Raise your hand if you hate red light cameras and photo speeding enforcement. Everyone? Yeah, that’s what we thought.
Two bi-partisan bills passed last session would ban the universally despised mechanisms that are mostly intended to raise cash for local municipalities. So why on earth would our very own Gov. of Denver Hickenlooper threaten to veto such popular and common sense measures?
Hick is even pontificating asking the Department of Transportation for a study on the matter, telling Colorado Public Radio:
“Part of this, as is often the case, it’s hard to get the real facts. Part of me wants to go to the Department of Transportation and say, ‘Why don’t we do our own study,’ and once and for all, in Colorado, try and gather the data and see does this make a difference or not?”
We’ve known for a long time now that Hick couldn’t make a decision to save his own life, but this is beyond absurd. He needs to stop letting fellow mayors pull his strings and just sign the damn bills. It’s what the people who elected him expect.
GET THE FACTS: CivilLiberty101.com proves studies that say "Red Light Cameras Improve Safety" are lying! Here is how you can know for sure:
RED LIGHT CAMERA STUDIES VIOLATE THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD:
Improper assumptions have skewed results of many studies on the subject of red light cameras. The most obvious being the fact that the cameras themselves do not provide drivers with salient information needed to make safer decisions in advance of the red.
Furthermore, the cameras do not begin to operate until after a violation has occurred. Therefore, it is highly improper for science to say the “cameras” influence behavior.
To understand the salient factor(s) that do influence driver behavior one must look at the control sites (intersections without cameras).
To say “The halo effect of the cameras cause behavior modification at these sites” is like saying “THE PLACEBO CURED THE DISEASE”.
This is also a fundamental violation of the scientific method.
Behavior modification at control sites indicates an environmental influence. In this case the environmental influence is the advertising campaign. These campaigns must be categorized as ferocious and fearsome.
Increased Rear End Collisions (REC): The influence of these scare tactics explains the increased incident of REC documented by most studies. The increase in REC also testifies to the fact that “cameras do not provide drivers with essential information needed to make better decisions”.
People panic when “they don’t know what to do” (They lack information). With an objective method (1), more drivers will operate with confidence and be able to focus on the most important task -which is to clear the intersection safely- rather than stop improperly.
GET THE FACTS AT CIVILLIBERTY101.COM