Community Forum: Accident numbers led Lubbock to pull cameras

Editor:
I read the letter from ATS concerning Lubbock's decision to remove the red-light cameras and felt the need to respond, as it is filled with inaccurate statements and misinformation.

I was the volunteer chairman of the Red Light Camera Committee appointed by the City Council to review the results of the cameras.

The other committee members and I have no vested interest in the cameras, but we are all for safety. That is why we voted, 4-2, to recommend the cameras be taken down. The cameras caused a negative change in driver behavior, resulting in a huge increase in collisions.

Politics were not involved in our committee's decision. Statements made by elected officials are politically motivated, but those statements saying the "statistics favor keeping cameras" are not the truth.

The big picture presented by the statistics is:

1) Collisions went up by 52 percent!

2) The longer the cameras were up, the more collisions there were. The first three months, collisions were up 41 percent; the second three months, collisions were up 64 percent.

3) The number of injuries was exactly the same at the 18 closely monitored intersections. And, because of the nature of rear-end collisions (which skyrocketed), injuries almost certainly were up. (Injuries from rear-ends often aren't reported at the scene of the collision, causing an undercount.)

The statistics are what caused the city staff and city council to ask our committee to look at taking the cameras down early. These are alarming statistics that cried out to take the cameras down.

The political part of this issue is the reluctance of some elected officials to admit they were wrong, even in the face of overwhelming facts.

The ATS letter said staff "misinterpreted" data. What method of interpretation would result in a 52 percent increase in collisions being a good thing? ATS never explained this to our committee, though it certainly had a chance.

The rest of the ATS letter is an example of selective use of statistics: The purpose of the cameras is to change citywide driver behavior, not just at some intersections with cameras. And they didn't even do that. Most of the detailed statistics showed decreased safety at all intersections.

The truth is that red-light cameras didn't work in Lubbock. I seriously doubt that they work anywhere, if you could really look at the non-manipulated facts.
David Spears
Lubbock
 

‘Half-ton' headline was discriminatory
Editor:
Come on. This is how you can tell that a news article is written locally. I am referring to the article on the first page of the Thursday, March 27, paper, "Half-ton woman faces murder charge."

How about "Fat woman faces murder charge" or "Jew faces murder charge"? Maybe even "Fat black woman faces murder charge"? You could be known as an equal opportunity discriminator.
Teri Tabares
Brownsville