Your Subtitle text
information resources
October 21/09
Wise Up Winnipeg releases a video address to mayor Sam Katz, Police Chief McCaskill, Justice Minister Dave Chomiak and ACS.
We invite them once again to engage in an open public debate on the program. To date none of the above have returned any of our inquiries. Hiding Behind "No Comment" is no longer acceptable.
Wise Up Winnipeg releases a video address to mayor Sam Katz, Police Chief McCaskill, Justice Minister Dave Chomiak and ACS.
We invite them once again to engage in an open public debate on the program. To date none of the above have returned any of our inquiries. Hiding Behind "No Comment" is no longer acceptable.
I
apologize for the delay in updating this page. We have had tremendous
response to our campaign and as a result time had to be used
accordingly. Temporarily I have posted below, 6 key reports. I am
creating a video that will explain their significance in an easy to
understand way.
I am also creating a audio version of each report that you can either listen to on site or download and put in your ipod or mp3 player. This way you can listen to them on your way to work, while walking etc.
Make sure you join our email update service to be notified when the video and audio files are posted. Posted Oct. 16/09 3:22pm
___________________________________________
The Red Light Running Crisis Is it Intentional?
There’s a hidden tax being levied on motorists today. In theory, this tax is only levied on those who violate the law and put others in danger. But the reality is that the game has been rigged. And we’re all at risk.
We are told to accept the idea that our laws should be administered by machines—not human beings —because it is a matter of safety. We must accept this expansion of government and this Orwellian threat to our privacy because cameras are the solution to the so-called red light running crisis.
This is a federal issue, not just a local one. The federal government is promoting and offering funding for this “solution”, because the safety benefits are supposed to be indisputable. After all, who’s going to object? Nobody likes a red light runner. They endanger
themselves and others. They must be penalized.
But why have so many people become wanton red light runners all of a sudden? The answer seems to be that changes made to accommodate camera enforcement have produced yellow light times that, in many cases, are shortened to the point that they are inadequate. And when people come upon an intersection with inadequate yellow time, they are faced with the choice either of stopping abruptly on yellow (risking a rear end accident) or accelerating.
The options for those confronting such circumstances are limited and unsafe. But each time a driver faces this dilemma, government increases its odds for hitting the jackpot.
This report suggests there is something that can be done to address this hazard. It cites examples of problem intersections where yellow times have been raised by about 30 percent and the number of people entering on red fell dramatically. It cites, in addition, controlled scientific studies that confirm the hypothesis that longer yellows are better. The following reductions in red light entries are documented:
Mesa, Arizona 73%
Georgia 75%
Virginia site 1 79%
Virginia site 2 77%
Virginia site 3 Problem “virtually eliminated”
Maryland Problem “virtually eliminated”
Click here to view report
___________________________________________
___________________________________________
Red Light Running Cameras: Would Crashes, Injuries and Automobile Insurance Rates Increase If They Are Used in Florida?
Running a red light can cause severe traffic crashes especially when one vehicle runs into the side of another. Red light cameras photograph violators who are sent traffic tickets by mail. Intuitively, cameras appear to be a good idea. However, comprehensive studies conclude cameras actually increase crashes and injuries, providing a safety argument not to install them. Presently, Florida statutes do not permit red light camera evidence to be used as the sole basis for ticketing drivers for violating the law. Legislation to permit camera citations has been proposed since
the 1990s, but none has passed to date. This paper explains red light running trends in Florida; effective solutions to reduce red light running; findings from major camera evaluations; examples of flawed evaluations; the automobile insurance financial interest in cameras; and the increased likelihood of even higher crash and injury rates if cameras are used in Florida due to the high percent of elderly drivers and passengers.
The theory behindred light cameras as potentially effective is that they rely on deterring red light running primarily through punishment of a specific driving behavior and secondarily by changing drivers’ experience. Because the rigorous and robust studies conclude that cameras are associated with increased crashes and costs, any economic analysis of cameras should include these newly generated costs to the public. Indirect costs to the public are usually not
considered in the calculation of total revenues and profits generated from red light cameras. Florida should be cautious in using traffic safety information from the automobile insurance industry. Insurance financial goals are to increase their revenues and profits, which do not necessarily include reducing traffic crashes, injuries or fatalities. Also, public policy should avoid conflicts of interest that enhance revenues for government and private interests at
the risk of public safety
Click here to view report
___________________________________________
___________________________________________
The Impact of Red Light Cameras (Photo-Red Enforcement) on Crashes in Virginia
Red light running is a significant public health concern, killing more than 800 people and injuring 200,000 in the United States per year (Retting et al., 1999a; Retting and Kyrychenko, 2002).
To reduce red light running in Virginia, six jurisdictions (Alexandria, Arlington, Fairfax City, Fairfax County, Falls Church, Vienna) deployed red light cameras at some point during the 10- year period when they were permitted under Virginia law.
This report documents the safety impacts of those cameras based on 7 years of crash data for the period January 1, 1998, through December 31, 2004.
