Keep the red light cameras on

by HOWARD M. BERLIN

11/24/2002

My friend John complained that his son recently received a greeting card from the Wilmington Police Department—a $75 ticket for running a red light. He was caught by one of the city's 10 robot cameras.

In the first 17 months, the city has sent out over 37,200 such notices. Although John claims his son unintentionally ran the light, he cited all the usual gripes nonetheless. It's unfair; it hurts poor people; it's big brother surveilance; it's an invasion of privacy; and it's nothing more than a way to raise money.

He said that I would change my mind if I were to be caught by the camera. I say: Baloney!

There is nothing wrong in using cameras to catch those who break the law, especially the habitual individuals who really don't give a damn what they are doing and the possibity their consequence of causing the death of an innocent motorist or pedestrian. I'm talking about the irresponsible miscreants who enter the intersection after the light has already turned red.

At $75 a shot, perhaps this financial penalty will be motivation to curb this epidemic behavior. I also reminded my friend that the ticket goes to the car's owner. He should be glad that he was the one that got the $75 fine without any points on his son's driving record.

Over 70 municipalities now use similar cameras and about a dozen have cameras just for speeders. According to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, in Washington, D.C. alone, the number of speeders on selected neighborhood streets has decreased by as much as 89 percent only six months after the cameras were installed. In Wilmington, eight of the ten cameras have resulted in decreases in citations at its locations ranging from 57 to 88 percent.

I asked John what his solution would be to stop these red light runners, without using cameras. His answer was to get the cops out of the doughnut shops and onto the streets. I countered that even if all the cops were on the street and many of the desk jobs to be handled by civilian employees, there still wouldn't be enough cops to be everywhere 24/7, especially with the city's financial crisis.

I also don't see these cameras as an invasion of privacy. Having a license to drive a motor vehicle is not a right, but a privilege in this state and that carries with it certain obligations and expectations.

When driving on public streets, there is no expectation of privacy.

As for being a cash cow, so what? This issue isn't in the same league as the state's notorious speed-trap towns. All taxes, such as Wilmington's wage and property taxes, could also be considered cash cows but I don't hear critics complaining about them with the same fervor.

It costs real money to keep real cops on the streets. As virtual cops, cameras provide photographic proof. They don't go on strike or take doughnut breaks. They are on duty 24/7. Actually, they are a good investment with an average daily take of over $2,000 after paying a $43 cut on each ticket to Lockheed Martin, the private firm that supplied and maintains the system.

Cameras, even fake ones, should make a lot of motorists think twice when approaching a yellow light and the possibility of putting others in harm's way. As for its not being fair, cameras treat all violators equally. It still remains to be proved whether yellow light times have been shorten, as some claim, to increase the "gotcha" rate.

Howard M. Berlin, of Wilmington, is a college educator of electrical engineering and a member of The News Journal Community Advisory Board.