The running of red lights is one of the
most frequent and frightening traffic offenses in the state. Thus, we
wonder at the reluctance of some lawmakers to support a bill to allow
cameras to catch people who run red lights.
The bill, currently being debated in the Senate, would allow cities
to install cameras capable of taking dozens of pictures a second at
intersections. Car owners caught running red lights would get a civil
citation and a fine in the mail.
Some lawmakers worry that the bill might be unconstitutional. For one
thing, it would not require uniform use of cameras in all
municipalities. For another, it would treat those caught running red
lights by cameras differently from those caught by a police officer on
the scene.
While those caught on camera would face a civil fine with no points
on their driving record, those caught the old-fashioned way would be
charged with a crime. Same crime, different punishment.
The difference stems, in part, from the inability of a camera to
determine exactly who is driving the car. For example, the bill states
that the photos could not be used in courts to determine fault in
accidents. And the fines would be assessed to the owner of the car, not
a specific driver.
Certainly, an officer on the scene has better powers of observation
than a camera, not to mention more discretion in how the matter is
handled. But that, in itself, should not disqualify the use of cameras.
As Sen. Scott Richardson, R-Hilton Head Island, one of the bill's chief
sponsors, noted, "We're going to carve out a different law for this
violation, and we're doing it for safety reasons."
The safety issue is the crucial one. State officials estimate that
red-light running was a factor in 30,674 crashes and 132 fatalities
between 1999 and 2003. And that was only a small fraction of the people
who ran red lights during that period.
Cameras, even if they didn't actually catch drivers in the act of
running a red light, would serve as a deterrent. Drivers would know they
were being watched every time they were tempted to ease through a red
light. Cameras would be on constant duty, supplementing efforts by
police, preventing accidents and saving lives.
We also wonder why, if cameras pose a constitutional problem, they
are used for this purpose in other states. Instead of throwing up
specious legal roadblocks, lawmakers should be supporting a program that
could help curb what amounts to an epidemic of red-light running in the
state.
