Today's paper | eEdition | Subscribe
The Truth-O-Meter
Latest print edition
St. Petersburg Times
Human Interest_News
Special report
Video report
Multimedia report
Fill out this form to email this article to a friend
Your name Your email
Recipient email
You may enter up to 20 multiple email addresses, separated by commas.
Your message

Will cameras make Florida roads safer? I'm not sure

By Andrew J. Skerritt, North Suncoast Columnist
In print: Friday, March 21, 2008


Social Bookmarking
Digg Facebook Stumbleupon
Reddit Del.icio.us Newsvine
ADVERTISEMENT

Maybe it's my imagination, but it sure seems like drivers in Florida run more red lights than in other states.

When teaching my 16-year-old son to drive, we witnessed plenty of that red-light running, which I took to calling Florida Roulette.

Now it seems lots of local governments are embracing a "solution.'' Technology to the rescue. Automatic cameras are going to catch these dangerous motorists and help part them with their cash.

Great idea.

Or is it?

The city of Port Richey and Hillsborough County recently said yes to the red-light cameras, while Temple Terrace, Clearwater and Brooksville are thinking about it. Brooksville Mayor David Pugh isn't so sure.

"If there is a public safety issue, we need to see the numbers to prove it," he said. "I'm not sold on it."

Neither am I.

What's the harm, you ask? American Traffic Solutions, a private company from Arizona, would install and maintain the cameras. Local law enforcement would decide whether to issue a ticket. The company would get a $40 cut from every $125 ticket issued, a sweet deal for any cash-strapped city.

From 1999 to 2004, Washington, D.C., raked in $35-million from tickets generated by red-light cameras — proof, I suppose, that Florida Roulette is more widespread.

Money matters, but do these cameras really improve public safety? There is plenty of doubt about that.

Camera advocates point to studies that show a big drop in red-light runners once the devices are installed. But critics have noted an escalation in rear-end collisions at intersections because motorists stopped suddenly rather than risk getting caught by the eye in the sky.

Easy money from red-light cameras might reduce the incentive to address other meaningful public safety issues, such as making yellow lights stay on longer and increasing police presence at the most dangerous intersections.

With the camera idea, offenders get caught and pay a fine. Bam, it's done. But if you get caught by a police officer, you suffer other consequences: points on your drivers license and potential higher insurance premiums.

That's real deterrence.

Andrew Skerritt can be reached at askerritt@sptimes.com or (813) 909-4602 or toll-free at 1-800-333-7505, ext. 4602.



[Last modified: Mar 24, 2008 11:22 AM]



Comments on this article
by John Mar 24, 2008 11:22 AM
It is funny how these politicians don't want to wiretap to prevent terrorism but they have no problem putting cameras up at a redlight.
by mike Mar 24, 2008 11:21 AM
I think the people SHOULD decide if this system can be used. Put it to a vote. It will not save lives, but it will bring in revnue.
by SAMUAL Mar 23, 2008 12:21 PM
A deputy has to review the video/photo and decide if a ticket is written. This is time that the deputy should be conducting traffic enforcement.What about the legal fees it will cost us (tax payers) when someone fights a ticket, money waste
by MIKE Mar 23, 2008 12:21 PM
The cameras could also be used during Amber Alerts to help track down a kidnapper. I would be careful before I ran a red light if I saw a camera. Its 2008 people.. Get with the times ! It is a great idea!!
by amy Mar 21, 2008 8:19 PM
you people are so narrow minded. red light cameras are great! then we can add fines for driving while on the cell phone, add cameras along the highway to catch drowsy drivers, teens, weaving, dui, illegals, cheating spouses, etc. so much money 2 mak
by THOMAS Mar 21, 2008 3:49 PM
These government agencies will try any thing to take money from our wallets. This very plot is not for public safety but a violation of the governments restrictions on a counter action to Amendment 1. Its not all about money Mrs. City Manager.
by Thomas Mar 21, 2008 3:10 PM
Safety should take precidence over revenue. A DUI running the light and crashing, wouldn't be deterred, unless he saw a patrol car. Most bodyshops will tell you 75% of their work is from rear-enders. Cameras won't make it safer, a
by Jann Mar 21, 2008 12:17 PM
OK, so these lights are going to be used to ticket the car and not the driver. How will they tell who was driving the vehicle, in order to know who is responsible for paying the ticket? Rear end collisions are a problem. Cops, show your presences.
by JOANNE Mar 21, 2008 10:48 AM
WHAT WILL HAPPEN WHEN PEOPLE ARE STOPPING SHORT TO ADVOID GETTING A PICTURE AND A TICKET. I THINK IT WILL CAUSE LOTS OF ACCIDENTS WITH PEOPLE TRYING TO MAKE THAT STOP WHEN THE REALIZE THE LIGHT IS CHANGING.LETS HOPE IT DOESN'T KILL POLICE FAMILI
Subscribe to the Times
Click here for daily delivery
of the St. Petersburg Times.

Email Newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

 
ADVERTISEMENT