Across America, disgruntled drivers are leading a backlash against red light cameras, which remotely spot red-light runners who are notified by mail of their traffic violation. It seems these drivers dislike the fact that cities “use” such system for revenue streams.

Oh, so that’s what it’s about? It’s not about drivers being peeved that they were caught?

If revenue streams were a good reason for discontinuing such cameras, why draw the line? Should no one get a traffic fine for any violation — ever — because that would enhance a city’s revenue streams? Of course, then no one would be punished, and rampant law-breaking on our roads would cause more traffic accidents.

The problem with red light cameras isn’t revenue streams. The problem is that people run red lights. When their vehicle and its license plate are caught red-handed, they get ticketed. If a police officer was nearby, spotted the same violation and pulled the driver over, they’d also get ticketed. What’s the difference? Running a red light is running a red light.

Yet seven states already have banned red light cameras: Maine, Montana, Mississippi, Nevada, New Hampshire, Wisconsin and West Virginia. And several others are mulling such action, including Texas.

In Houston, some upset drivers are petitioning to get enough signatures to place red light cameras on the November ballot. College Station residents already have voted them out. And the Texas House has tried phasing out such cameras, though the Texas Senate squelched it.

But really, what have opponents accomplished? In College Station, they’ve enabled more people  to run more red lights with impunity. They’ve defeated the purpose of traffic laws, which are for citizens to obey and cities to enforce.

Besides that, red light cameras work. Dallas officials report declines in car accidents caused by red-light runners at all intersections where such cameras are used. Such intersections are known by posted signs and by the cameras themselves, which are clearly visible.

Certainly, city revenues as a result of such fines should be monitored closely. No city should be getting fat as a result. Rather, those funds should be spent wisely. In Houston, such funds are being funneled into greater traffic safety and law enforcement.

According to the Dallas Morning News, Texas’ first city to install red light cameras, Garland, has barely broken even on the process. That’s because it pays more to the outside firm that operates the system than do other cities. Houston, which has a better deal, has amassed $24 million in red light fines since 2007. That’s triple the fines collected in Dallas, whose program is costlier to operate. With 70, Houston also has more cameras than Dallas’ 59.

Here’s a good way to avoid getting a ticket via a red light camera: Stop running red lights. And if you get caught — by a camera or by a police officer — pay your fine and slow down. That’s what the system is truly about, not pacifying those who want to selectively obey our  laws.

Jim S. Adler & Associates supports safe driving campaigns.

Share on Facebook