Red Light Cameras are Dangerous

The University
Of South Florida College Of Public Health
has brought a new study to our attention here at Sciolist Salmagundi. It
reflects our own unpublished study (even though our manager, Sal, showed up at
the publishing house with a can of gasoline and threatened to “burn this damned
place to the ground”) called “Idiots and Why Red light Cameras are the Spawn of
Satan.”

Typical Driver

We have several red light cameras here in my own town, and
the official explanation was that they were supposed to make our streets safer
by scaring the shit out of drivers that barley even understand the concept of
red lights. Anyone that has been in the stream of traffic that approaches one
of these “Make Our City Rich” cameras knows one thing: as soon as the light
turns yellow, all you can see are people slamming on their brakes. You are
lucky if they do not slam their brakes on the green, never mind the yellow.
According to this study:

“Rather than improving
motorist safety, red-light cameras significantly increase crashes and are a
ticket to higher auto insurance premiums, researchers at the University of South Florida
College of Public Health conclude.”

"Witness the firepower of this fully operational Insurance Company!"

Did you catch that? Read it again. It increases insurance
premiums. NO? REALLY? In fact, this article goes on to point out:

“Some studies that
conclude cameras reduced crashes or injuries contained major ‘research design
flaws,’ such as incomplete data or inadequate analyses, and were conducted by
researchers with links to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. The IIHS,
funded by automobile insurance companies, is the leading advocate for red-light
cameras. Insurers can profit from red-light cameras, since their revenues will
increase when higher premiums are charged due to the crash and citation
increase, the researchers say.”

Is it even possible that our state-driven monopoly of
automobile insurance could even consider a technology that increases their
profits while it kills innocents? Perish the thought. How is it possible that
these state-backed vampires could consider increasing their profits against our
pain and death?

I have news for you folks, as it profits more than the
insurance companies. It profits the local governments, and it profits the local
legal system. Ticket revenues via robot camera are the obvious revenues. It
also profits the local cops, because every time Grandma gets confused and
scared because of the cameras and slams on her brakes, the cops have to show up
in person to write up the ensuing accident. Those are called “contact points,”
and every cop has to have a certain number of those things to prove that he or
she is doing their job. They profit from that encounter as a result.

There are others that profit from this supposed safety
catch. The local politician can argue that they are using the best of insurance
company-backed technology in the name of not having to pay cops to do their
damned jobs.

Nobody loves watching some self-possessed asshole run a red
light. No doubt that there have been many deaths that have come from this
occurrence. What, I ask, happened to the highway engineers that run these
catastrophes we call roads in the first place?

“Red-light running can
be reduced by engineering improvements that address factors such as signal
visibility and timings, wet roads and traffic flow, the USF researchers say.”

You think they mean the kinds of improvements that will
reduce pain and suffering and yet not increase profits for local governments
and insurance companies?

I do.

The bastards.