<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Tribune Exposes Suburban Red Light Camera Scam &#8211; Parking Ticket Geek</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.smartcamerasblog.com/2009/07/tribune-exposes-suburban-red-light-camera-scam-parking-ticket-geek/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.smartcamerasblog.com/2009/07/tribune-exposes-suburban-red-light-camera-scam-parking-ticket-geek/</link>
	<description>Rajiv Shah</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Sep 2010 21:54:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: rshah</title>
		<link>http://www.smartcamerasblog.com/2009/07/tribune-exposes-suburban-red-light-camera-scam-parking-ticket-geek/comment-page-1/#comment-687</link>
		<dc:creator>rshah</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Jul 2009 17:38:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.smartcamerasblog.com/2009/07/tribune-exposes-suburban-red-light-camera-scam-parking-ticket-geek/#comment-687</guid>
		<description>I agree with you Jeff.  While there is a lot of good work done by places like thenewspaper.com and journalists, there is a paucity of work on red light cameras by scholars.  After summer, I am planning to work on writing up some papers/policy briefings on this subject.  While transportation engineers have studied RLC in small settings, they have not joined the discussion on how RLCs are actually implemented, e.g., emphasis on right turns in violations.  I would also like to move beyond the binary, lets keep RLCs and lets get rid of RLCs, and think about how best to use RLCs to improve safety.  If anyone would like to join this effort, please let me know.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with you Jeff.  While there is a lot of good work done by places like thenewspaper.com and journalists, there is a paucity of work on red light cameras by scholars.  After summer, I am planning to work on writing up some papers/policy briefings on this subject.  While transportation engineers have studied RLC in small settings, they have not joined the discussion on how RLCs are actually implemented, e.g., emphasis on right turns in violations.  I would also like to move beyond the binary, lets keep RLCs and lets get rid of RLCs, and think about how best to use RLCs to improve safety.  If anyone would like to join this effort, please let me know.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff Roush</title>
		<link>http://www.smartcamerasblog.com/2009/07/tribune-exposes-suburban-red-light-camera-scam-parking-ticket-geek/comment-page-1/#comment-686</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff Roush</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Jul 2009 17:27:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.smartcamerasblog.com/2009/07/tribune-exposes-suburban-red-light-camera-scam-parking-ticket-geek/#comment-686</guid>
		<description>There&#039;s no doubt about it, these systems are used as revenue makers only.  RLCs are even being deployed in &quot;dying cities&quot; - these are cities whose populations are in decline.  Why put in RLCs if traffic is not increasing?  Logic would state at a certain point if citizens are leaving these cities, traffic conditions go down, and red lights should be removed and replaced with stop signs or a 4 way yellow blinker.

The only valid argument I&#039;ve heard towards the use of these systems is that they are about citing &quot;violations&quot; and not &quot;reducing accidents&quot;.  This is true and is a valid argument, but when RLCs are sold as a way to &quot;reduce accidents&quot;, the politicians are simply not being honest.  Governors in more than 19 states so far have banned the RLC practice after public outcry.  Where is the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and why haven&#039;t they chimed in on the safety aspect?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There&#8217;s no doubt about it, these systems are used as revenue makers only.  RLCs are even being deployed in &#8220;dying cities&#8221; &#8211; these are cities whose populations are in decline.  Why put in RLCs if traffic is not increasing?  Logic would state at a certain point if citizens are leaving these cities, traffic conditions go down, and red lights should be removed and replaced with stop signs or a 4 way yellow blinker.</p>
<p>The only valid argument I&#8217;ve heard towards the use of these systems is that they are about citing &#8220;violations&#8221; and not &#8220;reducing accidents&#8221;.  This is true and is a valid argument, but when RLCs are sold as a way to &#8220;reduce accidents&#8221;, the politicians are simply not being honest.  Governors in more than 19 states so far have banned the RLC practice after public outcry.  Where is the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and why haven&#8217;t they chimed in on the safety aspect?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

