Florida: Review Shows Increased Red Light Cameras Accidents
Fri, 09/07/2012 - 10:55am
 16 years
|
A review of the accident history at red light camera intersections in Hallandale Beach, Florida suggests automated ticketing machines have failed to yield an overall safety benefit since Arizona-based American Traffic Solutions (ATS) began paying for the right to issue tickets and collect fines at a pair of intersections more than two years ago.
The overall number of accidents went up 46 percent with the greatest increase in rear-end collisions.
surprised?
Why doesn't this surprise me??
Garmin Nuvi 885T
Tailgaters
It wasn't the lights and cameras that made the accidents but idiots who tailgate and do not pay attention.
Follow the links
To get a sense of this one, you should follow the link to thenewspaper.com article and then to the report by Paul Henry on which thenewspaper.com article was based. That is at
http://thenewspaper.com/rlc/docs/2012/fl-hallandale.pdf
Henry did a good job with the sparse data he had - only two cameras, one of which had limited data, the other which showed that crashes in the intersection itself went from 4 before installation to 0 after.
I'd like to see other
I'd like to see other newspapers doing this type of analysis in major cities.
So?
A review of the accident history at red light camera intersections in Hallandale Beach, Florida suggests automated ticketing machines have failed to yield an overall safety benefit since Arizona-based American Traffic Solutions (ATS) began paying for the right to issue tickets and collect fines at a pair of intersections more than two years ago.
The overall number of accidents went up 46 percent with the greatest increase in rear-end collisions.
http://thenewspaper.com/news/38/3890.asp
So what else is new ?
"Ceterum autem censeo, Carthaginem esse delendam" “When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.”
Not True!
Many of these false reports blame the camera but fail to report that tailgating is the real culprit.
A person does not have to allow a tailgater the right to blow through an intersection at any speed so that is not a legitimate excuse.
IF YOU ARE CAUGHT BY CAMERA OR A POLICEMAN THEN BASICALLY YOU ARE GUILTY UNLESS YOU CAN PROVE YOUR INNOCENCE.
lame
You know folks, the same lame argument was made against ABS brakes. When you get down to brass tacks, it's user error.
But we all learned way back when that it's easy to use stats to show anything that you want to show. Because many do not question the reliability or validity.
Results Take Time
I'll be curious to see what happens as time passes and we get a good trend line. I wouldn't be surprised if the number of accidents spikes then drops. Hopefully the newspaper will do a follow up.
Lame?
Numerous studies, both by the Insurance Institute and the feds, have shown that ABS's actually increase stopping distance under some conditions. I personally know of two people who have either been involved in a wreck or blown through a stop sign because of their ABS. Sand on a paved road will greatly increase stopping distance over a non-ABS equipped vehicle. Gravel roads and loose snow are two other conditions where ABS vehicles suffer braking performance reductions. The reason for this is that a sliding tire tends to push up a damn of material in front of it giving greater stopping force than a rolling tire. They also tend to kick in and reduce braking at times when you would accept one locked wheel so that the other three could stop you. An experienced driver can actually outperform an ABS equipped vehicle in most incidents. There is a reason why race cars don't use ABS.
As for increased wrecks at camera-monitored intersections, there is an increase in the total number of wrecks but only at some intersections. There are several reasons for this, shorter yellow light times to increase revenue, ridiculously high fines making people reluctant to chance a ticket and driver inattention to conditions by following too closely. Only one of those reasons can be called "driver error" and that wouldn't have much effect if it wasn't for the other two.
ABS is an attempt to compensate for inexperienced drivers using technology that is only partly successful. Red light cameras are a method of increasing the amount of money politicians can spend that has proven to be highly successful.
Why Am I
Why am I not surprised.
Until the deployment of redlight & speed cameras become a local issue for the re-election of politicians, the public will continue to be screwed - & on a regular basis.
These devices continue to spread in Maryland leading me to believe that the public enjoys getting screwed!
Fred
Not surpised
Not surpised, I would love to see more studies really try to examine the effects of red light cameras.
