Implications of Resistance to Automated Speed Enforcement and Red-Light Camera Implementation

Abstract

Automated speed cameras (ASE) and red-light cameras are highly effective tools for reducing overall car crashes. ASE and red-light cameras help reduce most crashes, such as fatal crashes, injury crashes, and property damage crashes worldwide. Millions of people die yearly because of car crashes, and many more are severely injured. Due to the high number of fatal and injury crashes, to reduce deaths, many countries across different continents in the world started enforcing ASE and red-light cameras to mitigate the number of crashes. ASE and red-light cameras are enormously effective measures to reduce the totality of crashes. Unfortunately, despite the proven efficacy, many states in the United States and worldwide prohibit using ASE. Some prohibit red-light and speed cameras, such as New Hampshire, South Carolina, Maine, West Virginia, and Texas. Certain states only prohibit red-light cameras, including Montana and South Dakota, and some states do not allow speed cameras, counting Wisconsin and New Jersey. This paper will examine the reasons behind prohibiting automated speed enforcement technology. Additionally, the study will collect and analyze data from the United States, Canada, and Saudi Arabia regarding the amount each country levies for penalties and fines for ASE violations. Some of the public believe that automated speed enforcement techniques are a method for the government to generate revenue. Others argue that the profits are used to educate the public about traffic safety rules and use it to improve the public infrastructure. This study aims to establish whether the funds from automated speed enforcement fines are used to educate the public and improve infrastructure.