They've been the talk of the town for the past couple of weeks.
Brick residents have known about the approval of additional red light cameras since last summer, but only in the past few weeks were the cameras and flash poles installed at the intersection of Route 70 and Brick Boulevard.
The new cameras will target motorists who run the red light at the busy intersection where the two major roads come together. The cameras were approved in September.
But despite the fact that they've been installed, don't expect to be receiving any tickets in the mail just yet.
The cameras, owned by American Traffic Solutions of Arizona, are currently in a testing phase, according to Business Administrator Scott Pezarras.
The testing phase should be complete by the end of the month, at which time the township will give the required legal notices that the cameras are active. After activation, the cameras will generate warning notices to scofflaw motorists for 30 days.
"They should be up and running, and issuing tickets, the first week of June," said Pezarras.
Plans to erect cameras at yet another intersection, Route 88 and Post Road, have been put off.
Mayor Stephen C. Acropolis said additional accident data needs to be collected to comply with state regulations before cameras can be installed at that intersection.
Cameras have already been up and running at the intersections of Route 70 and Chambers Bridge Road and Brick Boulevard and Hooper Avenue for almost two years.
The cameras are allowed in select municipalities, including Brick, as part of a state pilot program.
"These results cannot be used to justify the widespread installation of cameras because they are not universally effective. These results also cannot be used to justify the abolition of cameras, as they have had a positive impact at some intersections and in some jurisdictions. The report recommends, therefore, that the decision to install a red light camera be made on an intersection-byintersection basis."
http://www.motorists.org/red-light-cameras/increase-accidents
Further research showed that there was a way to make intersections safer: Simply lengthen the duration of amber lights, allowing drivers more time to make the critical decision to stop or go. But there’s no money in longer yellow lights. And it turned out that there was lots of it—piles and piles, really—in red-light cameras. http://scottandfenderson.typepad.com/law_blog/2011/07/red-light-cameras-who-benefits.html
From Maryland to Ohio to Arizona to Illinois, whenever voters get to pull the lever, the cameras get run out of town. Which is why many towns (and the camera companies) have tried to keep the matter out of voters’ hands. In its 2010 annual report, Redflex noted that, while citizens have attempted to introduce ballot measures on cameras in many localities, the company was “actively implementing measures to defend against them” so as to “protect and improve our interests” in these “markets.” That’s not just bare-knuckled Redflex tactics, it’s the industry standard. http://scottandfenderson.typepad.com/law_blog/2011/07/red-light-cameras-who-benefits.html
And I am not a moron, I am a police officer in the town you are claiming has accidents at those camera's due to those cameras. Again, there have been NO accidents at the intersections DUE TO THE CAMERA'S. All accidents at those intersections can be directly blamed upon one of the drivers either not paying attention, driving careless or recklessly, and/or speeding. If you are driving like a sane, rational, safe driver, you will not get into an accident because of the camera's. I can not defend the idea of removing the camera's because some people may drive carelessly and be forced to slam on the brakes due to their inattention or inability to operate a care safely with respect to other drivers.
You also state that the studies on this topic tend to be biased to one side or another. This is true. The insurance industry has been the leading advocate for red-light cameras since they were first introduced in the United States and it’s worth examining why they push so hard for their installation. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), which is wholly funded by the insurance industry, is often quoted by media as an unbiased source despite the fact they benefit financially from their installation. http://blog.motorists.org/why-the-insurance-industry-loves-red-light-cameras/