Seeing red: Cameras at intersections creating problems

Authorizing robot cameras to photograph red-light runners and mail out traffic tickets to vehicle owners -- sometimes months after the event -- is a proposal that regularly resurfaces at the Nevada Legislature. Proponents tout the prospect of fewer accidents.

But there's now evidence that, by refusing to make Nevadans guinea pigs in this experiment, state lawmakers may have dodged a bullet.

USA Today reports that 555 communities around the country now employ the cameras. But nine states -- including Nevada -- ban them. Meantime, numerous municipalities that gave the devices a try have pulled the plug, and of two dozen referendums on the cameras, all but one failed. Why?

Opponents have long complained that the system violates a defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confront his or her accuser, of course. In Pasco County, Fla., Judge Anne Wansboro dismissed a traffic camera charge on Feb. 17, saying; "The law impermissibly shifts the burden of proof to the defendant, and therefore does not afford due process."

But the problems don't end there.

-- When former Harrison County Township Mayor Mike Koestler became one of more than 12,000 motorists ticketed for running a single red light at a busy intersection in Glassboro, N.J., in 2010, he told the local newspaper, "I remember thinking, 'I can make this,' and I was cruising along at normal speed, and all of a sudden it clicked off in red. I thought, 'This is wrong. It's way too quick.' "

Mr. Koestler researched the timing of the light and contacted the state Department of Transportation. Result: The municipality now admits a single red-light camera generated $1 million worth of tickets at an intersection with an "illegally short yellow." Motorists were given just three seconds of yellow warning before the camera began snapping -- as opposed to the four seconds mandated by state regulations, according to the Gloucester County Times.

Needless to say, they're reluctant to give the money back.

-- The Los Angeles City Council voted last July to shut down that city's red-light camera program. Some officials derided the steep red-light camera fines, which often topped $500, as "voluntary" because county courts were not aggressively penalizing those who simply ignored the citations.

-- Despite claims of companies that sell ticket-issuing cameras, there's no independent verification that photo enforcement improves highway safety or reduces overall accidents, insists the National Motorists Association Foundation. In fact, they may increase tail-end crashes, and "Once red-light cameras start making money for local governments, they are unlikely to jeopardize this income source" by introducing engineering improvements that can themselves decrease congestion and pollution, including traffic light synchronization.

What's the goal here? Is it added safety, or new revenue?

Other than looting motorists' pockets, this particular manifestation of the surveillance state doesn't seem to be working out very well for those who've tried it. Maybe we don't need it, here, after all.