Red Light Camera

Local officials and the companies that sell and operate them love red light cameras, which are not called cameras in the law. Nearly everyone else, not so much.

Why? Is Florida a hotbed of red light runners crashing into others? If you look at our traffic crash data over the past several years, you'll see that is not the case.

My background is law enforcement. I worked for two years as a Florida deputy sheriff and the remaining 23 years of my 25-year career with the Florida Highway Patrol, where I worked as a trooper, traffic homicide investigator, and squad sergeant, and retired as an investigations lieutenant. I currently operate a small lobbying firm in Tallahassee that specializes in issues involving liberty.

According to our Department of Highway Safety, red light running as a cause is around 2 to 3 percent of all crashes. One thing you will never see in any news story about the devices is how many red light running crashes are taking place to justify the need for these automated for-profit law enforcement devices. (Like the Florida Legislature, I don't call them red light cameras either.)

Why didn't the Legislature call them red light cameras? It is simple really. Running a red light is a traffic infraction, as is speeding and passing a stopped school bus. It just so happens one automated for-profit company has devices for these other infractions. Calling the devices red light cameras would limit their use. Calling them traffic infraction detectors means they can enforce all of these laws and any other infractions.

Why do I call them automated for-profit law enforcement devices? The fact they are automated is inarguable. The fact they are for-profit is likewise inarguable, as they are owned and operated by for-profit companies. Perhaps you read your local paper and believe they’re only meant for safety.

You may have read assertions like the St. Petersburg transportation director claiming a 60 percent reduction in red light "related" crashes,...