Attitudes Toward Red Light Camera Enforcement in Cities With Camera Programs

Abstract

Objective: To obtain information on attitudes and experiences related to red light camera enforcement in cities with camera programs and in Houston, Texas, where cameras were removed after voters rejected the program in November 2010. Methods:Telephone surveys were conducted with 3,111 drivers in 14 large cities (population greater than 200,000) with long-standing red light camera programs and 300 drivers in Houston, using random samples of landline and cellphone numbers. For analyses combining responses from the 14 cities, cases were weighted to reflect each city's share of the total population for the 14 cities.Results: Among drivers in the 14 cities with red light camera programs, two-thirds favor the use of cameras for red light enforcement, and 42 percent strongly favor it. The chief reasons for opposing cameras were the perceptions that cameras make mistakes and that the motivation for installing them is revenue, not safety. Fortyone percent of drivers favor using cameras to enforce right-turn-on-red violations. Nearly 9 in 10 drivers were aware of the camera enforcement programs in their cities, and 59 percent of these drivers believe the cameras have made intersections safer. Almost half know someone who received a red light camera citation and 17 percent had received at least one ticket themselves. When compared with drivers in the 14 cities with camera programs, the percentage of drivers in Houston who strongly favored enforcement was about the same (45 percent), but strong opposition was higher in Houston than in the other cities (28 percent versus 18 percent). Conclusions:Most drivers in cities with long-standing red light camera programs support cameras and recognize their safety benefits, but communities could do a better job of educating the public about the dangers of right-turn-on-red violations and the need for enforcement. Given that camera opponents frequently said cameras make mistakes, it appears communities also could do a better job of explaining the safeguards that ensure citations are issued only to drivers who clearly run red lights.

Safety Impacts of Red Light Cameras at Signalized Intersections Based on Cellular Automata Models

“…An autoregressive integrated moving average time series analysis of accident counts found RLCs to have an overall favorable net effect on traffic safety (Vanlaar et al 2014). It is generally agreed that RLCs have favorable effects on right-angle collisions (Aeron- Thomas and Hess 2005;McCartt and Eichelberger 2012;Retting and Kyrychenko 2002). However, both favorable and unfavorable effects are found in different studies for rear-end collisions (Huang et al 2008;Obeng and Burkey 2008;Retting et al 2003;South et al 1988).…”

Perceptions of Surveillance: Exploring Feelings Held by Black Community Leaders in Boston Toward Camera Enforcement of Roadway Infractions

“…Additionally, the literature highlights claims from the public of feeling that information in public space (i.e. signage alerting roadway users of nearby cameras) was being intentionally limited, and that CE was covert by design so as to catch as many offenders as possible and drive up revenue, not to encourage safer driving behavior (Freedman et al, 1990;McCartt & Eichelberger, 2012).…”

Modelling and simulation of vehicle movements at signalised junctions

“…Some studies found the installation of RLCs reduces incidences of rear-end collisions (South et al, 1988), while several other studies indicated that the effects on rear-end collisions are small or even unfavourable (Huang et al, 2008;Obeng and Burkey, 2008;Retting et al, 2003). For right-angle collisions, it is generally agreed that RLCs have favourable effects (Aeron-Thomas and Hess, 2005;McCartt and Eichelberger, 2012;Retting and Kyrychenko, 2002).…”