they sometimes do but the kinds of accidents they create are less dangerous - approx half of deaths from running reds are pedestrians/cyclists and run red collisions are often T-bone collisisions etc whereas rear ending people from not running lights is usually a front to back collision, which is significantly safer for all parties.
So if there is any pedestrian traffic at all or high traffic in both directions then photo enforced intersections are still a good tradeoff.
One major problem is that the incentive of increasing income from tickets causes authorities to shorten the time the yellow light is visible, meaning that drivers have less time to react and run a larger risk of actually running a red light and entering those dangerous situations you mentioned.
One way of dealing with this would be to ensure that the ones receiving the money are not the same ones issuing the punishment.
they sometimes do but the kinds of accidents they create are less dangerous - approx half of deaths from running reds are pedestrians/cyclists and run red collisions are often T-bone collisisions etc whereas rear ending people from not running lights is usually a front to back collision, which is significantly safer for all parties.
So if there is any pedestrian traffic at all or high traffic in both directions then photo enforced intersections are still a good tradeoff.
Noooo you don’t understand, having my property slightly damaged is waaaaaaay worse than taking a pedestrian’s life
One major problem is that the incentive of increasing income from tickets causes authorities to shorten the time the yellow light is visible, meaning that drivers have less time to react and run a larger risk of actually running a red light and entering those dangerous situations you mentioned.
One way of dealing with this would be to ensure that the ones receiving the money are not the same ones issuing the punishment.