Big brother: Traffic Cameras

April 6, 2008

I’ve read several articles and witnessed the installation of traffic cameras in surrounding areas and have to wonder if traffic surveillance cameras are not inevitable in our future.

Last week, red light cameras were activated at six heavily trafficked Palm Coast intersections.

In December, the City Council voted on a plan to put cameras and monitoring systems at Jacksonville’s most-dangerous intersections in an effort to cut down on red-light running. Feliscia Robbins died of injuries in a crash caused by a driver running a westside red light. Robbins’ father joined Councilman Stephen Joost, Mayor Payton and Sheriff John Rutherford in promoting the legislation.

In Palm Coast, when a driver is recorded as driving through a red light, the City’s traffic control infraction review officer will verify the accuracy of the recorded images. A $125 violation may then be issued. In Jacksonville, motorists photographed violating traffic laws would receive a ticket in the mail with a fine of between $125 and $300.

As traffic in St. Johns county increases, particularly in the St. Augustine and Julington Creek areas, tempers are rising with the temperatures. Added congestion fueled by record growth and tourist drivers unfamiliar with our roads aggravate the problem. We can’t afford a traffic cop on every street corner and this appears to be an economical alternative.

But do cameras provide a deterrent to running lights and other bad driving habits? Will the cases made by the surveillance cameras stand up when challenged in court? It’s too soon to tell, however, I suspect that we are next on the list to find out…. or at least very near the top.

Written by AuggieNewsHound · Filed Under Growth

Comments

3 Responses to “Big brother: Traffic Cameras”

MacV on April 7th, 2008 5:41 am

The headline should be Stupid Brother Redlight runners get nailed.

The photo tickets have stood up in every other court/town. Why not in Palm Coast (or St. A?) We have many people that just consider red lights an inconvenience and/or “for the other guys who wish to be law abiding.”

We should be next on the list. In fact we should be leading the list. Every the cops run through the yellow/red here (as actually seen by me and noted on another board).

Nobody cries about “Big Brother” when speeders are caught. Nobody is unhappy when road checks take drunks or people without licences off the road. Cameras are a very efficient form of law enforcement. Most police cars now have automatic cameras running all the time and yes, sometimes they even do catch law enforcement abuse. That is fine too. Police, like teachers, preachers or the Dr. caught on the computer thing last night, are people too and are going to make mistakes. If they (or the red light runners do) then they should pay the price.
Mike on April 7th, 2008 9:23 pm

I met with and discussed this topic with the Sheriff this afternoon, Auggie,

He commented that he’s fairly neutral on the need for cameras … generally; he says that he isn’t fond of “the technology” however he compared the use of traffic light cameras to the use of DUI checkpoints.

Shoar said that he hasn’t seen that much data on the success of traffic cameras in the states but promises to keep an open mind if they are installed here.

At first, he didn’t like the idea of DUI checkpoints, but the more data that became available, the more it became clear to him that checkpoints do, in fact, take drunk drivers off the road.

The sheriff explained, “Mike, if a checkpoint saved one child’s life in a drunken driving accident, they would all be worth it — especially if that child was yours.”
Dunrobin on April 7th, 2008 10:06 pm

I would support them. We have to embrace the technology available to us, and then leave the LEO human factor available to do what it does best….engage other criminal humans, when necessary.

The cameras WORK. Period. They catch the offenders, they deter those who consider it (running the light) for that split second in decision making processes.