>  Astounding! You are so egar to turn law-enforcement (read: revenue
>  generating) over to automation run by a private, for-profit 
>  venture, that you will turn a blind eye to a documented increase 
>  in traffic injuries as a result of this highly irresponsible, 
>  suspicious Orwellian system? The report by the VA DOT (stated 
>  to be in favor of the cameras) found no measurable reduction 
>  in angle collisions (side-impact), while finding a measurable, 
>  and significant increase in injuries resulting from rear-endings 
>  due to stopping short. These are people who like the cameras, yet 
>  are dropping them, because they are hurting people. Read this again:
>  
>  "Despite a distinct sympathy in favor of camera enforcement, 
>  the researchers found a "definite" increase in rear-end accidents 
>  and only a "possible" decrease in angle accidents. Most importantly,
>  the net effect was that more injuries happened after cameras are
>  installed. Camera proponents explain this away by asserting angle
>  accidents are more serious, but this claim has not been scientifically 
>  studied according to this report. The rear end collisions caused by 
>  the cameras still produce injuries -- the original promise of camera 
>  proponents was that they would reduce accidents and injuries, not 
>  rearrange them. This study agrees with long-term findings in Australia 
>  and North Carolina."
>  
>  Many many on this list, despite this information still enthusiastically 
>  support the cameras. Apparently in Minneapolis, making money for the city 
>  is more important than protecting the citizens.

A battle of references I suppose.  I believe that the NYT's article was
more positive.  There are a number of things to keep in mind.

1) These studies may or may not be valid.
2) Their results may or may not generalize to driving
in Minneapolis.
3) Even if valid and generalizable, changing just one
variable may significantly affect the results.  For
example, a well done public service campaign may reduce
rear-end collisions.

My position is that the city and the PD should record
all relevant data and make their own determination. It
would appear that Lt. Reinhart has researched this issue
and the Department believes that camera can benefit the
public.  I would be moderately surprised if all the
studies show that accidents only increase and if so that 
the PD would go a head with the project anyway.

Dan Prozinski wrote:

> But these red light cameras, I am troubled by our 
> willingness to fine a person for something that can't be 
> proven.  Who was driving the car?  Let me propose this: three 
> strikes on a vehicle and you're out.  Two warning letters, 
> then a stiff fine, and this should not be a moving violation.  
> If this is a behavior problem the person is very likely 
> doing it often and they will be tagged shortly.  If it's an issue 
> of someone else driving the car, the owner will be alerted to the 
> situation and made responsible.

You are already responsible for parking tickets even if you
are not driving.  You are responsible for any accident or
harm done by your vehicle even if you are not the one
driving.  Why shouldn't you be responsible for who you let
drive your car?  I think that any responsible person would
reimburse you for the ticket.

Ben Jangula wrote:

>  I have been following the discussion on red lights-cameras 
>  at intersections. I was wondering if using cameras to ticket 
>  red light runners would apply to bicycles as well as motor vehicles?

I think they should, but I'm not sure if the technology can
process bicycles.  It might be hard to pick up the registration
sticker, if there even was one. :-)  If they could, then I
would support using cameras for jaywalking as well.

Michael Atherton
Prospect Park



REMINDERS:
1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If 
you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at [EMAIL 
PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list.

2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.

For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
________________________________

Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn 
E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[email protected]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls

Reply via email to