Consistent with the findings of a previous Virginia study (Garber et al., 2005), this study finds that
cameras are associated with an increase in rear-end crashes (about 27% or 42% depending on the statistical method used as shown in Tables ES1 and H1) and a decrease in red light running crashes (about 8% or 42% depending on the statistical method used as shown in Tables ES1 and H2). This report also shows that there is significant variation by intersection and by jurisdiction: one jurisdiction (Arlington) suggests that cameras are associated with an increase in all six crash types that were explicitly studied (rearend, angle, red light running, injury red light running, total injury, and total) whereas two other jurisdictions saw decreases in most of these crash types. Click here to view report
___________________________________________
EVALUATION OF THE RED LIGHT CAMERA
FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT
DECEMBER 2003 ENFORCEMENT PILOT PROJECT
The Red Light Cameras Pilot Projects Act, 1998, was passed by the Ontario Legislature in December 1998 to enable designated municipalities in the province of Ontario to operate red light cameras for a two-year period. The Cities of Toronto, Hamilton, Ottawa and Regional Municipalities of Halton, Peel, and Waterloo participated in the original two-year pilot project,
called the Red Light Camera Enforcement Pilot Project.
Click here to view report
___________________________________________
A DETAILED INVESTIGATION OF CRASH RISK REDUCTION RESULTING FROM RED LIGHT CAMERAS IN SMALL URBAN AREAS
This paper analyzes the impact of red light cameras (RLCs) on crashes at signalized intersections. It examines total crashes and also breaks crashes into categories based on both severity (e.g., causing severe injuries or only property da7mage) and by type (e.g., angle, rear end). Prompted by criticism of the simplistic methods and small data sets used in many studies of red light cameras, we relate the occurrence of these crashes to the characteristics of signalized intersections, presence or absence of RLC, traffic, weather and other variables. Using a large data set including 26 months before the introduction of RLCs, we analyze reported accidents occurring near 303 intersections over a 57-month period, for a total of 17,271 observations.
Click here to view report
Crash Reductions Associated with Red Light Camera Enforcement in Oxnard California
Red light cameras are increasingly being used in communities to deter drivers from running red lights.
Numerous studies have established that red light camera enforcement sharply reduces red light violations, but little information is available regarding crash effects. **This report has been used to sell photo enforcement to cities all over the North America. It has been completely discredited by qualified researchers. They could not replicate the results and it's data is vague.
Click here to view report
City of Winnipeg Photo Enforcement Program Performance Audit–Final Report 2006
The City launched the Photo Enforcement
Program in late 2002, pursuant to an
amendment to The Highway Traffic Act. The
primary goal of the program is to improve
traffic safety through reduction of red light
running and speeding violations and
collisions and injuries associated with these
high risk driving behaviours. While
enhanced public safety is the primary goal
of the program, financial projections made
at inception suggested that the program
would also generate significant revenues for
the City to help address current budget
challenges. Over the first five years of
operation, gross revenues were projected to
exceed $95 million with the net revenue to
the City expected to be over $65 million.
Click here to view report
I am also creating a audio version of each report that you can either listen to on site or download and put in your ipod or mp3 player. This way you can listen to them on your way to work, while walking etc.
Make sure you join our email update service to be notified when the video and audio files are posted. Posted Oct. 16/09 3:22pm
___________________________________________
The Red Light Running Crisis Is it Intentional?
There’s a hidden tax being levied on motorists today. In theory, this tax is only levied on those who violate the law and put others in danger. But the reality is that the game has been rigged. And we’re all at risk.
We are told to accept the idea that our laws should be administered by machines—not human beings —because it is a matter of safety. We must accept this expansion of government and this Orwellian threat to our privacy because cameras are the solution to the so-called red light running crisis.
This is a federal issue, not just a local one. The federal government is promoting and offering funding for this “solution”, because the safety benefits are supposed to be indisputable. After all, who’s going to object? Nobody likes a red light runner. They endanger
themselves and others. They must be penalized.
But why have so many people become wanton red light runners all of a sudden? The answer seems to be that changes made to accommodate camera enforcement have produced yellow light times that, in many cases, are shortened to the point that they are inadequate. And when people come upon an intersection with inadequate yellow time, they are faced with the choice either of stopping abruptly on yellow (risking a rear end accident) or accelerating.
The options for those confronting such circumstances are limited and unsafe. But each time a driver faces this dilemma, government increases its odds for hitting the jackpot.
This report suggests there is something that can be done to address this hazard. It cites examples of problem intersections where yellow times have been raised by about 30 percent and the number of people entering on red fell dramatically. It cites, in addition, controlled scientific studies that confirm the hypothesis that longer yellows are better. The following reductions in red light entries are documented:
Mesa, Arizona 73%
Georgia 75%
Virginia site 1 79%
Virginia site 2 77%
Virginia site 3 Problem “virtually eliminated”
Maryland Problem “virtually eliminated”
Click here to view report
___________________________________________
___________________________________________
Red Light Running Cameras: Would Crashes, Injuries and Automobile Insurance Rates Increase If They Are Used in Florida?
