Revenue Over Reason? City Keeps Cameras In Place After Study Shows They Increased Accidents

No news here. A municipality puts in red-light cameras to generate revenue while telling the public "we're doing it for *your* good." Kinda makes ya lose yer faith in politicians, don't it? ;-)

Same mentality originated with Radar guns. It was like the mafia started wearing badges.

"We are doing this for your protection" is the justification of every tyrant in the history of human civilization. And all that ends up happening is that their coffers get full while the people suffer.

But hey who can we argue with...we keep putting these people in office.

How does a radar gun cause accidents? If cops didn't enforce speed laws, idiots would drive even more recklessly w/o fear of punishment.

This nation is a nation built on laws, if you don't like it move to a lawless nation and tell me how you like it.

Speed cameras, red light cameras etc while built with good intention, became a cash cow for municipalities to raise money and keep taxes low(political suicide to raise tax rate). For this reason, I do not support the use of them.

Secondly, we have a right to face our accuser in a court of law. I doubt a nikon or canon is going to come to court.

radar guns at intersections cause accidents due to the drivers slamming on their brakes to avoid getting a ticket from the accompanying red light camera.

There are some other unique psychological factors that play into speeding tickets as well as other fines. By setting up a speeding ticket all of a sudden you attach a monetary value to the act of speeding. When you attach a monetary value the moral obligations that individuals have to speeding are removed. So when weighing the pro's and cons you no longer regard other peoples lives, but in fact make your decision of risk/reward on a purely financial basis. Then, if the fines are too low, there will be an increase in speeding. The higher you raise the fine the less people will speed. Aside from having a high monetary cost to those that are caught, high fines also have a high to people's happiness levels. For example, if you lived in a society where breaking any laws would result in execution, you probably wouldn't be as happy. Finally, in addition to the cost to happiness, if you increase your fines past a certain point, the net profit will decrease as the decrease in speeding offences will outweigh the increased profit per ticket.

and to your comment on lawless nations. Studies have found that small tribal communities with no laws are far happier and everyone knows their place due to social norms. I'm not sure how and if this scales up to large countries.

What places Joe?

The example has been shown around the world. Here are a couple examples.

1. In Norway, the lobster industry is unregulated by any law enforcement, yet they don't over fish the sea and it is virtually impossible to get a monopoly over the industry. This is due to traditional catching grounds, social norms have dictated that you only catch your fair share. When these norms are broken society is structured such that the person braking those norms are dealt with by shunning them from society, and if they continue, acts of sabotage etc.

2. In Africa, small tribal communities have traditionally had no police enforcement. This absence of official enforcement decreased the amount of crime. What would happen is that whenever someone would step out of line and break the social norms, they were "dealt" with by the community in accordance to the severity of the crime. Not simply locked up and given free food. Society enforcing these norms allowed for many potential law breakers to be quickly put in their place before they did anything serious.

I assume you mean, cameras at intersections cause accidents. There is no need to slam on your brake when you see a radar gun, that just shows the cop your guilty :-p Again, anything that will prevent accidents at intersections and potentially save lives I support. While the cameras, I hope, were designed with good intent, it has become a solely a revenue generator which is why I am against them.

Secondly, to comment on your response re: speed tickets etc, I hope you are not suggesting a MV laws is preferred. Fact is, humans respond to the carrot and stick. I assume you are not a father, or mother, since you believe punishment doesn't work.

Fact is, if there were no threat of punishment or repercussions, idiot drives will drive even "idioter" and cause more accidents. I am sure you don't need studies to prove this. Again, there must be a line drawn in the sand when it comes to government intervention. Motor vehicle laws shouldn't be an issue since it applies to a 3000 lb vehicle potentially moving at triple digit speeds. Remember, you are given certain rights by our beautiful constitution, driving isn't one of them.

By your mentality, one shouldn't have go to go through driver training, or even be licensed to drive a MV.

In your response regarding lawless societies, Africa........ really? Thats the best you got?

Regarding Norway, read what you wrote. Social norms, acts of sabotage. Does this sound familiar? Social norms = laws. Acts of sabotage...while I would not liken them to jail or monetary punishment since it is much more crude and archaic, it would be similar no?