In one hour, the Hillsborough County Commission will hold its public hearing and final vote on installing red light cameras at busy intersections.
By the comments I've heard from Commissioner Ken Hagan, chief supporter of the cameras, the concept looks like a shoo-in.
Which is unfortunate. Of course, nobody likes people who run red lights. But there are more issues with these cameras than just finding a way to prevent accidents.
There’s the privacy issue.
There’s the rear-end collision issue.
There’s the “Does it really work?†issue.
There’s the issue of a private company conducting law enforcement duties for profit.
Plus the issue of the government choosing these cameras to fill their own coffers.
And it's even against state law (some counties in Florida have found a loophole, though).
I don't think these issues are getting as much play as the "let's-get-cameras-and-we'll-all-be-safer" line. Pam Iorio agrees, reports the Times:
Mayor Pam Iorio recently considered and scrapped a proposal to install red-light cameras in Tampa. She said some research has shown the cameras cause accidents because people slam on their brakes when lights change.
She also expressed concern about a company issuing the citations and keeping a portion of the fines.
"The jury's still out as to whether that approach works," Iorio said.
Admittedly, some arguments against the cameras are better than others. But from personal experience, cameras do little to combat red light runners. Running a red light is usually a split second decision made by a hurried driver. If they are already risking life and limb to save a few seconds, I don’t see how they’ll care about a ticket.
If it works and saves lives, I won't complain. But, honestly, this smells much more like a business opportunity for some Arizona company, at my expense no less.
What do you think?
UPDATE: Yup, we got 'em.
This article appears in Mar 5-11, 2008.