Ran across
this Feb 02 article by accident over the weekend. Now we already know how bad privately operated parking enforcement can be, but in case the powers that be think about getting private scamera operators this is an example of how things can go wrong.
From the article:
Quote:
Last September, Angela Brock-Smith, a resident of Washington D.C., was issued a $50 speeding ticket for barreling her white truck at 45-mph through a 30-mph speed zone, The Washington Times reported last week. There's just one problem. Angela Brock-Smith doesn't own a white truck. She owns a blue Chevy Lumina. And it hasn't puttered, much less barreled, a foot since it broke down last July - two months before her "violation".
It seems that one of D.C.'s new revenue-generating toys, an automated photo-snapping radar affixed to the side of the road, couldn't get a good read on the offending truck's license plate. So somebody saw an "AR," and a "049," and guestimated it to be Brock-Smith's "AR8049" tag. They guessed wrong.
The D.C. radars are installed and operated by Affiliated Computer Systems, which gets $29 for every ticket issued by its cyber-cops. The company already operates cameras in Hawaii and Australia, among other places.
Here's the kicker: When Brock-Smith appealed her ticket, guess who got first crack at her mailed-in complaint? No, it wasn't a traffic court, or a D.C. bureaucrat. It was ACS, the very company that profits from her ticket. ACS, a private company, serves as cop, judge, jury and executioner. And they make $29 for every execution.
Is there some system in place here to prevent someone misreading a number plate from a poor Gatso photo? I have no idea, and in fairness UK number plates seem much more legible than those I've seen in the US. However, three recent stories on the ABD site about drivers receiving fines despite the scameras recording wildy inaccurate (and in two cases implausible) speeds might suggest that the photos aren't being checked very carefully before the NIPs go into the envelopes. So I can't help but wonder what's to prevent human error affecting who get's sent NIPS. Is the number plate double checked? Is it cross checked to the DVLA to make sure the car make/model/colour are correct? What about dirty plates? Bottom line, are we any less likely to get a duff NIP than the American lady in the article?
The article goes on to talk about red light cameras:
Quote:
Automated camera speed traps snuck into public acceptance after the success of automated red-light cameras. Red-light cameras have been around for several years now, and have effectively reduced the number of red-light runners.
But while red-light cameras did dramatically reduce infractions at dangerous intersections, it's not yet clear that they are in fact the best solution to red-light running.
Last summer, a study conducted in Fairfax County, Virginia, home to cameras operated and profited by Lockheed Martin, found that simply increasing the "yellow" time at a given intersection by 1.5 seconds dropped red-light infractions by 96%, significantly more than the decrease effected by installing cameras.
Now, picture yourself a city councilman. You have two options to better road safety, increase yellow times at intersections in your town, which will bring in no new revenue, or install camera-cops that have in some cases issued 500 citations per hour (as the camera at New York Avenue and 4th St. in Northwest D.C. has) and could generate millions for city coffers (Sydney, Australia raked in over $20 million AU from camera citations in 2000).
In fact, for city officials facing tight budgets, it might be tempting to shorten yellows. After all, wouldn't shaving a few fractions off of city yellows seem preferable to raising taxes or cutting city services?
There are more problems. A recent University of Virginia study found that on high-speed multi-lane highways - the camera-laden George Washington Parkway in D.C., for example - automated cameras were able to provide clear images of plate, driver and vehicle just 3% of the time.
Now I've generally been strongly in favour of traffic light cameras. Jumping the lights seems far riskier to me than creeping a few mph over the limit, so up till now I've never seen any reason to object to anything that punishes people for it. But the idea of playing with the light phasing had simply never occured to me. Also, light cameras have been fitted at a crossroads I use fairly often where I regularly see people jumping the lights. Due to the size and layout of the junction accidents seem pretty rare - I've certainly never seen or heard of any at the junction itself, though there have been a few just beyond where the road narrows from 2 lanes to one (compounded by a badly located pair of bus stops). All the same cameras have been installed north and southbound to cover the main road. The only real problem I have is that all the light jumpers I ever see are going eastbound on the minor road. Now, either my observations aren't representative, or someone hasn't researched it properly. I can't even see much point to these cameras for revenue raising, as I've never seen anyone jump the lights where they're positioned.
One way or another, I'm starting to become almost as sceptical about traffic light cameras as I am of speed cams, as well as highly suspicious of any non-police involvement in the system.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
Members
