February 11, 2009 5:27 PM

Red Light Cameras Stir Controversy

By
Caitlin A. Johnson
(CBS)  It's a decision many motorists face while driving: when a traffic light turns yellow, do we apply the brake or the gas?

Today, if the wrong choice is made at some intersections, the likely result is a ticket given not by a police officer, but a camera. It happened to The Early Show correspondent Susan McGinnis and it's also happening in 100 cities across the United States.

It seems like red light cameras are going to become a standard. At the consumer electronics show in Las Vegas, Cobra, which makes radar detectors, unveiled a new system to alert drivers where traffic cameras are in use. Those devices should be available in the spring.

Philadelphia's Roosevelt Boulevard has been known for some of the most dangerous intersections in the nation. To slow speeders and prevent accidents, the city installed cameras that catch drivers who run red lights.

"We've seen people tear up here like it's a drag way. Running red lights is a big problem," Sgt. Christopher Bee, who supervises the automated ticketing system.

Bee said the cameras are intended to reduce accidents, increase safety and re-educate drivers about being careful on the roads.

According to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, red light cameras work. They have reduced side impact accidents by an average of 24 percent and accident injuries by 16 percent.

Here's how it works: once a traffic signal has turned red, cars entering an intersection illegally are photographed several times and from several angles. The pictures, and a ticket are automatically mailed to the vehicle's owner.

But not everyone is willing to pay. That' s because cameras like those at a Chicago intersection, are focused on the car and not the driver. Irv Binder is an electrical contractor who owns several vehicles. And although it was one of his employees who ran the light, Binder got the ticket.

"It's not fair the hold me responsible for someone else's actions," he said. "We hired a lawyer and started a class-action lawsuit."

That suit, now in a federal court, argues the $90 tickets don't name or identify the driver of the vehicle, and deny the owner a request for a jury trial. So far, the arguments against red light cameras have only been won on a state level. In both Minnesota and Iowa, judges have ruled the cameras violate state motor vehicle law, which considers running a red light a criminal offense as opposed to a civil one.

"I expect everybody should be reimbursed," Binder said.

Binder argues that money, not safety that has motivated cities to use traffic cameras. After all, several of the nation's mayors have successfully relied on the revenue of red light cameras to help balance their budgets.

Chicago expects to earn $14 million from red light violators this year, while New York City hopes to pull in $13 million. Both cities have more cameras on the way.

But Bee says, first and foremost, this is a public safety issue.

"Is there revenue generated? Sure there is," he said. "But this is strictly a re-education for drivers and safety."

For motorists along Roosevelt Boulevard, more re-education is on the way as Pennsylvania legislators debate another camera system — one designed to photograph and ticket speeders.

Copyright 2009 CBS. All rights reserved.
Add a Comment See all 31 Comments
by jjreding-2009 January 23, 2007 2:01 PM EST
I have no sympathy for people who whine about red-light cameras. If you don't do anything wrong, you should never even know they're there.
Reply to this comment
by pghlady3 January 23, 2007 1:42 PM EST
socrates577 read the newspaper.com article. The drivers in the rear can see the light changing too and by law are to be in control of their own car. If they rear-end some one, then they are at fault. They will be given a ticket and it has absolutely nothing to do with cameras, if they are tailgating, eventually they will hit someone.
Reply to this comment
by socrates577 January 23, 2007 11:47 AM EST
North Carolina rear end collision KILLS 3.

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/15/1523.asp
Reply to this comment
by socrates577 January 23, 2007 11:44 AM EST
This story will educate the ones of you who wish to be.

Weekly Standard 2001 on Washington DC cameras.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/001/078ftoqz.asp
Reply to this comment
by socrates577 January 23, 2007 11:43 AM EST
Redflex camera official convicted on FRAUD charges.

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/15/1563.asp
Reply to this comment
by socrates577 January 23, 2007 11:40 AM EST
Even though you elected Bush last time around, I now have faith that you can still be taught.
No go sit in your car that you can't drive and pout.
Posted by ndg1979 at 03:38 AM : Jan 23, 2007
---------------
What the heck does a conversation about red light cameras have to do with the President????

You are the one in need of an education sir.
Reply to this comment
by socrates577 January 23, 2007 11:34 AM EST
There are a multitude of INDEPENDENT studies which show that the cameras have absolutely NO EFFECT on changing driver behavior. This include admissions from officials in the UK and Australia where they have been in use for years. The person performing the "studies" for the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (which is FUNDED by INSURANCE COMPANIES) is a man named Richard Rettig. This man worked as the head of the transportation dept of New York, and is credited with being the father of the red light cameras because he is the one which brought the cameras to NY. Having him do a "study" is like having the CEO of Ford doing a crash test study and claiming that Ford has the best numbers.
Plus, a recent study shows that 85% of infractions were within one tenth of a second after the light turns red. This is the dilemma zone and we all have been there.
If you want to know more check out "thenewspaper.com" and actually research what you are defending and don't be a sheep and just go along with it. We all hate runners, but the cameras are NOT THE ANSWER.
Reply to this comment
by socrates577 January 23, 2007 11:33 AM EST
There are a multitude of INDEPENDENT studies which show that the cameras have absolutely NO EFFECT on changing driver behavior. This include admissions from officials in the UK and Australia where they have been in use for years. The person performing the "studies" for the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (which is FUNDED by INSURANCE COMPANIES) is a man named Richard Rettig. This man worked as the head of the transportation dept of New York, and is credited with being the father of the red light cameras because he is the one which brought the cameras to NY. Having him do a "study" is like having the CEO of Ford doing a crash test study and claiming that Ford has the best numbers.
Plus, a recent study shows that 85% of infractions were within one tenth of a second after the light turns red. This is the dilemma zone and we all have been there.
If you want to know more check out "thenewspaper.com" and actually research what you are defending and don't be a sheep and just go along with it.
Reply to this comment
by ndg1979 January 23, 2007 6:38 AM EST
For all of you who have apparently forgotten, which is just about everyone - THE ABILITY TO OPERATE A MOTOR VEHICLE IS A PRIVILEGE - NOT A RIGHT!!!!

Therefore, is you perform badly, rules are imposed, or the privilege is taken away. With so many of you performing badly (STUPID), it is no wonder these are necessary.

I have owned 3 cars so far, a 1975 Buick LeSabre, 1976 Dodge Monaco and now a 2006 Charger. I have learned how to drive all three properly and though I am not perfect (I have to be at work on time like everyone else), I still DO NOT TAKE CHANCES!!!!

And until you come up with a better solution to make others better drivers - YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO SAY ANYTHING!!!! Only the privilege to say something allowed by the constitution. It is time to suck it up America. Grab your go-nads and say it with me - "I will no longer be an a**h*le!" I knew you could.

Even though you elected Bush last time around, I now have faith that you can still be taught.

No go sit in your car that you can't drive and pout.
Reply to this comment
by cinwisc January 23, 2007 2:43 AM EST
Anyone who buys and licenses a car assumes responsiblity for whoever drives it. Business vehicle drivers who break the law and incur a ticket in the business name could be docked on payday.
I am amazed that people actually want the RIGHT to run red lights! Causing an accident that injures others, self, car and contents, and perhaps being sued by injured parties would be more costly than a ticket--and could include a lifetime of guilt---or a jail sentence.
Reply to this comment
See all 31 Comments
.
Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook