Here is an article illustrating one of the downsides of traffic cameras - lack of instant feedback. Traditional "in person" traffic enforcement leaves you remembering the encounter, and, often, chiding yourself and promising to do better. Additionally, everybody else sees that someone is pulled over, and they remember that it could be them.
Cameras, however, catch everyone who breaks the law (leaving aside the actually very significant issue of whether assuming that a license plate number identifies the individual driving)... and they don't even know it. And if, as in the article, you aren't receiving the summonses in the mail, you would never have any feedback. Until the day you actually get pulled over - the old fashioned way - and get arrested because (first you heard of it) you owe nearly two million dollars for running red lights and pushing your speed.
Which of course, raises the revenue questions (if this one guy owed two mil, what did everyone else's payments amount to?!) and why cities might have incentive to use cameras rather than enforcement methods which provide direct and immediate disincentives for continued violations... another thought for another day.
I grant that perhaps the guy became aware or should have become aware that, when he never seemed to get caught by the cams, there was in fact something wrong with the notice system, and perhaps he decided to take advantage of this seeming immunity. He was, after all, running up, on average, a citation every two and a half days for seven years.
Cameras, however, catch everyone who breaks the law (leaving aside the actually very significant issue of whether assuming that a license plate number identifies the individual driving)... and they don't even know it. And if, as in the article, you aren't receiving the summonses in the mail, you would never have any feedback. Until the day you actually get pulled over - the old fashioned way - and get arrested because (first you heard of it) you owe nearly two million dollars for running red lights and pushing your speed.
Which of course, raises the revenue questions (if this one guy owed two mil, what did everyone else's payments amount to?!) and why cities might have incentive to use cameras rather than enforcement methods which provide direct and immediate disincentives for continued violations... another thought for another day.
I grant that perhaps the guy became aware or should have become aware that, when he never seemed to get caught by the cams, there was in fact something wrong with the notice system, and perhaps he decided to take advantage of this seeming immunity. He was, after all, running up, on average, a citation every two and a half days for seven years.
