Red-light cameras boost safety, are not a cash grab

Speeding through intersections can create far greater financial and emotional toll

The howls of rage could be heard far and wide at the mere suggestion of expanding the traffic camera program in Saskatoon.

“It’s a tax grab,” they said. “We’re innocent,” they cried.

But let’s be frank: none of this feigned outrage has anything to do with an actual grievance, but rather an indignation that people may be caught, and punished, for doing something they know is wrong.

The “tax grab” comment is particularly laughable.

Being penalized for speeding is more like a voluntary payment for being stupid, as opposed to anyone “grabbing ” anything from you.

Frankly, it warms my heart to know that cities earn money from photo radar and/or red light cameras. I prefer municipal revenue be generated from fining people who break the law, rather than taking it from my pocketbook (which is the actual definition of a “tax grab”).

Refusal to follow traffic laws is nothing more than arrogance. The violator feels entitled to put others at risk by speeding or running traffic lights, just so they can meet their own personal needs by getting somewhere faster, or just not paying attention.

Unlike a tax grab, you don’t have to pay the fine. If you don’t speed or run red lights, you’ll never pay a cent. It’s not rocket science.

Funny story: the first time my husband and I laid eyes on each other, he was the sergeant in charge of traffic for the city police. He had been sent to persuade city council to start a photo radar project in Saskatoon.

Both myself and then-councillor Gordon Wyant were unimpressed with the presentation. (When I formally met my future husband some years later, he remained equally unimpressed withme.)

Wyant and I soundly rejected the idea and, unfortunately, persuaded most of our colleagues to vote against the cameras. It would be years before photo radar was brought back to the council table (thankfully, by then, I had reformed my views).

The cost of traffic collisions is high. It goes far beyond a mere speeding ticket. This is the other side of the alleged “tax grab.”

The health-care costs to the provincial government of a vehicle crash with injuries are astronomical (hospital stays, doctor and nursing salaries, physiotherapy, etc.). The price of a traffic ticket is a mere fraction of the health costs of caring for an accident victim. Not to mention the personal price to victims: time off work, inability to complete household tasks, taking care of children, etc.

The provincial government has no interest in the money from speeding tickets.

It would be a lot less expensive for the province if drivers simply followed the laws. The government could forgo the ticket revenue but not incur the healthcare costs.

And then there are those who complain that red light cameras increase rear-end collisions. I recall this accusation being put to former police chief Clive Weighill. Once he finished laughing, he advised that, even if true, he would prefer a few rear-end crashes over the catastrophic ones that result when people race through intersections trying to beat yellow and red lights. Speeding through intersections is far more dangerous and causes far more damage than a mere rear-end collision.

There is no reason for elected officials not to wholeheartedly endorse these types of traffic enforcement measures. So, why did some members of city council recently express hesitation about expansion of photo radar into school zones?

Well, there is the small issue of the voters, most of whom go ballistic when they hear the words “photo radar.” Any type of traffic enforcement measure will always be wildly unpopular with the voting masses.

However, that should not stop elected folks from doing the right thing for the community and not hiding behind requests to “study the issue more.”

As a paramedic, Coun. Troy Davies sees first-hand the horrifying results of speeding and accidents. Davies, wisely, already accepts the expansion of tools to keep children safe in school zones.

Safety measures should never be a popularity contest.