What are real reasons behind traffic cameras?

Coverage of our report, “Caution: red light cameras ahead (Study questions outsourcing traffic camera systems,” Oct. 27) quoted David Kelly, the president of the industry-funded National Coalition for Safer Roads, who responded that vendors “aren't creating a market. The people running the red lights are creating the market.” It's a telling remark.

When red-light running is viewed as a market opportunity, the success of camera programs is measured by the volume of tickets issued at intersections. No wonder some camera companies have caused an uproar by shortening yellow light durations or slapping lawsuits on cities that lengthen them.

The public interest is in shrinking this market, not growing it. That's why the report urges cities to consider alternative safety measures such as longer yellow lights, brighter traffic signals, larger signage and “all-red” periods at dangerous intersections. If cameras need to be introduced, they should be located where injuries have been greatest rather than simply where the most tickets can be written.

More tickets typically means higher vendor profits, but not necessarily more safety. That's why the number of

tickets issued for different violations at each intersection should be posted online for citizen review.

Cities and towns can demonstrate their commitment to safer roads by adopting our proposals. If cameras are still deemed a necessary complement to other safety measures, then we'll know it's for the right reasons.

Ryan Pierannunzi

U.S. Public Interest Research Group

Boston