Smile! You're on Red Light Camera!
No doubt if you live in or near a metropolitan area, you've seen red light cameras as they're popping up faster than CVS Pharmacies. They're the boon of municipalities and the bane of civil libertarians but we all know they're here to stay.
There was once a time--at least in Chicago--when stoplights were timed perfectly. Timed in such a way that if you began at a stoplight that turned green and drove the speed limit (25 MPH in Chicago) you could travel most arterial streets (Madison, Lake, Chicago, Ashland, Western etc) without ever having to stop. It's true. Then the pavement sensor emerged and changed traffic flow. In some ways it was an improvement because if you approached a red light and no other traffic was travelling on the perpendicular street, the light would change and you could go, saving fuel and time. Now it seems like a push because a single car activating a sensor can stop the flow of a much greater volume of traffic, just drive by a mall or large retail center late at night and watch as a single car will trigger a red light for just one car to be allowed to exit a parking lot.
Now photo-enforced intersections have turned urban drivers into hair-trigger drivers. I distinctly remember learning about 'stale green lights' in Driver's Education, any green light which is due to turn yellow and then red. We were told to approach 'stale greens' with caution, be prepared to stop but once you've reached a certain point, even if the light turns, you can clear the intersection safely (and legally) before opposing traffic is given the green. The problem with the red light cameras is that it forces the driver to second guess their timing and wonder if they'll 'get caught'. It used to be you'd roll the dice and hope a cop wasn't nearby in case you were running a red light, now the figure $90 (or more) pops into your head and that heistation causes all manner of reactions. I've seen people slam on their brakes, end up halfway in the intersection but not setting off the camera only to put the car in reverse and activate the camera in reverse as the cameras sense any movement. On the other extreme, I've seen drivers approach photo-enforced intersections slower than the speed limit (slowing traffic flow behind them) so as to avoid slamming on the brakes to stop whereas if they had just proceeded normally they would've made it past the intersection with plenty of time to spare. There are competing studies that speak to the effectiveness of photo-enforced intersections, one says it makes the intersections safer and another says the presence of the cameras actually make the intersections more dangerous.
Not long after Chicago began installing the red light cameras, I got caught but I was driving a vehicle owned by my employer (for the first and only time) and since the owner of the vehicle is the one who's ticketed, I got kind of a freebie. I even owned up to it the day it happened and told my boss but I never was asked to pay the fine. I know if you've read this far, you must have an opinion about photo-enforced intersections, please share it with us in the comments. Ever been nabbed at one? Are the cameras an affront to our civil liberties or a necessary component of our tech-heavy society?