¶ … traffic photo enforcement a good idea? 2.
Traffic Camera Enforcement
The fact that many states have installed traffic enforcement cameras as a means of regulating traffic has been the subject of many debates in the recent years. Although this is considered to be generally beneficial for individuals engaged in traffic, there are still many people who believe that their privacy is violated by these devices. Also, there is a great deal of individuals who are victims to errors generated by this technology. It is certainly difficult to determine whether the system brings more advantages than it does detriments.
Taking into account the "Big Brother" theory, it is only safe to assume that a system of identifying traffic violators (one that would be error-free) would be more effective and less stressing for motorists if it were to target criminals only and if the persons in charge of operating it were qualified to see that these cameras would not violate the intimate lives of people.
The times when drivers were cautious and slowed down when encountering police vehicles carrying radars are apparently history. The modern society embraces more efficient methods of apprehending people who perform illegalities in traffic. Machines are normally recognized for the fact that they rarely have errors and because they put across a truthful account regarding what happens in traffic.
Policemen having the duty of scanning motorways in search of motorists breaking traffic laws have often been reported to commit grave errors, as it is only human to mistake. Judging from this, effectiveness is essential in controlling traffic - thus meaning that policemen should be replaced with technologies that are better in catching criminals. This would also allow police officers to get involved in critical conditions, where...
Installing cameras on every street would virtually mean that people cannot move an inch without being caught on camera. The fact that the government is normally not the institution in charge of operating traffic cameras makes matters even more severe. The companies selling traffic cameras are the ones monitoring traffic and deciding who gets a ticket and who doesn't. The state apparently pays these companies on account of the number of tickets that are being issued (Klein).
Cameras are widespread in areas like Hawaii and London, making it virtually impossible for people living there to have a feeling of privacy, given that their every step is being monitored. Whereas this might be interpreted as a positive breakthrough in society, it can also be considered as being particularly damaging and stressful for the general public. It seems that the main purpose of video cameras installed in public places is no longer that of catching criminals, as it is practically a tool to monitor the public. The authorities have apparently also used traffic cameras as a means to verify if certain people performed suspect activities (Blumberg & Keeler & Shelat). This is surely a violation of privacy, considering that it is immoral to follow people around just because their behavior is abnormal.
Traffic cameras are presently primarily used with the purpose of catching individuals who run red lights. Ethical and legal controversies have prevented numerous traffic camera violation reports to be considered worthy…
