How can “a 23 percent decrease in Level 1 trauma calls at red-light camera enforced intersections” not be considered an increase in public safety?

Seriously. The only people who oppose the red-light cameras are the selfish and irresponsible drivers who think it’s their god-given right to drive as fast and as dangerously as they want and who refuse to recognize that it puts other people (and themselves) in dangerous situations.

So, grow up Jakob Schiller. The important consequences of your driving through a red light or speeding through an intersection have nothing to do with your driving record – they are the lives of people on the road with you.

If it saves just one life then it is worth it. We should ban all cars from the roads. This would drastically reduce the number of Level 1 trauma calls, not only at intersections but all parts of the road.

I think the whole point of the study is to, well, STUDY the red light camera results. I’m sure that will include any data from the fire department.

Of course, helpfully, they will also take into account some of the games that have been played with the data since the cameras where instigated, such as redefining what “in the intersection” was so all the rear end collisions would be considered on the roadway and NOT in the intersection even though the accident was directly caused by people over reacting to yellow lights at an intersection with red light cameras.

Read more …

Two things: first, your headline clearly should read “Studying the efficacy of red-light cameras” or “Studying the effectiveness of red-light cameras”; they clearly are “efficient” in that they capture images of all or nearly all speeders and red-light-runners. Second, “a 23 percent decrease in Level 1 trauma calls at red-light camera enforced intersections” clearly indicates that the cameras effectively reduce accidents at those intersections. The proposed study is absurd. It doesn’t matter whether the cameras decrease accidents citywide in a statistically significant way. I drive through two of those intersections twice each day and am glad that my commute is safer. From a public safety standpoint, the fact that the cameras clearly and measurably reduce accidents at monitored intersections suggests that the city should install more. They’ll obviously pay for themselves.

Okay Clint,
You say that there are “a lot of other reasons to oppose those cameras,” but you fail to name even one. I still hold that it is naked anti-social selfishness that lays behind the vitriolic opposition to these cameras. Until you can offer some meaningful other reason, I’m afraid that it is you who is being simplistic.

The data gathering for the efficacy of red light cameras is “not all in”. Similar to the Global Warming effect of CO2, this is not a slam dunk. Many studies of red light cameras, such as thouse conducted by the National Motorists Association demonstrate an increase in accidents (precisely rear end collisions) at the intersections where red-light cameras are installed. The fire department reported whatever Marty wanted them to, they bent over and he pointed. Red light cameras are about the money, not about safety, even the dim witted can see this fact.

Slowhike,
Even if they are “about the money,” what’s wrong with extracting money from people who choose to break the law. Choose to speed through and intersection or run a red light and you pay. So, the real dimwits are those who can’t figure out to slow down. I don’t understand why we shouldn’t use them to pay the city’s bills.

red,
Deception and farce come to my mind as good rationales for not using the current red light camera system. Unless you are certain they save lives, and by your post you are not, we should not attempt to say that the funding is just a side effect of improved safety. It it’s a fund-raising system, then call it a fund-raising methodology.

Additionally if studies come out that indicate red light cameras cause accidents then any victims involved in accidents at these intersections can sue the city of Abq. and rapidly out-pace any revenue the city has gained with the system.

Read more …

Plus I am suspicious of anything that Marty Chavez started except for his work in the humane society-he did prove to be a staunch animal activist. But in everything else he was ify.

What I’d like to see the city do is actually ticket inattentive idiots on their cell-phones and do more to combat drunk driving. Distracted and drunk drivers cause the vast majority of auto accidents, whereas speeding (as a sole factor) is far less likely to result in an accident than either a drunk or distracted driver.

Then again, the whole road network seems to be catered to the lowest common denominator of driver. Anyone who doesn’t want to be engaged in the process of driving should do the rest of us a favor and take the bus.

This is Joshua “UNM Techno Guy” Arellano, and I just want to say that these red light cameras are some BS! They are just another way for the man to keep the people down. Just like my music, which I should be allowed to play whenever and wherever I want cause its my right as an AMERICAN, I should be able to drive how I want and when I want, without some camera telling me I can’t do it MY WAY. You people need to wise up and see how your all being controlled! Dont be afraid to challenge the system and fight for your rights!!! Red light cameras are a violation of my rights as a citizen and I wont stand for them!!!!! Peace.

Come on, techno guy, peace may equal listening to music and dancing, but peace does not equal barreling through an intersection dangerously fast. Your comparison is ridiculous: you actually don’t have the right to speed and run red lights because those activities infringe on the rights of others to use public roadways safely. I’m all for you listening to your music because it doesn’t threaten or hurt anyone, but perpetrating violence on public roads just because you think you have the right to drive how you want is something altogether different. As an artist, you should know that driving fast and dangerously is hardly a meaningful form of rebellion anyway (something like wearing a Che t-shirt) – mostly just for the selfish and weak-minded.

Hey Jack, you’re a jack-ass communist! That’s a fan-freaking-tastic idea. Let’s just take everyone’s cars away! That will stop all the deaths in America! Man, why hasn’t someone put you in office? You’re just chock full of stuff like this aren’t you?

Douche bag.

I don’t think that Red Light camera’s are useful. At the intersections that have them level 1 trauma’s are down, but are they down at other intersections as well. If it stops level 1 traumas at one intersection but increases them at another they aren’t useful. Yes people do slow down at the red light camera intersections, but they speed back up right after them.So unless you are going to put red light camera’s on every intersection it’s pretty pointless.

Hey TJ you hit the nail on the head! Thanks for such a concise explanation of why red light cameras don’t improve the overall traffic accident rate.

Red-

How about the way the STOP ordinance is written (like a convoluted scam), for starts. How about that the city’s admin hearing office can’t legally establish jurisdiction because it conflicts with NM state law (NMSA 34-8A-3). They also don’t have the authority to determine that a traffic violation has taken place (that’s Metro court, too.)
How about the fact that the STOP ordinance simply seeks to extort money from the registered owner of a vehicle, regardless of who the driver was. This is in stark contrast to traffic laws in NM, which target the driver.

Read more …

what ever that jack ass said was not me, its sad that people have to hide behind my persona in order to have an opnion, so yeah this is the real “Techno guy”