Virginia: Short Yellows, Red Light Cameras Increase Accidents

Can you say Class Action Suit!!!

Fred

But they are safer accidents, aren't they?

Let's see...

The National Motor Association opposes red light cameras, and they do a study that indicates that RLCs do not improve safety. And this is big news in thenewspaper.com.

But the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, which supports RLCs, does a study and finds that the cameras improve safety (http://www.iihs.org/iihs/news/desktopnews/study-provides-mor...).

Of course, readers can choose whichever report they believe is more credible.

And the discussion continues

Reading the articles, this really isn't a red light camera issue but a state engineer issue: setting yellow light times illegally short. The short yellow is the likely source of the bulk of the accidents. The presence of the red light cameras is sensationalist reporting and, as noted, is incidental to the true issue.

Your comparison doesn't jive. The article you provided talks about reducing red light running. It's not comparing accidents, whether they've increased or decreased at red light camera intersections.

I simply cannot believe that "shorter yellows" cause accidents.

I can believe that shorter yellows are simply unethical, and they do cause more red-light running or violations. But accidents, that's bogus.

What causes accidents, are bad drivers.

If I stop for a red light, and you rear end me, how is it that we blame the traffic signal, and not the fact that you were unable to control your vehicle?

It was my birthday. I played the daily numbers and won $1,000. Therefore, if I play the daily numbers on my birthday, I'll win a prize.

TRUE, TRUE, unrelated.

A red light camera was installed. The yellow lights were adjusted. There are more accidents at that intersection after the camera was installed.

TRUE, TRUE, unrelated.

I do think that short yellows can cause an increase in accidents, but so can doing anything that will cause people to go through a light no red because it it causes an unexpected action. There might be some marginal increase in people being rear-ended, but if you're getting rear ended at an intersection, the person behind you isn't paying attention anyways, and it probably would have happened whether the light was a short yellow, long yellow, or even green with a kid in the street you had to stop for.

The telling test isn't whether or not accidents increase at the intersection, but whether that increase is significant. I doubt many of the people that are claiming there is an increase in accidents are doing the math to figure out of the increase is statistically significant. An increase from 3 accidents per year to 6 accidents per year seems like it's a HUGE change right? The rate doubled? But if you find out there are 50k cars going through that intersection each day, then it becomes pretty marginal very quickly!

The people know that the yellow lights have been shortened and when they approach the intersection and they see the light going to yellow, they slam on their brakes to prevent getting a red-light citation. This results in the person behind them doing a rear-end collision. This then results in the person receiving a citation for following too closely or for an assured clear distance violation. Hence, increased accidents resulting from the red-light cameras.

"The people" who know the yellows have been shortened, but "the person behind them" do not - otherwise they would not have been following so close, or not accelerating to follow the lead car through the yellow.

If you want to make an assumption about "The people", don't you have to make it about all the people - not just those in the first cars approaching yellow lights?

on both sides. thanks

... for me to stay out of Virginia wherever possible.

"No Turn on Red" signs hidden behind trees, headlights REQUIRED on long, lonely stretches of road, 35-mph speed limits miles from any cities or towns, and now this. I thought I had it bad in my home state. I sure don't need any more headaches. If you think I'm kidding, come drive in Ann Arbor.

http://www.mlive.com/news/ann-arbor/index.ssf/2013/10/some_a...

--

it's the dog's fault

You're right in the sense that one driver rear-ending another is normally the one at fault, even if the driver of the car in front had to slam on his brakes, and I'm sure that accounts for a large number of accidents at this particular intersection. And you're also right that shortening yellows below national standards, presumably to increase ticket revenue, is unethical. When you combine yellow lights shorter than the recommended duration with speed cameras, an increase in rear-end collisions is one foreseeable consequence.

But if you don't like the word "cause," would you accept the term "contributing factor"?

Think about it. The shorter the interval, the more people will fail to stop in time. Older folks for one take longer to react to a yellow and apply the brake. If you keep shortening the yellow light half a second at a time each week until there is no possible way for a driver going even 5 mph under the speed limit to react to the yellow and stop the car before entering the intersection--and that is going to happen at some point--picture one second yellows--the accident rate is going to climb at that intersection, not just from rear-end collisions, but also from t-bone collisions.

