Traffic enforcement camera

The British Medical Journal reported that speed cameras were effective at reducing accidents and injuries in their vicinity and recommended wider deployment.

An LSE study in 2017 found that "adding another 1,000 cameras to British roads could save up to 190 lives annually, reduce up to 1,130 collisions and mitigate 330 serious injuries.

Some groups, such as the American Civil Liberties Union in the US, claim that "the common use of speed traps as a revenue source also undercuts the legitimacy of safety efforts.

[5] Other systems use a camera mounted on the bus, for example in London where they monitor Red routes[6] on which stopping is not allowed for any purpose (other than taxis and disabled parking permit holders).

In many municipalities, an officer monitors the cameras in a live command center and records all violations, including texting at a red light.

[17] In 2020 the UK Department for Transport published a feasibility study commissioned from a joint venture between engineering consultancies Atkins and Jacobs.

[18] The Atkins/Jacobs noise camera setup was unable to consistently derive sound readings from cars travelling less than ten seconds apart from other vehicles.

Local government cited technical shortcomings with the trial setup to explain spending $192,000 on noise cameras that recouped $98,000 in fines.

[20] The world's first all-weather, 24-hour, automatic number plate recognition system SAFE-T-CAM was developed in Australia for the Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) by Telstra as the prime contractor and ICONIX and CSIRO as sub-contractors in 1991.

After they complained formally, it was discovered they were stopped when their car was picked up by the roadside ANPR CCTV cameras; it had been flagged in the Police National Computer database when they were seen near EDO MBM demonstrations in Brighton.

[However, the] devices are already there; they demonstrate value for money, yet are not significant revenue raisers for the Treasury; they are shown to save lives; and despite the headlines, most people accept the need for them.

[45] In 2003 the British Medical Journal reported that speed cameras were effective at reducing accidents and injuries and recommended wider deployment.

[46] In February 2005 the British Medical Journal again reported that speed cameras were an effective intervention in reducing road traffic collisions and related casualties, noting however that most studies to date did not have satisfactory control groups.

[49] The Times reported that this research showed that the department had been previous exaggerating the safety benefits of speed cameras but that the results were still 'impressive'.

[50] A report published by the RAC Foundation in 2010 estimated that an additional 800 more people a year could be killed or seriously injured on the UK's roads if all speed cameras were scrapped.

[57][58] HOTA is an acronym for Home Office Type Approval, a testing and certification process by the Home Office in the United Kingdom that speed cameras must pass before evidence from them can be admissible in UK courts by way of certification in accordance with Section 20 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 (RTOA) (Amended by the Road Traffic Act 1991).

The Type Approval of devices that meet the definitions or more accurately "prescriptions" of types of devices in Statutory Instruments (forms of secondary legislation) is administered by the Home Office Road Crimes Section with the scientific scrutiny now performed by The Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL) in conjunction with accredited technical laboratories.

Once recommended an administrative process takes place between the Home Office and the UK manufacturer or distributing agent in which a contract (Type Approval Agreement) is exchanged and agreed between both parties.

The Speedmeter Handbooks are freely and openly available to view, they provide guidance to manufacturers and the accredited test laboratories in the general requirements.

A study conducted in Alabama and published in 2016 reveals that Red Light Cameras (RLCs) seem to have a slight impact on the clearance lost time; the intersections equipped with RLCs are half a second less in use compared with those without cameras; and highway capacity manual estimates a shorter lost time and thus may overestimate the intersection's capacity.

In such jurisdictions, corporations that own vehicles (such as rental car companies) almost invariably require authorized drivers to agree in writing to assume financial responsibly for all such tickets.

[73] In April 2000, two motorists who were caught speeding in the United Kingdom challenged the Road Traffic Act 1988, which required the keeper of a car to identify the driver at a particular time[74] as being in contradiction to the Human Rights Act 1998 on the grounds that it amounted to a 'compulsory confession', also that since the camera partnerships included the police, local authorities, Magistrates Courts Service (MCS) and Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) which had a financial interest in the fine revenue that they would not get a fair trial.

In 2007 the European Court of Human Rights found there was no breach of article 6 in requiring the keepers of cars caught speeding on camera to provide the name of the driver.

[75] The erroneous citations included at least one issued to a completely stationary car, a fact revealed by a recorded video of the alleged violation.

"[80] In January 2011 Edmonton, Alberta cancelled all 100,000 "Speed On Green" tickets issued in the previous 14 months due to concerns about camera reliability.

Opinion polling in New York City,[96] British Columbia,[97] and Washington, DC[98] have shown significant margins of approval for automatic speed enforcement.

[122] In 1905, Popular Mechanics reported on a patent for a "Time Recording Camera for Trapping Motorists" that enabled the operator to take time-stamped images of a vehicle moving across the start and endpoints of a measured section of road.

[124] Gatsonides wished to better monitor his average speed on a race track and invented the device in order to improve his lap times.

However, film-based systems may provide superior image quality in the variety of lighting conditions encountered on roads, and are required by courts in some jurisdictions.

New film-based systems are still being sold, but digital pictures are providing greater versatility and lower maintenance and are now more popular with law enforcement agencies.