[Source MSNBC]

Last week, Dallas officials reviewed the numbers and decided that a quarter of the cameras they had installed to catch motorists running red lights were too effective. So they shut them down.

They are not alone. Faced with data showing that drivers pay attention to cameras at intersections — resulting in fewer ticketable violations and ever-shrinking revenue from fines — municipalities across the country are reconsidering red light cameras, which often work too well.

At the heart of the discussions taking place in city councils and county commissions is tension between the twin benefits that were touted when local governments began installing cameras about a decade and a half ago. Officials were promised that the cameras — which take snapshots of busy intersections, capturing the license plates of any cars that are running the light — would simultaneously save lives and generate millions of dollars in extra fines.

It is the second half of the equation that may be beginning to collapse. As drivers learn where the cameras are, they are more careful. Fewer of them run red lights. Local governments collect fewer fines.

Fewer violations = less revenue
Sometimes, as in Dallas, cameras generate so little revenue that they can’t even pay for themselves.

Citywide statistics obtained by NBC affiliate KXAS-TV found that red light cameras do reduce accidents. That is a good thing.

But they do it by reducing red light violations, by as much as 29 percent from month to month at particularly busy Dallas intersections. On the face of it, that, too, is a good thing — but not, necessarily, if you rely on traffic fines to make up a healthy chunk of your budget.

Dallas lawmakers originally estimated gross revenue of $15 million from their 62 cameras this fiscal year, which ends June 30. But City Manager Mary Suhm estimated last week that the city would fall short by more than $4 million.

So last week, the city turned off about a quarter of the least profitable cameras, saying it couldn’t justify the cost of running them.

Safety benefits questioned
Dallas was just following the lead of several other cities that have shut down red light cameras.

City officials in Charlotte and Fayetteville, N.C., recently turned off all of their red light cameras, concluding that a state law diverting much of the revenue they generate in fines to schools meant their general funds were actually losing money, NBC affiliate WNCN of Raleigh reported.

In Bolingbrook, Ill., meanwhile, officials ended their red light camera program after statistics showed a 40 percent drop in ticketable offenses.

Nor is money the only reason cameras have been removed. In Lubbock, Texas, the City Council shut down all its cameras last month, citing a report that showed statistically significant increases in rear-end collisions at intersections, including those with cameras.

so city's want camera's removed because they generate too little in fines despite saving peoples lives. Sounds about right for 21ts century.

I'm trying to think of something funny, poignant or insightful to say... But I'm speechless.

Aren't these things not even monitored by people in the same area? For example, there was stuff going around that the ones in the city near where I live (that shall remain undisclosed -_- ) that the cameras were sending the pictures to a whole other state for the information to be processed and stuff.

Though I do think it's funny that officials talk about how many lives these things would save, yet they're shutting them down because they're not fining enough people.  

 Screw saving lives, the city needs money.

I'm surprised that everyone is mad at the city.  I'm overjoyed.  Less big brother looking over my shoulder the better.  The statistics that the cameras save lives were sketchy anyway, and the cameras actually produce more rear end collisions due to drivers stopping so suddenly.  However, not withstanding that I felt it was all a money making scheme anyway, this is what governments do.  They supply services for the constituents on a limited budget.  If the people feel they need to have the big brother lights, they can partition their congressmen and get a ballot put on the next election and start paying taxes to have the lights.  However, the chances of that happening are 0% since no way that would pass a popular vote.  Oh well, much more important things in life than big brother lights.

 However, with more motorists turning to motorcycles as their main mode of transportation, and the increase of rear end collisions, it increases the chance that a motorcyclist will be run down and killed trying to avoid going through a red light, just to avoid a ticket.

It isn't the person who goes through with the light barely turning red that is a problem. It is the people who go through a red, that was red 2-3 seconds before they even entered the intersection, and those are the kinds of people that will run you over just because you tried to stop last second to make sure you didn't get a ticket. 

 Also, If I borrowed your car, and drove it around, I could pick up tons of red light tickets and you would legally have to pay them.

 Any auto-generated ticket writer is a complete waste of taxpayers money, I'd rather pay for an aditional cop to roam the streets.

 Less big brother?  Please don't start the crap.  They didn't install the red light cameras so they could watch you sign to bad 80's music in the car, they installed them so people wouldn't run red lights.

And it's true there are idiots that stop suddenly, but that's because they're driving 30 over the speed limit anyways which is hardly the governments fault.  If you're driving the speed limit or even 10 over the speed limit you have plenty of time to stop for the red light.  People just need to pay attention and not drive double the speed limit.

And I would think this article does prove they do work.  People aren't running red lights because they know they're getting a ticket.  I don't know about where you live but idiots use to pretty frequently run red lights down here and now I very rarely see it and those places I do see it are the intersections that don't have cameras yet.  Anybody that says these don't work and are just some tool to spy on the people are...well I shouldn't say since I'm supposed to be resonsible and all.

So yeah, take your big brother bullshit somewhere else.  Red light cameras aren't some evil plot, they actually are there to stop peopel from running lights, they do work, and the city taking them out to get more money is bullshit. 

Do you ever see people driving on motorcycles?  Most of them deserve to die.

I see them all the time doing wheelies through intersections, weaving through traffic, and driving 100+ down the highway.  

As for someone borrowing your car: don't let people drive your car.  If that person isn't on your insurance, why are they driving your car anyways?

And once again, the auto-generated tickets work.  Remember, the point of tickets isn't (or shouldn't be) to make money, it's to protect the citizens.  It's true having a cop nearby makes you be a little more careful, but cops can't be everywhere at once.