And don't say it's just bigger government, because it's NOT. It's using technology in place of a policeman sitting by a traffic signal, OR manning a speed trap in the case of the speeding cameras. It's LESS government. And if it's a money grab, then that's fine too.
The issue is...it's ONLY a money grab.
This was from the other thread but it fits here too.
I know this has been addressed before, but if safety was the real reason for these things, other means would be tried before cameras. How about...and I'm just spit-balling here...not having one light turn green instantaneously as the crossing light turn red? Why not leave a second or two and then turn the light allowing a straggler or two to make it through safely? After all, the reason for lights, stop signs, and basically all traffic signals in the first place is to allow drivers to essentially govern themselves safely without having to have a police man standing at every intersection directing traffic. Why? Because if no drivers ever ran a light and were ticketed for it, what would the city do without that money?
But it isn't about safety...it's about revenue generation. In Lafayette this is obvious based on which intersections have the cameras and which ones are enforced. No cameras at Johnston and Ambassador...no cameras at Ambassador and Kaliste Saloom, etc. If it was about safety, the cameras would be where the most accidents have traditionally occurred...not 2 within 200 yards of each other on Camellia in River Ranch on a stretch of road that's 35 which ought to be 45.
FWIW I've never gotten one of these tickets.