If they really want to enhance intersection safety, they should lengthen the yellows, certainly to recommended standards, even longer at problem intersections. Cameras are more about easy municipal revenue than safety.

I see nothing wrong with this. There are some state highways in both Connecticut and Massachusetts that have this requirement. I don't recall with certainty, but I believe New Hampshire also has some highways where headlights are required.

Just another reason for the authorities to pull you over to find out how your day is going and to make it worse.

--

it's the dog's fault

There have been numerous places (e.g. San Diego) where yellow cycles have been decreased at intersections with cameras. Cameras need to make revenue and shortening yellow intervals supports this goal. It's all about revenue, I mean "safety."

It seems to me that escalation of the red light cameras, etc. at intersections, etc. located seemingly arbitrarily throughout a city and different cities is likely to create a psychological effect on many drivers concerned about being unwittingly photographed with a possible violation and ticket here, there and everywhere and could distract many of these drivers from focusing meaningfully on the traffic or the street and therefore could contribute to causing accidents because of that.

I tried for quite a while but could not come up with an article that said that San Diego had decreased yellow cycles at intersections with cameras.

@telecomdigest2, where did you get your information?

I think you are being reasonable, and I agree.

No question, even someone like me who is a proponent of red light cams, wholeheartedly agrees that fooling around with the yellow is a negative and is wrong. What we should have is the timing of lights. Again, I mentioned my friend saying he drove from Long Island into Manhattan with no red lights--he challenged himself to drive the proper speed. Now this was in the early 90's--I don't know if it's possible anymore, and it's certainly not if people are shortening yellows.

I just think that there is most certainly an element who simply blames technology, because they have to change their behavior as a result.

I'm not that comfortable driving around speed cams--this weekend, I followed the speed limit while passing through MD. The funny thing is, nobody was driving close to me or annoyed with my going 35 in a 35. Do that up here where I live, and you'll get people honking and attempting a pass on a double yellow. And that behavior is non-existent in DC/MD, thanks to controls and technology....

I live in VA and work and drive in Newport News. I wonder about the accident "Facts" talked about in the article.

All 3 of the intersections have 4 "dual" left turn lanes.

I don't know how many times I have been making a left turn at one of those intersections and have been cut off by someone changing lanes in front of me, or have had someone "Drift" over into my lane. I'd like to see the accidents broken down into "side swipes" and "rear end" collisions. I bet there are more side swipes than rear enders.

Newport News (or any part of Hampton Roads) is not a very good place to cite accident "Facts" from. There is a very high percentage of the population in the military here. Cruising around the area will allow you to see License plates from all 50 states (probably in one day), lots of Canadian plates on I-64, also Central America, the Caribbean and yes - even tags from Europe. Hampton Roads is a major port as well as having the largest Naval Base in the world.

When you combine all the different driving habits here - it makes for one big mess.

When I go to work I get of at the 35th street ramp on I-664 and make a left turn at the bottom. It's a one-way to one-way intersection. In VA, you can make a left turn on red at a one-way to one-way intersection - as long as there is no sign prohibiting it (or you're going the wrong way - see cars going the wrong way all the time in downtown Newport News). There are 2 signs at that intersection saying "Left Turn On Red". One on the TL bar and one on a pole next to the curb. People still stop and wait for the light to change to green before they turn. The TLs on the one-way Huntington Ave. are "Timed", and of course, if you wait for the green light to make the left, you will get a red light at 34th street and Huntington! If you honk your horn (gently of course), they don't have a clue. Only if they see someone in front of them make a left on red does it dawn on them that it's legal.

Pay attention, don't "push your luck" at Traffic Lights and your insurance rates will stay low.

Well, if you don't turn your lights on you're giving them probable cause to pull you over and asking you about your day. Perhaps I'm odd here, but I'd rather give the police officer one less reason to pull me over. Therefore, I'd just as soon turn on my lights.

^ Buy a car with daytime running lights!

By the way, this is standard in new cars in Canada, and you have to manually switch the lights off.

I have never been pulled over here or in the States because my lights are on during the day.

By the way, this is standard in new cars in Canada, and you have to manually switch the lights off.

I have never been pulled over here or in the States because my lights are on during the day.