Tenn. lawmakers learning from Ga. red light camera rules
by Chattanooga Times Free Press
Nov 30, 2009 | 909 views | 4 4 comments | 5 5 recommendations | email to a friend | print
A funny thing happened in Georgia after state lawmakers in 2008 required local governments to add an extra second of yellow light on traffic signals using cameras to catch drivers running red lights.

The number of camera-initiated tickets plummeted. So did enforcement revenues. As a result, some towns and cities, where officials previously had lauded photo enforcement’s impact on driver safety, decided to dump the camera program.

“It sort of exposed the myth of why those cameras are there,” observed Dalton, Ga., Mayor David Pennington, a photo-enforcement critic. “The reason that a lot of us were given was (it was) to prevent accidents.”

Click here to read more.

What do you think about redlight cameras? Are they effective? The Calhoun Times wants to know. Leave a comment below.
Share This Article |
similar stories

Ga. ends holdout over pickup seat belt law | 3 months ago

First Fairmount tree lighting draws crowd of nearly 100 | 9 months ago

Three-vehicle wreck shuts down direct route onto Ga. 53 | 9 months ago

Ham Jam is Saturday | 3 months ago

Ga. lawmakers enter final day of marathon session | 4 months ago

comments (4)
« DifferentView wrote on Wednesday, Dec 09 at 02:48 PM »
vwpowwow wrote: I believe that red light cameras do not reduce accidents where they are placed. If they worked then the city's would not have increased tickets from them. People are going to drive and obey or disobey safety regulations regardless of a camera or not. I believe that a number of people have been wrongly ticketed from them. This is why there is such an argument against them. Having an actual officer at a trouble intersection is the best bet. I would rather go to court arguing an officers testimony than a speechless camera.

Well of course you would! You would rather try to make the officer out to be a liar than try to prove that the pictures/video of you and your vehicle didn't flagrantly break the law. What a joke!
« Mumbles1 wrote on Monday, Nov 30 at 11:14 PM »
The red light camera doesn't prevent accidents, drivers prevent accidents by obeying the instruction of the traffic signal. The decision of drivers to "rush the yellow light" is what causes the accidents. The intention of the yellow is to give the driver ample warning that the light is about to change to red; therefore, the driver should be preparing to stop BEFORE the light changes red. The accidents are caused by drivers who don't want to wait another cycle through the light and therefore stomp the gas pedal in an attempt to get through before the red. Misjudgement is the cause of the accident as when the light changes red for one direction, the other direction gets the green. When this side proceeds into the intersection as directed by the signal, unfortunately, a lot of times they meet the driver who is usually traveling faster than the speed limit due to "rushing the yellow" and the end result is called an accident. Traffic cameras DO WORK. Having seen the photo of a company vehicle driven by an employee who was in the middle of an intersection when the photo was taken, I can say that the photo was very clear as to the location of the vehicle, listed the date, time and location of the camera, as well as how much time had elasped since the traffic signal had turned red and the snap of the photo. Argument of such valid information is a lot harder to argue in court than the simple "I saw" testimony of a law enforcement officer. I'd rather have the cameras in place, freeing the officers to run radar in other areas where the speed limit signs seem to have no meaning!
« Mumbles1 wrote on Monday, Nov 30 at 10:57 PM »
« vwpowwow wrote on Monday, Nov 30 at 06:54 PM »
I believe that red light cameras do not reduce accidents where they are placed. If they worked then the city's would not have increased tickets from them. People are going to drive and obey or disobey safety regulations regardless of a camera or not. I believe that a number of people have been wrongly ticketed from them. This is why there is such an argument against them. Having an actual officer at a trouble intersection is the best bet. I would rather go to court arguing an officers testimony than a speechless camera.
Postings are not edited and are the responsibility of the author. You agree not to post comments that are abusive, threatening or obscene. Postings may be removed at our discretion.