With the increasing emergence of traffic cameras around the nation, there has emerged a debate about whether the cameras are effectively functioning to keep drivers safe or whether they are just another source of revenue for cites. Facts have proven that the purpose for the traffic cameras is simply generating more money for the cities. The estimated amount of money that the city of Denver will be making in 2011 from these cameras (Kaminsky)—excluding the ones recently put up—a grand estimation total of seven million dollars… “According to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety more than 550 communities in the United States use red light cameras.” (Urie) Research shows how the cameras are not improving safety for drivers, and for inexcusable …show more content…
The increases of revenue for the cities that have installed traffic cameras are amazingly high. In all senses of the traffic cameras, cities receive a huge growth of income. It is ironic how the purpose of the cameras to protect the safety of car drivers, but that would not explain why the prices on the tickets given are so unbelievably high… For example, “At the top is Illinois, with a $250 fine or 25 hours of community service as a penalty for running a red light.” (Owen) The ridiculous charges for the violations pass the boundary of being reasonable to being out of this world. Of course, the cities being basically the only ones who benefit from these cameras have overall had a massive and comforting increase in money. At just four intersections the addition of traffic cameras has given the city a revenue increase of 465%. (Lee) Through these tough economic times, people cannot afford to be paying these outrageous tickets, yet the city instead of finding other reasonable ways to increase revenue, are stealing and stripping the money of its citizens away. Plus, after adding them in the city of Denver, the amount of money stolen was $1.3 million in fines, in comparison to the $230,000 before…(Meyer). To add even more to that growing amount there is a plan to add an …show more content…
All around the nation, where these unforgiving cameras have been installed, the number of accidents—in general, with only a few particular differences—the accident rate has increased, yet, the issue of these cameras is still a debate. In a common sense way, the fact that the accidents and risks have increased due to their installment, the intelligent and proper thing to do would be eliminate… Supporters of the photo radars argue that the cameras are for safety and the reduction of accidents, but the numbers just simply do not add up… “That reduction has never happened, according to official data obtained by the group Citizens for Responsible Aurora Government (CRAG). The city admitted accidents increased at three of the four intersections monitored by red light cameras.” (Accident Data). Something that increases the number of car accidents in any sense should be reformed to change that, yet these cameras although portrayed as safety helpers are nothing but increasing accidents for drivers,
There are more than 200,000,000 drivers on the road in the United States alone, what are the chances of you colliding with someone else running a red light? Red light cameras are raising controversy among citizens in every state, and individuals have had a difficult time finding the truth out of traffic cameras. Traffic limitations have created a better sense of safety on the streets but have also created further problems. The controversy that is around traffic cameras is a positive point into the safety of streets and the revenue that comes from people that fail to follow safety protocol. Traffic cameras have a characteristic that everyone is aware of, safety.
A simple Google search will turn up hundreds of studies based on the effectiveness of emergency lighting on the road. Obviously, this wealth of information is too vast to summarize in one article; however, there is one study that sticks out when discussing whether red or blue emergency vehicle lights are easier to see on the road. In this article, we will go over a study released by Lt. James D. Wells Jr. on behalf of the Florida Highway Patrol. This study was released in 2004 and concentrates mainly on emergency lighting configurations and the effectiveness of these lights in helping to reduce collisions on the road and keeping officers and emergency first responders safer on the road. Who Should Understand the 2004 Florida Highway Patrol Emergency Lighting Configuration?
Johnson, Laurie. "Red Light Camera Controversy Continues." Houston Public Media. N.p., 30 Nov. 2010. Web. 19 Nov. 2013.
The intent of this study is to determine the effects between the independent variable of law enforcement professionals wearing body-cameras and the dependent variable of civilian’s willingness to talk to the police. The research questions that the data collected intends to answer are: Do civilians that come in contact with police deterred from talking to them about relevant information regarding a crime when there is a camera on the officer? What effects do police body-cameras have beyond accountability of law enforcement professionals? Will body-cameras damage communication between civilians and law enforcement that could result in a decrease in willingness to report crimes thus increasing crime itself?
