[geeks] Stuff fo' sale

[Phil Stracchino]

Jonathan C. Patschke wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Aug 2006, Patrick Giagnocavo wrote:
> 
>>> I'm sure each "speeder cam" is really a source of revenue,
>> Here in the USA, there are many documented cases where the duration of
>> the "yellow" traffic light was actually shortened at those
>> intersections having a stoplight camera, in order to increase revenue.
>>
>> Of course a shorter yellow in this case means that people etiher brake
>> harder or they speed up to avoid being caught out on the yellow.
>>
>> Which increases the chance of an accident.
> 
> That's because they were put into place to be a revenue source, rather
> than to increase public safety.

More specifically, to be a revenue source for Lockheed Martin or one of
the handful of other suppliers.

Here's basically how it works:  Lockheed Martin approaches a city or
municipality with a proposal for revenue enhancement.  The contract
specifies a certain minimum monthly revenue for the supplier, and the
rest goes into the city's coffers.  The city thinks this sounds
wonderful, and slaps cameras all over the place.  They then find that
the rate of red-light running is grossly exaggerated, and that the
cameras don't bring in enough revenue to cover the vendor's guaranteed
monthly revenue.  "Tough shit," says Lockheed Martin (or whoever), "you
signed a five-year contract."
"But we can't afford this!" says the city.  "We'll go bankrupt!"
"Well," says the vendor, "you could always shorten the amber lights to
generate more tickets."

And, all too often, they do exactly that.


> Austin is considering red-light cameras all over the city to reduce the
> number of fatalities at intersections due to people running red lights,
> at the cost of several million dollars.  When pressed (at a city
> council meeting) for actual numbers, the folks behind that movement
> admitted that there were only three such accidents in the last year.
> 
> It's not about safety.  It's about tax collection.

Not only that, but statistics gathered from various jurisdictions have
shown that red light cameras do slightly reduce side collisions at red
lights, but at the cost of a much larger increase in rear-end
collisions.  Overall, accidents and fatalitles go UP when red-light
cameras are installed.

Last year, a proposal was introduced before the New Hampshire state
legislature to permit the use of red light cameras.  It was jeered and
heckled by the gallery and the legislature before being voted down by a
large majority.  The general consensus of the legislature seemed to be,
"Surely you jest."



-- 
 Phil Stracchino                     Landline: 603-886-3518
 phil.stracchino at speakeasy.net         Mobile: 603-216-7037
 Renaissance Man, Unix generalist, Perl hacker, Free Stater