In the 20 years since I started American Traffic Solutions, the red-light safety camera industry has come a long way. ATS now has cameras in 21 states and the District of Columbia and currently there are more than 3000 cameras in communities throughout the country. But no matter how familiar drivers are with the concept behind them, misperceptions continue to exist surrounding the way the cameras operate. It is important to understand the technology, as well as the systems and processes in place to ensure that drivers are protected. Both are depicted in a new video we've created titled "How it Works."
Red-light safety cameras are meticulously engineered and maintained to accurately capture red-light runners at intersections. The basic operations include sensors embedded in the road, just before the stop line. When the traffic signal is red, the sensors detect vehicles approaching the stop line at a speed too fast to stop. The sensors send signals to the cameras indicating that a violation has occurred. The camera then captures video and a set of high resolution images before and after the vehicle crosses the stop line when the signal is still red. The video and violation images are then transmitted to my company's Operations Center where trained technicians review the violations and check for accuracy. After that, a police officer reviews the footage and images to determine conclusively that a red light has been run. If there is doubt, a citation is not issued. If the police officer is satisfied that a violation has occurred, then a ticket will be issued.
This last step is the portion of the system used with regard to red-light safety cameras that is least understood by skeptics: A police officer issues the ticket, upon a review of evidence; the process is not automated, it's just that the footage and images taken by cameras enable police to be conclusive in establishing where a violation has occurred. That matters for one reason, and one reason alone: Red-light running is the leading cause of urban crashes, according to the Insurance Institute of Highway Safety. More people are injured in crashes involving red-light running than in any other crash type.
Ultimately, cameras are a safety precaution and an important tool in deterring dangerous driving that has enormous negative effects on other drivers, passengers, pedestrians, cyclists and indeed taxpayers. Just recently, new studies have indicated that when red light cameras are turned off after having been in use, accidents increase.
In Houston, where cameras were switched off in the wake of a vote last November, there are three intersections where accidents have risen more than 400 percent. Citywide, comparing one six-month period without cameras to the same period a year earlier (when the cameras were in use), accidents rose 137 percent. Worse yet, there a 350 percent increase in injuries that involved injury or serious property damage.
Meanwhile, in Albuquerque, where some cameras were switched off temporarily, the number of red light runners and speeders increased 600 percent.
Red-light safety cameras have been proven a reliable, effective, technology-driven solution that help reduce collisions, injuries and fatalities by changing driver behavior. Hopefully, this video will help more people understand the way they function and the systems that are in place to ensure citations are issued only when a violation occurs.
habits same technology requires. School zone traffic electronic monitors, for example. I noticed a
petition drive with 1,500 names had city-wide municipal circulation two days after City Fathers saw
fit to announce future operation of fifteen red light traffic monitors. They would generate computer-
generated moving vehicle violation citations. In France I understand the cost of replacing missing
monitors exceeds same revenue for traffic violations. I'd appreciate a monitor system that is French-
Proof. Allow motor officer participation in citation issue process. Assist legal assistance for citation prosecution purposes.
Why didn't you explain to everyone how the timing of the Yellow lights are shortened at the Red Light camera enforced intersections to increase the likelihood of a red light violation. Just a few years ago a city in the northern suburbs of Chicago removed its red light camera's do to the increase of rear end collision at an intersection near a very large mall. Mall officials and residents made comment that the Yellow light was merely just seconds and that camera generated many thousands of dollars in revenue for the city. The City acknowledged the Yellow light was shortened.
If the red light camera's where just a safety precaution why would there need to be adjustments to the yellow light? Why are there cases in towns across America that use to have red light cameras defending their actions of shortening the yellow light? In 2008 USF published a study that showed an increase of traffic accidents at Red light camera enforced intersections. USF also mentioned that "The injury rate from red-light running crashes has dropped by a third in less than a decade, indicating red-light running crashes have been continually declining in Florida without the use of cameras."
It's a money generator nothing more nothing less and it’s under the disguise of making our roadways safer
To echo a few of the comments, Red Light Cameras only purpose is to generate revenue for American Traffic Solutions - at the tax payers expense.
Safety? Laughable!!!!
The Stassi probably had Red Light Cameras all of over East Germany years before the US. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the author got the inspiration from them.
http://www.cellphoneshopper.net/htc-droid-incredible.html
Apparently, the light companies get to decide where to put the camera to maximize profit, not safety.
This is not safety, it's a revenue generator. Funny how the two things measurable by cameras, speeding and red light zones are where 'safety' measures are put in place while the statistics on crashes show 'failure to yeild' as being the number one cause of crashes. Nothing done on that, it would involve actually driving around and observing bad drivers do stupid things.
Yet the license test remains so easy a chimp could be trained to pass it.
If safety was the consideration, or traffic throughput was the consideration, or proper diving habits were the consideration, then other things could be done. For instance, rather than use all that expense and technology to give out tickets, it could be applied to sensors or cameras to adjust signal-light timing to maximize traffic flow. How many times do you stop and wait at a red when no traffic is coming from the other direction? How many two-lane streets get backed up because someone is making a left turn? How many people drive with their fog-lights on... when there isn't any fog?
Every aspect of the argument for red-light cameras is specious.
I believe it is around 3.? seconds.
REAL studies without ATS's hands all over them prove conclusively that red light cameras INCREASE accidents wherever they're installed. The figures aren't close. ATS wants you to believe most violations are running intersections, but the vast majority of their bogus violations are for turning right on red or crossing the stop line with your car.
They fund fake advocacy groups all over the country, and use their lead Washington hired-gun lobbyist, David Kelly, to act as the head "concerned citizen" while fear mongering with TV commercials designed to scare the public into allowing RLCs.
One look at the number of organizations set up to fight these unconstitutional scams and one can easily see that almost no one wants RLCs and plenty of people are lined up to fight them. Google ATS and investigate yourself. ATS and RLCs are both a scam and nothing but a fleecing of the public and has nothing at all to do with increasing safety.
I don't know how you sleep at night.
Quote: “Why would they not use data from the city of Washington? Hmmm, could it be because the data wasn’t helpful to the conclusion they desired? Could it be because American Traffic Solutions, one of the “vendors” who had input into the study, but who’s name was not disclosed by MoDOT,”
ATS town busted manipulating crash statistics by shortening the distance 1/2. Arnold, MO: http://camerafraud.wordpress.com/2011/02/10/ats-astro-turf-support-american-traffic-solutions-desperate-for-friends/
ATS and Baytown TX BUSTED manipulating VOLATION RATES by increasing the Rejection Rate! http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/31/3173.asp
Quote: "Statistics show that, in response, city officials and American Traffic Solutions have deliberately issued fewer citations. The program rejected 29 percent of violations in July 2008, but documents show the rate of rejections climbed to 54 percent in December."
Most of what ATS "cites" are technical fouls. GO PULL THE STATS!
Most "violations" are right turns on red, stopping over the stop line, and split second mistakes.
Use of different "definitions" of what "counts" as a violation in towns: http://www.banthecams.org/201105131210/Tale-of-Two-ATS-Towns-HOW-SCAMERA-OPERATIONS-USE-DIFFERENT-DEFINITIONS-of-a-Stop-line.html
LET THE PEOPLE VOTE! ATS and their Cronies DO NOT WANT based on attempts in Washington State Towns! http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/34/3489.asp
www.banthecams.org