Dah!!!! Dohh!!!
Dah!!!! Dohh!!!
nuvi 250 --> 1250T --> 265T Lost my 1250T
What are you saying?
Numerous studies, both by the Insurance Institute and the feds, have shown that ABS's actually increase stopping distance under some conditions. I personally know of two people who have either been involved in a wreck or blown through a stop sign because of their ABS. Sand on a paved road will greatly increase stopping distance over a non-ABS equipped vehicle. Gravel roads and loose snow are two other conditions where ABS vehicles suffer braking performance reductions. The reason for this is that a sliding tire tends to push up a damn of material in front of it giving greater stopping force than a rolling tire. They also tend to kick in and reduce braking at times when you would accept one locked wheel so that the other three could stop you. An experienced driver can actually outperform an ABS equipped vehicle in most incidents. There is a reason why race cars don't use ABS.
I think you are commenting on johnnatash4 post above, but I do not see the relevance. A quick look at IIHS does not seem to make comments on "increas[ing] stopping distances" in current implementation. see http://www.iihs.org/research/qanda/antilock.aspx
How are you relating ABS to cameras?
"user error"
Numerous studies, both by the Insurance Institute and the feds, have shown that ABS's actually increase stopping distance under some conditions. I personally know of two people who have either been involved in a wreck or blown through a stop sign because of their ABS. Sand on a paved road will greatly increase stopping distance over a non-ABS equipped vehicle. Gravel roads and loose snow are two other conditions where ABS vehicles suffer braking performance reductions. The reason for this is that a sliding tire tends to push up a damn of material in front of it giving greater stopping force than a rolling tire. They also tend to kick in and reduce braking at times when you would accept one locked wheel so that the other three could stop you. An experienced driver can actually outperform an ABS equipped vehicle in most incidents. There is a reason why race cars don't use ABS.
I think you are commenting on johnnatash4 post above, but I do not see the relevance. A quick look at IIHS does not seem to make comments on "increas[ing] stopping distances" in current implementation. see http://www.iihs.org/research/qanda/antilock.aspx
How are you relating ABS to cameras?
It wasn't jackj180 that was relating ABS to cameras, but
You know folks, the same lame argument was made against ABS brakes. When you get down to brass tacks, it's user error.
?
Numerous studies, both by the Insurance Institute and the feds, have shown that ABS's actually increase stopping distance under some conditions. I personally know of two people who have either been involved in a wreck or blown through a stop sign because of their ABS. Sand on a paved road will greatly increase stopping distance over a non-ABS equipped vehicle. Gravel roads and loose snow are two other conditions where ABS vehicles suffer braking performance reductions. The reason for this is that a sliding tire tends to push up a damn of material in front of it giving greater stopping force than a rolling tire. They also tend to kick in and reduce braking at times when you would accept one locked wheel so that the other three could stop you. An experienced driver can actually outperform an ABS equipped vehicle in most incidents. There is a reason why race cars don't use ABS.
I think you are commenting on johnnatash4 post above, but I do not see the relevance. A quick look at IIHS does not seem to make comments on "increas[ing] stopping distances" in current implementation. see http://www.iihs.org/research/qanda/antilock.aspx
How are you relating ABS to cameras?
It wasn't jackj180 that was relating ABS to cameras, but
You know folks, the same lame argument was made against ABS brakes. When you get down to brass tacks, it's user error.
kurzemnieks had two posts (see http://www.poi-factory.com/node/37572/#comment-302062 and
http://www.poi-factory.com/node/37572/#comment-303595 ).
I thought he was saying that a fair amount of the blame went to drivers rather than cameras when he said
Many of these false reports blame the camera but fail to report that tailgating is the real culprit.
I interpreted johnnatash4 as making an analogy with ABS and users who claimed that ABS did not work. (see http://www.poi-factory.com/node/37572/#comment-303607 )
Jackj180 then made the statement I quoted.
I questioned the characterization Jackj180 made of the IIHS and provided a link from the IIHS that did not strongly the statement.
