By Gina Williams
The Accident “Conspiracy”
Red Light Cameras (RLCs) are supposed to prevent accidents. However, according to various studies, RLCs actually cause harmful accidents and it isn’t all that surprising.
It makes sense that when people see a yellow light that they’ll slam on their brakes out of fear of being ticketed because they know they’re being watched; given the same situation with no camera, the same people would go through the yellow light.
After all, yellow lights don’t mean stop, they mean “caution” because a red light is approaching.
Flawed Studies and Conflicts of Interest
Two extremely biased and thoroughly debunked studies are usually cited as proof that there is some type of safety benefit associated with the use of RLCs.
The first is a 2005 Federal Highway Administration (FHA) study which gives red light cameras credit for a decrease right-angle crashes. However, this report made that conclusions based on only 7 jurisdictions which combined have less cameras than the Houston, TX area.
According to photoenforced.com which hosts a database of all RLCs and speed cameras in the U.S., 1,300 cities use RLCs; given this, the sample size that the FHA used to conduct its study was entirely too small to truly represent RLCs effects sufficiently.
Additionally, said study has been criticized due to conflicts of interest, as well as methodical and analytical flaws in their research and findings. Its co-directors conducted research for the Insurance Institute of Highway Safety (IIHS) in the past, meaning that the FHA and IIHS financial ties to each other.
IIHS is a private company that represents the auto insurance industry which has continuously raised rates based on photo ticketing data as that system proliferated during the last decade. See this report for extended details on the FHA’s study’s methodical and analytics flaws.
The other report that’s usually referred to by companies like Redflex and American Traffic Solutions was conducted by the IIHS themselves. Not only was their data almost completely irrelevant in some cases, but a recent report shows the IIHS study, when reviewed by peers shows an increase in fatalities at red light camera intersections.
Other Studies Suggest An Increase in Accidents
On the other hand, studies conducted by various Departments of Transportation, universities, and media outlets contradict the above study and others.
According to a 2004 North Carolina A & T University study that examined 17,271 crashes, “When analyzing total crashes…RLCs have a statistically significant (p<0.001) and large (40% increase) effect on accident rates.”
According to a 2005 Virginia Department of Transportation funded study, in Virginia, RLCs decrease the number of right-angle crashes with injuries. However, they also lead to an increase in rear-end crashes and the number of overall crashes resulting in injuries. This study was based on an 18 month study of 7 jurisdictions in Virginia. Unlike the FHA study above, this study was applied only to Virginia.
Given the funds these RLCs generate for governments, especially in an economy experiencing financial problems, it is difficult to take government studies that support RLCs seriously. It’s in their interest to continue the programs, and in order to continue them, the programs must be justified to the public; thus “studies” proving RLCs effectiveness are conducted and released to the public.
Gina Williams is a guest post and article writer bringing to us information on RLCs. Gina also writes about motorcycle accident statistics
