Traffic violations in sharp decline

As usual just statement that brings nothing to the table. There is no statistics or even hints how he come to idea that this decrease is cased by cameras. Just another bureaucrat that says whatever it takes to justify his decisions.

As is it's just as good as saying that increase in selling of computer games can be contributed to decreasing number of incidents. After all it keeps a lot of young drivers off the roads. So all hail companies that make computer games.

Even as the IIHS recently attributed the nationwide reduction in vehicle injuries to vehicle safety improvements by manufacturers, they were careful to point out that driving has been down due to the economy.

This is a perfect time to jump out there with claims of all sorts that don't take into account & include other fundamental data.

I vote the result a function of the poor economy & people not wanting to contribute money money in a tough time to government.

Fred

"Leinbach also said the program is 'revenue neutral,' meaning the city will never pay more than it takes in. That's an important point, he said, because fewer violations means a reduction in revenue for the city."

This part makes me laugh. Heaven forbid cities should pay for their "safety enhancements."

If cities, counties, what have you, didn't get any revenue from these cameras, would they still be so enthused about installing them?

Of course not. In every instance that cameras program goes into red it is being scrapped right away. And nobody says even tiniest remark about need for safety. And when they are forced to cancel any of profitables cameras there is no talk about safety either. It is always about how much revenue city will loose after they shut down cameras. Hell, right now many cities even planing revenues from camera as budget income. It makes me wonder how far they will go when cameras stop meeting their quotas. Probably same like for example this one:

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/32/3283.asp

links to details in news text. In short:
Baytown, Texas has been caught using an illegally short yellow time at the latest city intersection to be monitored by a red light camera...
..."They didn't even bother to check the speed limit before they went ahead and put this camera up -- or did they?" BRLCC leader Byron Schirmbeck said. "Camera companies are notorious for taking advantage of poor engineering situations like this."...
...Confidential documents uncovered in a San Diego court trial prove that the city and its private vendor, now Affiliated Computer Services (ACS), colluded to install red light cameras only at intersections with short yellow times, thereby maximizing profits...

And where camera company makes more there is a bigger cut for a city too.

"When not sounding off about the benefits of roundabouts or the evils of poorly designed crosswalks, Retting has made red-light
cameras a near full-time pursuit. Other than Retting's, there have been few studies on red-light cameras. The most rigorous was
a 1995 study conducted by the Australian Road Research Board which examined red-light-camera intersection accidents for the five
years before and after the cameras were installed. The report concluded--unpopularly with camera manufacturers and police
departments--that "there has been no demonstrated value" of the red-light camera "as an effective countermeasure."
The Australian report, however, is rarely cited. Its most controversial finding, ironically, is one Retting grudgingly concedes--that red-light-camera intersections tend to see increases in rear-end accidents from people slamming on their brakes to avoid being ticketed. Oddly enough, most of the anti-camera forces' best arguments are buried deep in the bowels of Retting's own studies. While those who skim his conclusions to justify camera enforcement wouldn't know it, over the years Retting has asserted that too little yellow time causes people to run red lights inadvertently, that nearly four-fifths of red-light runners do so less than a second after the light changes, that over one-third of red-light running incidents are alcohol related, and that one-fourth of the people cited by the cameras aren't driving during the infraction."

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/00...

There have been no eggs hard boiled by Leinbach's red light cameras either. That makes as much sense as that fool's unsubstantiated statement.

According to the DES Moines Register, the city of Ceder Rapids has in the first seven months earned $600000 or $2900 a day from the cameras. Of the 27500 citations 12800 have been paid and the company is paid $30 per paid ticket.
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2...

is the Cedar Bayou Lynchburg Road at Garth Road camera mentioned in thenewspaper.com article about Baytown in the camera file

I found these
RLC - I-10 & Garth
RLC - Lanier & Alexander
RLC - Baker & Decker
RLC - Garth & Hwy 146
RLC - Garth & Baker
RLC - Business 146 & Wyoming
RLC - Hwy 146 & Alexander

This is the typical response of a bureaucrat, they think that the world will stop turning without the regulations they force on us.

I too agree that the decline in accidents has to do with people driving less because they got no job and has nothing to do with cameras.

At the rate they are putting traffic light cameras up they are going to render the Red Light Cameras file at POI-Factory obsolete, heck the GPSr will be on a never ending alert, pretty soon Maryann (Miss-Poi) is going to have to modify the file to alert on the corners where there are no cameras.

I've had to decrease the distance threshold on my GPS a couple times now because of all the RLCs that are popping up.

Ditto on that,especially in Maryland! Guess they luv the revenue!

It's all about money. pretty soon there is going to Stop sign cameras everywhere like in California.

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/18/1846.asp

Red light cameras are good if there are no witness to accident and other driver states it was you not him who ran the red light. Camera can save you a heap of money!

Can the police, or you for that matter, ask if a ticket was issued to the other driver?