Red light cameras? Seriously? I don't think I've ever heard people seriously object to them before - because red lights are not routinely run, and running them is widely recognised as dangerous. Whereas anyone who drives recognises it is sometimes safer to do slightly over the speed limit.
The other problem I have with this argument is because of bad road design, allowing traffic behaviour to evolve in an emergent way is a great way to screw bicyclists and pedestrians. So, to bring in the UI metaphor, we have to put in a big error dialog hack of traffic calming etc when you shouldn't be able to press the button at all at that time.
Give me utilitiy or give me something slightly better!
I got pinged by a red light camera in 1989(?) in Sydney near Sydney Uni. It was when they first put them in there. Anyway I dawdled through the lights at 40kmh when getting caught in no-mans land with stop/go through. I got photographed. The annoyance was that if I had of sped through the lights at 90kmh then I would not have been caught. They lack context.
IIRC a couple of counties here got caught shortening the amber interval to increase revenue. Other studies from US DOTs have shown that increasing the amber interval lets drivers make good decisions and decreases people running the lights. So again, no need for the cameras, adjusting to allow emergent behaviour works.
I think town planning and roads(traffic) are another issue. I am comfortable with roads being changed to accomodate pedestrians/bikers explicitly rather than the tack on they are now.
'Sworn to no party, and of no sect am I.' Frederick Vosper's republican motto.
Comments