Assemblyman Declan O’Scanlan today challenged red light camera companies to allow their cameras be taken down by any municipality where traffic data proves a legitimate safety concern.
“Many local officials believed the companies’ sales pitch that promised red light cameras would increase safety,” O’Scanlon, R-Monmouth, said. “Now that towns are gathering data that casts real doubt on those numbers, I call on any company truly motivated by safety to permit municipal officials to remove cameras from intersections where those officials have found there to be a net decrease in safety after the cameras were installed.
“We’ve heard over and over that this is a safety issue,” O’Scanlon added. “If that’s truly the case, it’s time for camera companies to put their money where there mouth is and allow towns to remove cameras without penalty – no matter what their contract stipulates.”
At the intersection of Route 1 and Bakers Basin Road/Franklin Corner Road in Lawrenceville, crashes nearly doubled in 7 ½ months compared to the previous year after cameras were installed.
According to a recent Lawrenceville Patch story: A total of 25 accidents happened at or within 200 feet of the intersection between Nov. 18, 2010, and June 29, 2011 – before the cameras – compared to 49 accidents between Nov. 18, 2011, and June 29 of this year (after the cameras were installed). Rear end accidents went up by 100 percent, right-angle accidents went up by 33 percent and T-Bone accidents – typically the most dangerous – went up by 100 percent.
This occurred as the township is expecting record revenue from citations.
“I find it troubling that these contracts don’t universally allow removal of cameras without financial penalty due to safety concerns,” said O’Scanlon, “But apparently unless municipal officials specifically ask for such a stipulation the camera companies are happy to sign contracts without it. That is, quite frankly, outrageous since these companies know there are many instances where crashes and injuries have gone up after these cameras have been installed. They are happy to profit from municipal officials’ trust –even if it might force a municipality into the untenable position of choosing between the safety of New Jersey motorists or busting their budgets to pay penalties.”
“If camera companies don’t offer to remove cameras at intersections that have become more dangerous, they will reveal their true colors and be admitting that they care about their bottom line more than they do about the safety of New Jersey motorists,” O’Scanlon said. “There should be no reason why we can’t get a definitive statement from these companies on this within 24 hours. If they really care about safety this is a no-brainer.”
O’Scanlon, who has been a leading advocate against red light cameras, sponsors legislation that would end the state’s pilot program, or, failing a repeal, another measure that would ensure a more fair system for motorists. TLS.
the accident statistics should be made public.
“IF” it helps then its good, but if not then ‘GET RID OF THEM’
The red light camera companies should perhaps be named as co-defendants in lawsuits arising at intersections where there is data showing an increased hazard statistic after installation of a camera. When they are hit with a few substantial judgements, they’ll reconsider safety statistics versus profitability. The question is whether or not they can be legally held liable as a contributing cause.
I am not a fan of the cameras . I received 2 tickets because of not coming to a complete stop at a red light (turning right on red)
however I don’t understand how it causes more accidents . can someone explain?
taking it down might mean you got something to hide..could be the towns to far out of control..!!
If you read the 3 types of accidents in the article above, it would make sense.
1) People stop short much more often than at other intersections to avoid the possibility of going thru the light. The car behind rear ends them, not expecting the sudden stop. The car behind gets blamed for following too closely, but the accident would not have occurred if the camera wasn’t there to scare the first person into the abrupt stop.
2) T-Bone accidents: Instead of getting hit in the rear, getting hit from oncoming traffic from either side because of the short stop in the middle of the intersection not to run the light on the natural reaction to the camera flash. The position of the vehicles creates the letter T.
3) Right Angle accidents: Same cause and direction as a T-Bone, but less of a direct impact to the occupants, creating a L shape, right angle impact. Usually not as harmful to the passengers.
Lets call a spade, a spade. Of course they r in it for the money!!! And you assumed that no one was making a significant profit?!!
There are more accidents because of more people using cell phones and other distractions therefore it still could be safer. I dont see how you can show statistics for this.
calm down you will never-ever see them in Lakewood