I asked how he was relating ABS and cameras because I was curious. I was hoping to learn more.
Did I make a “User Error”?
It's ridiculous
I too see this in MD. The Baltimore city government is so corrupt that they are always going broke, so they've decided speed and red light cameras are a nice new way to make money, which then promptly disappears.
Sorry about that
Numerous studies, both by the Insurance Institute and the feds, have shown that ABS's actually increase stopping distance under some conditions.
I think you are commenting on johnnatash4 post above, but I do not see the relevance. A quick look at IIHS does not seem to make comments on "increas[ing] stopping distances" in current implementation. see http://www.iihs.org/research/qanda/antilock.aspx
How are you relating ABS to cameras?
I wasn't relating ABS to cameras, johnnatash4 was in his post. I just forgot to quote his comments, sorry.
As for the web site you link to, well what can I say he repeats the ABS legend. I stand by my comments but you are welcome to believe whatever you want.
Thanks
...
I wasn't relating ABS to cameras, johnnatash4 was in his post. I just forgot to quote his comments, sorry.
As for the web site you link to, well what can I say he repeats the ABS legend. I stand by my comments but you are welcome to believe whatever you want.
for the response. I am not sure I can find enough data to say how good ABS is. In the link I cited from the IIHS dated July 2012, they say
Why don't antilocks reduce stopping distances as much on dry roads as wet ones?
Adequate braking is easy to achieve on dry roads with or without antilock brakes. Even if wheels lock, the coefficient of friction between tires and road surface still is relatively high, so a vehicle stops relatively quickly. It is even possible on some surfaces to stop sooner without antilocks than with them, although such instances are rare. (emphasis added) They occur, for example, when loosely packed snow or gravel creates a "dam" effect in front of locked wheels, shortening the stopping distance more than antilocks could.
I think that overall ABS has been beneficial.
Most intersections here with a RLC ...
It wasn't the lights and cameras that made the accidents but idiots who tailgate and do not pay attention.
... also have a walk/don't walk signal with a count down timer. When the timer for the walk signal hits zero the yellow light activates, then red. Now what happens is that folks who are aware of this start to stop while the light is still green if the timer is low enough, to avoid possibly getting nailed.
Wonder how many rear end accidents were because of this factor.
. 2 Garmin DriveSmart 61 LMT-S, Nuvi 2689, 2 Nuvi 2460, Zumo 550, Zumo 450, Uniden R3 radar detector with GPS built in, includes RLC info. Uconnect 430N Garmin based, built into my Jeep. .
Do we disagree?
...
I wasn't relating ABS to cameras,
for the response. I am not sure I can find enough data to say how good ABS is. In the link I cited from the IIHS dated July 2012, they say
It is even possible on some surfaces to stop sooner without antilocks than with them, although such instances are rare. (emphasis added) They occur, for example, when loosely packed snow or gravel creates a "dam" effect in front of locked wheels, shortening the stopping distance more than antilocks could.
I think that overall ABS has been beneficial.
Isn't that what I said? I have never said that Anti Lock Brake Systems are not any good, just that they are an attempt to use technology to compensate for inexperienced drivers. I stand by that statement!
As for instances of increased stopping distance caused by the ABS being rare, I guess that's going to depend on where you live. Here in NW Ohio, you will run into loosely packed snow several times each winter but I will agree that it is very rare in Florida. Southern Michigan has a LOT of gravel roads but in NW Ohio they are rare.
An experienced driver who pays attention to his vehicle can out preform an ABS in most conditions. That said, it is becoming almost impossible for an inexperienced driver to learn the needed skills to do this using today's cars. Depending on technology to make up for your own shortcomings will end up biting you in the a--.
I repeat, "There is a reason why ABS isn't used on race cars."
Let's stay on topic, please
jack...you're threadjacking.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Threadjack
I understand... you didn't bring up ABS... but the person who *mentioned* ABS was on topic. The subsequent discussion has been off-topic. This thread is not about ABS. It's about red light cameras and safety vs. revenue. I don't think you're trolling. I'm sure you're sincere in your concerns about ABS, and it's obviously a topic you've thought a lot about, but please start a new thread if you want to debate the merits of ABS.
