That wasn’t their purpose.
Red light cameras aren’t about stopping accidents. They’re about generating revenue.
Reducing accidents was never the goal. Increasing revenue based on automated ticketing was the goal. The cameras actually increase accidents.
Red light cameras do generate more revenue, while at the same time sudden stop rear end collisions are more numerous — but, hey, as long as the government rakes in more money, do they care?
I would of guessed they increased accidents. Many cities are removing red lights for this reason.
If someone gets a ticket from a red light camera the next time they are at that intersection and see a yellow they will inclined to slam on the brakes, causing a rear-end collision.
/S
They are revenue generators for money hungry municipalities.
They also cause accidents. There are more rear end collisions at traffic lights when a nervous driver slams on the brakes rather than proceed through a light that just moved from green to yellow.
Lastly, in San Diego, the private company operator who was getting a piece of the revenue changed the timing on the yellow lights. State law requires that the yellow time period be set based upon the speed limit on the street. The higher the speed limit, the longer the yellow period. The operator actually shortened the yellow time periods. In the end, tickets were negated and San Diego dropped the traffic light cameras.
I lived in one city that allowed the voters to ban red light cameras, sadly I had to move to one that embraces them. One of the worst features of red light camera intersections that I rail about is the lack of countdown timers to let drivers know when the light is going to change. My firm belief is that the lack is to support revenue collection but is also to blame for many rear end collisions.