Should police officers be mandated to wear body cameras? That is a question that has grown to be widely discussed in media, politics, and public. The death of Michael Brown due to a fatal shooting by a law enforcement officer inflamed the idea that police officers should wear body cameras (Griggs, Brandon). The opposing sides of such controversial questions both provide a strong reasonable argument that support each side. However, despite the critiques against body cameras, I believe the evidence that support the usage of body cameras to be overwhelmingly positive and the intention is of pure deeds. Police officers should be required to wear body cameras; because it will build a trust between law enforcement and the community, it will decrease
Police officers with their body cameras: a history and back ground paper to answer the question if should all police officers wear body cameras, it is important to first look at the history and back ground of the topic. According to article of Journal of quantitative criminology, writers Ariel, Farrar, Sutherland, Body cameras have been given a new eye opener to people about the excessive use of force against their community members. Arial, Farrar, and Sutherland in the article state “The effect of police body warn cameras on use of force and citizens’ complaints against the police: A randomize controlled trial” describe their observation as:
... that 10 percent to 15 percent of the usage of these cameras were to spy and peep on women. That’s highly disgusting and disrespectful. Even worse in New York City, on average people recorded 43 to 75 times a day, according to a rough calculation, in 2000. That number could very well have increased because of the increase of cameras being placed in public since then. Professor Richards is hesitant to increase cameras on the streets because with the technology, “such a system could give conceivably give the government increased power over us, in some cases, potentially to blackmail and discriminate.”(Maverick, 1 of 4) Of course that would be resulting in less privacy. America’s safety is at risk.
Surveillance cameras have helped hundreds of law enforcement agencies solve thousands of crimes throughout the nation. They have become so helpful that most law enforcement agencies are planning on setting them up on street corners, buildings, publication parks, and on their own officers. There are many cities across the nation that have began to use surveillance cameras. Setting up cameras is a pivotal technique to solving and preventing crimes. Although, it is often argued that having law enforcement surveillance cameras set up throughout the nations communities is an invasion of privacy, citizens should sacrifice a little bit of privacy in return for their safety and protection of civil rights against criminals and police officers.
The 25% of police agencies in America that use body worn cameras must follow set
The article by Elida S. Perez discusses the Police Union’s push back on body cameras in El Paso, Texas. Perez states the denial of El Paso Police Department to equip body cameras because they believe other funding priorities and privacy concerns must be addressed. Some of the top funding priorities that Perez states are “hiring more police officers, buying new police cars, and updating radios”(par. 5). In addition, the police union is also concerned over unfair disciplinary actions against the police officers because of any camera malfunctions. She added an example that explained El Paso Municipal Police Officers Association President Ron Martin’s statement, “sometimes emergency situations unfold so quickly that an officer may not have time to turn on the camera, which he fears may be seen as an attempt to hide what occurred” (par.
In recent years there has been an increase in police brutality in america. Due to this many law enforcement officials have decided to initiate the use of body cameras. The reason behind this new trend can be credited to the need for protection of the public and the protection of the police. These cameras also is very beneficial during court proceedings, having the documented evidence acepacsesable for viewing takes away speculation or opinions during these kinds proceedings. This could potentially affect the length and the outcome crucial hearings deciding the fate of officers and civilians alike. In all police body cams are acceptable because they help protect citizens and police alike in the court of law and on the streets while making the world a safer place.
In this article, the rhetor Jim Walsh reveals and educates the importance of the body -camera. His audience consists of the AZ Central viewers and the Arizona Republic, and Police departments all over the country. Police-body cameras are placed to ensure people’s safety and their justice. A national debate that is
He feels cameras are protection from police abuse to the public and protection from being accused of brutality to the police. Johnson sees it as a win-win for the ACLU, NAACP, and other Civil and Human Rights groups if they can input into camera policy. He says the cameras are not widely used in Massachusetts. According to Johnson even if all the legal issues and policies were in place it would take time and wouldn’t happen overnight. He lists problems and concerns from existing state law, legal procedures, and privacy issues are just the start. Storing and maintaining videos for criminal cases is a main concern to Johnson. He suggests that evidence video needs to have protection against tampering, altering, or being deleted. He brings up recording of someone without their permission or a court order could be considered wiretapping. Additional legal and privacy issues with recording inside a private residence or on a medical call and what should or shouldn’t be released to the public is more of Johnson’s
As we cruised around the community, he pointed out countless minor traffic violations, both moving and non-moving, but opted not to make any stops. At this point he stated his main concern was to spot any impaired drivers and get them off the road. Eventually, as we came up behind an older civic (the Civic had a broken brake light) on Centreville Road, the officer stated that he detected the scent of marijuana coming from the Civic. The driver of the Civic noticed Crutchman’s police cruiser behind him and dropped his speed to 5 mph under the posted limit. Officer Crutchman began tailing the vehicle which immediately turned off on the next available road. We proceeded to follow the Civic for a couple of miles. I could tell that Officer Crutchman wanted to make the stop, and I inquired why he hadn’t done so already on account of the Civic’s faulty brake light. He responded that he is cautious about making such stops because he does not want a “new law named after him” on account of the controversy surrounding pretextual stops. It is possible that this careful attitude has developed as a result of the rising public outcry against police and
Kelly, Heather. "After Boston: The Pros and Cons of Surveillance Cameras." CNN. Cable News Network, 26 Apr. 2013. Web. 14 May 2014.