JMoo On
I'm done
dagarmin, I had already made up my mind that my last post was going to be my last on the subject. However, why are you jumping on me? I didn't bring up ABS nor did I compare it to cameras and I only responded to comments by others. If you are going to accuse me of hijacking the thread, others are just as guilty so why not accuse them as well?
Don't answer that, I don't want to be accused of hijacking the ABS thread as well. But do think about your accusation please.
Not the point
It wasn't the lights and cameras that made the accidents but idiots who tailgate and do not pay attention.
True but only in the limited sense that in a rear-end accident, the driver of the vehicle in back is almost always the one held liable for the accident.
The point is that officials agreeing to install these lights tell their communities that they're doing it to enhance *safety*. If they were doing it for safety and they saw statistics like these, they'd immediately take the enforcement cameras out. But the lights will stay because they're doing it to increase revenue and to pick up campaign contributions from the automated traffic enforcement industry.
JMoo On
People need to read these links
Not the Point
...
The point is that officials agreeing to install these lights tell their communities that they're doing it to enhance *safety*. If they were doing it for safety and they saw statistics like these, they'd immediately take the enforcement cameras out. But the lights will stay because they're doing it to increase revenue and to pick up campaign contributions from the automated traffic enforcement industry.
People need to read these links before succumbing to their confirmation biases.
From the link
Based on this information, automated for-profit lawenforcement at these intersections can be
said to have had a positive to no effect on red light running crashes (four (4) total; one DUI
causation) and a negative effect on other crashes, notably the total number of crashes and rear
end crashes. Additionally, the revenue aspect of them has been shown to be far less than what
other cities are reporting and Hallandale Beach appears to be operating at a loss for 2011 and
so far in 2012.
In summary, there is no safety benefit to the citizens, and there is no financial benefit to the
taxpayer due to automated for-profit law enforcement. To the contrary, there appears to be a
recurring burden to the taxpayer each month.
Plus, we are dealing here with a situation where the sparsity of data should not be used to make broad based statements (two interesections and two years of data)
?
People need to read these links before succumbing to their confirmation biases.
Or what? What's going to happen to them?
Florida: Review Shows Increased Red Light Cameras Accidents
I will not turn right at a red stop light till the light turns green at those intersections with cameras. It ticks off folks behind me,
TSK TSK!
Continued poor decision making is one outcome
?
People need to read these links before succumbing to their confirmation biases.
Or what? What's going to happen to them?
Wikipedia says it better than I can
Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or myside bias) is a tendency of people to favor information that confirms their beliefs or hypotheses.[Note 1][1] People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way. The effect is stronger for emotionally charged issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs. For example, in reading about gun control, people usually prefer sources that affirm their existing attitudes. They also tend to interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing position. Biased search, interpretation and memory have been invoked to explain attitude polarization (when a disagreement becomes more extreme even though the different parties are exposed to the same evidence), belief perseverance (when beliefs persist after the evidence for them is shown to be false), the irrational primacy effect (a greater reliance on information encountered early in a series) and illusory correlation (when people falsely perceive an association between two events or situations).
A series of experiments in the 1960s suggested that people are biased toward confirming their existing beliefs. Later work re-interpreted these results as a tendency to test ideas in a one-sided way, focusing on one possibility and ignoring alternatives. In certain situations, this tendency can bias people's conclusions. Explanations for the observed biases include wishful thinking and the limited human capacity to process information. Another explanation is that people show confirmation bias because they are weighing up the costs of being wrong, rather than investigating in a neutral, scientific way.
Confirmation biases contribute to overconfidence in personal beliefs and can maintain or strengthen beliefs in the face of contrary evidence. Poor decisions due to these biases have been found in military, political, and organizational contexts. [emphasis added}
No surprise
to me.
With God, all things are possible. ——State motto of the Great State of Ohio