it's just a moral hazard that may lead to injustice (or other poor behavior). E.g. I remember hearing about a city that, after implementing red light cameras, shortened the yellow time, thus technically increasing the number of people who ran reds and gaining revenue (at the expense of actual safety since short yellows are more dangerous).
- ascagnel_ 10y ago
  Some of the comments in the linked thread go into this, but nobody was able to provide hard evidence of short yellows.
Karunamon 10y ago
You're taking the same logical leap that the RLC companies are. Sometimes running lights and ignoring speed limits is more safe than the alternative, depending on circumstances. The cameras don't care about your circumstances or safety, they only care whether you're over a line or not. Safety is just a sorta-value-added benefit that may or may not come with installation.
cwyers 10y ago
So, that's an open question -- do the sorts of infractions that red light cameras catch make roads less safe? Does the installation of red light cameras make roads more safe? As it turns out, no. The installation of red light cameras in Chicago has actually increased rear-end collisions that result in injury by 22%.[1] And that's what I mean by moral hazard. Revenue generation by these means changes the city's incentive. Rather than having traffic laws and enforcement designed to increase safety, you have laws and enforcement designed to turn the greatest part of your city's population into offenders as possible, in order to maximize your revenue generation, at the expense of public safety. And it's an injustice because the well-off simply pay their fines and move on, while the poor end up trapped in a neverending cycle of fines and punishments, because the inability to pay the first fine leads to a cascade of involvement with a court system pressured to produce revenue, not justice or fairness. 1) https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/12/major-chicago-study-finds-red-light-cameras-not-safer-cause-more-rear-end-injuries/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/12/major-chicago-st...
- wcummings 10y ago
  >As it turns out, no. The installation of red light cameras in Chicago has actually increased rear-end collisions that result in injury by 22%. You're misrepresenting the results of the study. The study recommended the continuation of the program. The rear-end collisions were less severe than types of collisions it reduced, it was a safety improvement overall. From the findings section of the actual study (emphasis mine): >Quantitative studies conducted in this project demonstrate significant safety benefits of the current RLC program. As a result, it is appropriate to recommend continuation of the program. Most of the intersections have experienced an improvement in safety, particularly in terms of severe angle and turn crashes, albeit with an accompanying increase in less severe rear-end crashes. The safety benefits extend beyond the immediate vicinity of the RLC intersections, evidenced by a significant spillover effect. However, some intersections appear to experience no significant safety impact. Recognizing that crashes are the result of complex interactions amongst many factors, and subject to considerable randomness, these deviations should be used as opportunities for detailed investigation and learning to design and deploy more effective automated enforcement programs http://www.transportation.northwestern.edu/docs/research/RLC-Report-Web.pdf http://www.transportation.northwestern.edu/docs/research/RLC... Similar benefits have been demonstrated in other cities. Doesn't mean it will work in every city, but there is evidence it works in Chicago.

erentz 10y ago

Chicago seems to have also reduced the amber phase to an absolute minimum also in order to increase the likelihood of someone hitting a red. This is anecdotal, but go there and see. And this seems to contribute to some of the very scary driving behavior you see in Chicago so it's likely that in fact this is causing accidents more than punishing bad drivers.

TulliusCicero 10y ago

It's not an injustice inherently, it's just a moral hazard that may lead to injustice (or other poor behavior). E.g. I remember hearing about a city that, after implementing red light cameras, shortened the yellow time, thus technically increasing the number of people who ran reds and gaining revenue (at the expense of actual safety since short yellows are more dangerous).

ascagnel_ 10y ago
Some of the comments in the linked thread go into this, but nobody was able to provide hard evidence of short yellows.

Karunamon 10y ago

You're taking the same logical leap that the RLC companies are. Sometimes running lights and ignoring speed limits is more safe than the alternative, depending on circumstances. The cameras don't care about your circumstances or safety, they only care whether you're over a line or not. Safety is just a sorta-value-added benefit that may or may not come with installation.

cwyers 10y ago

So, that's an open question -- do the sorts of infractions that red light cameras catch make roads less safe? Does the installation of red light cameras make roads more safe? As it turns out, no. The installation of red light cameras in Chicago has actually increased rear-end collisions that result in injury by 22%.[1] And that's what I mean by moral hazard. Revenue generation by these means changes the city's incentive. Rather than having traffic laws and enforcement designed to increase safety, you have laws and enforcement designed to turn the greatest part of your city's population into offenders as possible, in order to maximize your revenue generation, at the expense of public safety. And it's an injustice because the well-off simply pay their fines and move on, while the poor end up trapped in a neverending cycle of fines and punishments, because the inability to pay the first fine leads to a cascade of involvement with a court system pressured to produce revenue, not justice or fairness. 1) https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/12/major-chicago-study-finds-red-light-cameras-not-safer-cause-more-rear-end-injuries/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/12/major-chicago-st...

wcummings 10y ago
>As it turns out, no. The installation of red light cameras in Chicago has actually increased rear-end collisions that result in injury by 22%. You're misrepresenting the results of the study. The study recommended the continuation of the program. The rear-end collisions were less severe than types of collisions it reduced, it was a safety improvement overall. From the findings section of the actual study (emphasis mine): >Quantitative studies conducted in this project demonstrate significant safety benefits of the current RLC program. As a result, it is appropriate to recommend continuation of the program. Most of the intersections have experienced an improvement in safety, particularly in terms of severe angle and turn crashes, albeit with an accompanying increase in less severe rear-end crashes. The safety benefits extend beyond the immediate vicinity of the RLC intersections, evidenced by a significant spillover effect. However, some intersections appear to experience no significant safety impact. Recognizing that crashes are the result of complex interactions amongst many factors, and subject to considerable randomness, these deviations should be used as opportunities for detailed investigation and learning to design and deploy more effective automated enforcement programs http://www.transportation.northwestern.edu/docs/research/RLC-Report-Web.pdf http://www.transportation.northwestern.edu/docs/research/RLC... Similar benefits have been demonstrated in other cities. Doesn't mean it will work in every city, but there is evidence it works in Chicago.