|Home >Camera Enforcement > Red Light Cameras > Virginia DOT Study Shows Cameras Increase Injury Accidents|
California Workers Sue Red Light Camera Firm Over Poor Pay, Conditions
Ohio Supreme Court Briefed On Anti-Camera Referendum
New Jersey Senate Committee Votes To Ban Out-Of-State Photo Tickets
Florida: Red Light Camera Ballot Battle Hits The Courtroom
Federal Government Pours $25 Million Into New York Anti-Driving Campaign
View Main Topics:
Subscribe via RSS or E-Mail
Back To Front Page
1/27/2005Virginia DOT Study Shows Cameras Increase Injury Accidents
The Virginia Transportation Research Council studied all of the state red light camera programs and found an overall increase in injury accidents.
A brand new, exhaustive study of all seven Virginia red light camera programs shows an overall increase in injury accidents has occurred where the devices are installed. The study was performed by The Virginia Transportation Research Council at the request of the state transportation secretary. The report also notes a fatal flaw in the Virginia's camera law -- motorists can ignore any ticket received in the mail. Only tickets that are personally served matter (the same thing happened in Arizona).
Despite a distinct sympathy in favor of camera enforcement, the researchers found a "definite" increase in rear-end accidents and only a "possible" decrease in angle accidents. Most importantly, the net effect was that more injuries happened after cameras are installed. Camera proponents explain this away by asserting angle accidents are more serious, but this claim has not been scientifically studied according to this report. The rear end collisions caused by the cameras still produce injuries -- the original promise of camera proponents was that they would reduce accidents and injuries, not rearrange them.
This study agrees with long-term findings in Australia and North Carolina.
1.7mb PDF format
Further analysis indicated that the cameras are contributing to a definite increase in rear-end crashes, a possible decrease in angle crashes, a net decrease in injury crashes attributable to red light running, and an increase in total injury crashes. Page xiii
Summary of Empirical Bayes Method (Level 4 Analysis)
[Editor's note: only Fairfax County data reflects the most rigorous analysis. Other cities did not provide volume, yellow time, and data on other key factors.] The latter half of Appendix D shows the results of an Empirical Bayes analysis for Fairfax County crash data only. These results suggest the following:
...but it obscures the that only a small percentage of crashes are attributable to red light running. Data from Virginia�s Department of Motor Vehicles, for example, suggested that in 1998 (a year when no red light cameras were in operation), only 3.3% of all crashes involved a driver who �ran traffic control� (DMV, 1999). Page 124
There is a practical issue with regard to issuing citations for red light running: the Code of Virginia requires that an in-person summons, rather than certified mail, be used to compel an individual to appear in court. Because of the high cost of delivering summonses outside Virginia, this requirement could make the programs administratively difficult for some localities if it became commonly known that only an in-person summons can require a vehicle owner either to pay the penalty or to appear in court. However, the program can still legally continue in its present form without a change in the Code. Page xiiSource: Evaluation of Red Light Camera Enforcement Programs in Virginia (The Virginia Transportation Research Council, 1/27/2005)
Permanent Link for this item
Return to Front Page
Front Page | Get Updates |
Site Map |
News Archive |
theNewspaper.com: A journal of the politics of driving