"Do traffic cameras save lives or violate due process?" PBS NewsHour 5/17/2014
Excerpt
SUMMARY: Ten years ago, only a few dozen communities had red-light or speed-enforcement cameras. Today, hundreds do. On Saturday, we take a look at a debate in Ohio. Camera advocates say the technology saves lives. Opponents say the devices are profit-centers for municipalities and camera manufacturers and a violation of due process.
RICK KARR (NewsHour): Drivers who run red lights kill nearly seven hundred people every year nationwide. Sue and Paul Oberhauser refuse to call those crashes “accidents.”
PAUL OBERHAUSER: Most of those are intentionally people think they going to get away with it and they run the red light. They never think they’re going to kill a person.
RICK KARR: Their daughter Sarah was killed by a driver who ran a red light in 2002. She was thirty-one years old and a mother of two, a high-school chemistry teacher and basketball coach in Oxford, Ohio. She was on her way to a teacher-training workshop on a Saturday morning when her light turned green.
SUE OBERHAUSER: There was a young man who was 21 years old. And he ran the red light going 55 miles an hour. And he T-boned her car and Sarah was killed instantly.
RICK KARR: The Oberhausers believe there’s a way to prevent crashes like the one that killed their daughter: automated cameras that keep an eye on intersections 24/7. So even when police aren’t there, drivers think twice before running a light. And the proof that they work, according to the Oberhausers, is a forty-minute drive from their farmhouse in Ohio’s state capital.
RICK KARR: The City of Columbus installed its first red-light camera at this intersection in 2006. Since then, it’s put cameras at more than three dozen other intersections. And at those locations, side-impact collisions are down by 74 percent.
No comments:
Post a Comment