Government Favoritism in Red Light Cameras
[From theNewspaper.com New York: Lobbyist Sparks U-Turns on Cameras] [Buffalo News]
An article on red light cameras gave me some pause on the role of government in using camera systems. Apparently in New York, legislation was introduced favors certain technologies (i.e. vendors) for red light cameras. The article notes the following about the bill:
AB 10948 states red light cameras must use “radar-based down-the-road speed measurement methods in which a photograph is taken coincident to, or as near as possible to, the location of, recorded speed measurements.” This is the description of the technology by Sensys Traffic.
The bill further states “Such demonstration program shall not utilize vehicle sensors of the following types: video, virtual loops, laser-based, across-the-road radar, in-the-road embedded or surface mount or additional road markings . . .” This eliminates laser sensors used by Lasercraft, video technology used by Nestor, and in road sensors used by Affiliated Computer Services (ACS). The leading vendors of red light cameras, American Traffic Systems and Australia’s Redflex, also rely on some of the banned technologies.
While this bill has been pulled at this point, the article points out that “2005, the Pennsylvania legislature likewise adopted legislation mandating “wet film” be used for ticketing so that ACS would be favored over rivals like Redflex that use digital cameras”.
I didn’t realize this type of behavior was happening for surveillance cameras. I am not naive, I understand that lobbyists push for this type of language in bills and its not too difficult to get someone to introduce these bills. I think this type of favoritism is wrong and something all vendors should despise. If anyone knows of other examples, please pass them on. (You can read a defense of the bill in the Buffalo News article, the defense is flimsy).
Recent Comments