Running a red light can cause severe traffic crashes especially when one vehicle runs into the side of another. Red light cameras photograph violators who are sent traffic tickets by mail. Intuitively, cameras appear to be a good idea. However, comprehensive studies conclude cameras actually increase crashes and injuries, providing a safety argument not to install them. Presently, Florida statutes do not permit red light camera evidence to be used as the sole basis for ticketing drivers for violating the law. Legislation to permit camera citations has been proposed since
the 1990s, but none has passed to date. This paper explains red light running trends in Florida; effective solutions to reduce red light running; findings from major camera evaluations; examples of flawed evaluations; the automobile insurance financial interest in cameras; and the increased likelihood of even higher crash and injury rates if cameras are used in Florida due to the high percent of elderly drivers and passengers.
The theory behindred light cameras as potentially effective is that they rely on deterring red light running primarily through punishment of a specific driving behavior and secondarily by changing drivers’ experience. Because the rigorous and robust studies conclude that cameras are associated with increased crashes and costs, any economic analysis of cameras should include these newly generated costs to the public. Indirect costs to the public are usually not
considered in the calculation of total revenues and profits generated from red light cameras. Florida should be cautious in using traffic safety information from the automobile insurance industry. Insurance financial goals are to increase their revenues and profits, which do not necessarily include reducing traffic crashes, injuries or fatalities. Also, public policy should avoid conflicts of interest that enhance revenues for government and private interests at
the risk of public safety
Click here to view report
___________________________________________
___________________________________________
The Impact of Red Light Cameras (Photo-Red Enforcement) on Crashes in Virginia
Red light running is a significant public health concern, killing more than 800 people and injuring 200,000 in the United States per year (Retting et al., 1999a; Retting and Kyrychenko, 2002).
To reduce red light running in Virginia, six jurisdictions (Alexandria, Arlington, Fairfax City, Fairfax County, Falls Church, Vienna) deployed red light cameras at some point during the 10- year period when they were permitted under Virginia law.
This report documents the safety impacts of those cameras based on 7 years of crash data for the period January 1, 1998, through December 31, 2004.
Consistent with the findings of a previous Virginia study (Garber et al., 2005), this study finds that
cameras are associated with an increase in rear-end crashes (about 27% or 42% depending on the statistical method used as shown in Tables ES1 and H1) and a decrease in red light running crashes (about 8% or 42% depending on the statistical method used as shown in Tables ES1 and H2). This report also shows that there is significant variation by intersection and by jurisdiction: one jurisdiction (Arlington) suggests that cameras are associated with an increase in all six crash types that were explicitly studied (rearend, angle, red light running, injury red light running, total injury, and total) whereas two other jurisdictions saw decreases in most of these crash types. Click here to view report
___________________________________________
EVALUATION OF THE RED LIGHT CAMERA
FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT
DECEMBER 2003 ENFORCEMENT PILOT PROJECT
The Red Light Cameras Pilot Projects Act, 1998, was passed by the Ontario Legislature in December 1998 to enable designated municipalities in the province of Ontario to operate red light cameras for a two-year period. The Cities of Toronto, Hamilton, Ottawa and Regional Municipalities of Halton, Peel, and Waterloo participated in the original two-year pilot project,
called the Red Light Camera Enforcement Pilot Project.
Click here to view report
___________________________________________
A DETAILED INVESTIGATION OF CRASH RISK REDUCTION RESULTING FROM RED LIGHT CAMERAS IN SMALL URBAN AREAS
This paper analyzes the impact of red light cameras (RLCs) on crashes at signalized intersections. It examines total crashes and also breaks crashes into categories based on both severity (e.g., causing severe injuries or only property da7mage) and by type (e.g., angle, rear end). Prompted by criticism of the simplistic methods and small data sets used in many studies of red light cameras, we relate the occurrence of these crashes to the characteristics of signalized intersections, presence or absence of RLC, traffic, weather and other variables. Using a large data set including 26 months before the introduction of RLCs, we analyze reported accidents occurring near 303 intersections over a 57-month period, for a total of 17,271 observations.
Click here to view report
Crash Reductions Associated with Red Light Camera Enforcement in Oxnard California
Red light cameras are increasingly being used in communities to deter drivers from running red lights.
Numerous studies have established that red light camera enforcement sharply reduces red light violations, but little information is available regarding crash effects. **This report has been used to sell photo enforcement to cities all over the North America. It has been completely discredited by qualified researchers. They could not replicate the results and it's data is vague.
Click here to view report
City of Winnipeg Photo Enforcement Program Performance Audit–Final Report 2006
The City launched the Photo Enforcement
Program in late 2002, pursuant to an
amendment to The Highway Traffic Act. The
primary goal of the program is to improve
traffic safety through reduction of red light
running and speeding violations and
collisions and injuries associated with these
high risk driving behaviours. While
enhanced public safety is the primary goal
of the program, financial projections made
at inception suggested that the program
would also generate significant revenues for
the City to help address current budget
challenges. Over the first five years of
operation, gross revenues were projected to
exceed $95 million with the net revenue to
the City expected to be over $65 million.
Click here to view report
