Red Light Cameras: A Grudging Supporter

When I was stationed in San Diego, there was a big flap over the installation of red light cameras, because they were a) an invasion of privacy b) big brother going high tech and c) they were installed in places where lots of lights were run but few accidents took place (for revenue generation), but billed as being "for safety" and d) the police handed off the job of giving out tickets to private companies, including access to the DMV database.

When the idea came to Austin, the people around here raised all the above as reasons why the cameras should not go in. True to form, the city council moved to installed them over the vociferous objections of the citizenry (and mostly got re-elected anyway). So they have been in for a year, and the data have been compiled and studied, and the results are in:

When you install red light cameras at intersections with lots of crashes (for safety), T-bone (right-angle) collisions dropped almost in half. Predictably, rear-end collisions increased but surprisingly only by 5%. This tells me that about half of those [deleted] people who were running red lights and T-bone crashing into and killing people, could have avoided the collisions. Now they are just jamming the brakes and getting hit from behind.

Like I told my Darling Wife the other day, I'd rather somebody got a bad case of whiplash* than a bad case of dead, any day.

People the yellow lights are there for a reason. They are not there to tell you to speed up. If it takes a "you'll be ticketed" camera on the intersection to get you to stop in time for the red light, you are a jackass AND costing me my privacy when the cameras go in to catch your sorry [deleted] and fine you. Our society was set up for the governance of a good, moral, and religious people and if you fall short in those areas, you will disrespect the other drivers on the road and chance the red light. Thus, we must use a bigger stick than the slim chance of a policeman catching you.

Therefore (I thought I would never say this but here goes):

When they are installed (only) at intersections with lots of accidents due to running red lights, and administered by companies with private detective licenses (as Texas cameras may not be, oopsy) or, preferably, the Police. . .

I support the use of red light cameras.

There, I said it. Ugh, now I need a shower.

********

* If you had read or listened to Pete Egoscue like you should have done, you would likely be spared that case of whiplash. If your spine is drawn (by the muscles thereon) into such a shape that your head is rotated down, with your chin by your chest, as you drive, you are begging for a whiplash injury. With your chin down (this is counterintuitive, so follow me here) in a rear-end collision, your head doesn't snap back right away. The spine is not ready for the head to snap back into the headrest; the head is forced FORWARD and then it is too far from the head rest for the head rest to do any good. Then, when your head stops going forward, your head will snap back with nothing to catch it, and you suffer a spinal injury.

If, on the other hand, your spine is erect and your head is close to or touching the head rest, you are in good shape. When your car is hit from behind, the head is positioned to pivot backward on the neck, so it does . . . and strikes the head rest which is there to catch it. Then the headrest pushes your head forward with the rest of the car and, if your head bounces forward it is at a reduced velocity and much less harmful energy is put into your neck, having been dissipated in the padding of your seat back.

Sit up straight! If you can.