We got our first red light camera at Yosemite and Arapahoe road. Anyone who has been there prior to the cameras knows that the entire intersection was jammed with red light runners from all directions. With the cameras the intersection is not clear and flows smoothly. They placed cameras at about 6 more interesections with the same problem. So, to me, the cameras were not revenue generators but have solved major problems at key intersections.
>>We got our first red light camera at Yosemite and Arapahoe road. Anyone who has been there prior to the cameras knows that the entire intersection was jammed with red light runners from all directions. With the cameras the intersection is not clear and flows smoothly. They placed cameras at about 6 more interesections with the same problem. So, to me, the cameras were not revenue generators but have solved major problems at key intersections.<<
Yes, I’ve seen this in some Chicago intersections as well. I was at one where I had a green and yet THREE cars, one behind the other, continued into the intersection in front of me. It is one reason that I look before I leap if I am the first car in line at a green light.
You also bring up the official reason these cameras were introduced in the first place. And, frankly, I think it just might work if they did just two things:
1. Slightly extend the length of the yellw at “red light” intersections.
2. Ignore “California stop” free right turns. That is not the “safety” reason that is used to justify their presence. It is the T-bone accidents from someone running a red, just after the yellow.
The cameras are brutal on number two. It is the main source of revenue from these things. If it were not for number two, most people just may think these cameras were ok and they wouldn’t be voted out EVERY SINGLE TIME THEY ARE BROUGHT TO A VOTE OF THE PEOPLE.