Cameras great way to catch violators

Our fine folks at McMinnville City Hall are at it again, this time coming up with the idea of installing cameras at intersections around town to catch motorists who run red lights.

Let me make my thoughts clear on this idea ‘ I like it.

This is not to suggest I enjoy having cameras plastered around town. On the contrary, the camera the city has aimed on Court Square to produce live Internet images of downtown is disturbing.

But I’m at the point in my life where I place great emphasis on safety. And the thought of someone plowing through a red light and taking me out in the process is not the least bit appealing.

That’s why I’ve latched onto this idea of intersection cameras and encourage city officials to see the plan through to completion. If these cameras can decrease my chances of being in an automobile accident ‘ at absolutely no cost to the city ‘ it has my total support.

I realize this might not necessarily be the majority opinion. I’ve already heard grumbles from folks who say this is all some devious city plot to generate extra revenue at the expense of local motorists. (Insert evil laugh here.)

My reply: The revenue generated is simply a reflection of the problem at hand. If there aren’t people out there blowing through red lights, there won’t be any extra revenue. If you don’t like the idea of paying a $50 ticket, then don’t run a red light. It’s that simple.

From my perch, I’d much rather you stop at the red light and keep your money. Hypothetically speaking, if the city does make a bundle off this venture, it only proves a large segment of our driving population has blatant disregard for the most basic rule of the road. Red means stop. All day, every day.

In my years of working at the Standard, I’ve had the misfortune of covering my share of accidents. I’ve been on the site of fatality wrecks and seen crashes where the victim surely faces years of rehab to regain a normal lifestyle. These are not enjoyable memories.

Intersections are at the top of the list when it comes to common accident sites. And, as you might expect, a large portion of those accidents are caused when someone fails to stop at a red light and enters the intersection.

Representatives from Redflex, the company which wants to install intersection cameras here, say their cameras reduce the number of red light violators by up to 75 percent. This, in turn, reduces the number of intersection collisions. And that just happens to be the part I like.

According to Redflex, motorists who run red lights triggered 220,000 crashes in 2005. The company flaunts a number of newspaper clippings to show how its cameras reduce accidents.

According to the Chicago Sun Times, there has been a 69 percent drop in accidents at the intersection of 71st Street and Ashland since cameras were installed, a 67 percent decrease at the intersection of LaSalle and Kinzie, and a 64 percent decrease at the intersection of Foster and Nagle.

According to the Appeal-Democrat in Marysville, Calif., before the cameras were installed intersections at Third and E averaged 24 collisions a month; Third and F averaged nine collisions a month; and Tenth and G averaged 22 collisions a month. The month after the cameras began monitoring the intersections, the collisions dropped to two, zero and one, respectively.

The way I see it, the only motorists who would be against these intersection cameras are folks who make it a habit of running red lights. That’s fine so long as they plow into their own family and not mine.

James Clark is editor of the Standard. He can be reached at 473-2191 or by e-mail at [email protected].