> At the end of the day traffic enforcement via fine hardly ever does anything to improve actual safety, it is a revenue generator and a pretense for other police investigation but has never and can never be about safety

NYC's red-light violation fining program (which was just expanded this year) is substantively responsible for a 70% decline in right-angle crashes, as well as a 40% decline in rear-end crashes[1]. Drivers who are fined for driving unsafely learn that there's a cost, and drive more safely as a result.

I agree with the rest (including the concerning pretext aspect!). But fines do play a critical role in road safety.

[1]: https://www1.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/nyc-red-light-ca...

Automated, i.e constant monitoring, is slightly different than ad-hoc police enforcement, as drivers learn which lights are continually monitored will change behavior, in those locations. Just like known "speed traps" cause people to slow down, or if you use Waze you will slow down if police are reported on the app.

So I have no doubt that automated enforcement will change behavior, I still opposed automated enforcement on a number of grounds, privacy / constitutional / abuse concerns / etc.

Further I would have to look deeper into the implantation, but I know more than a few studies on Red Light cams have shown that while they will reduce intersection crashed, often then INCREASE rear end crashes as people slam on the breaks when the yellow comes on making the intersection not really "safer" it just changes the location of the wreck.

Now for a city like NYC rear end may be safer over all given the high levels of pedestrians I dont know...

Sure, it's different. The claim was that traffic enforcement via fine doesn't improve safety; I've shown that a form of traffic enforcement via fine does.

I've heard just about every driver I've ever talked to repeat the "red light cameras cause rear-ends" claim, but the only evidence I've seen shows that they decrease rear-ends. That makes more intuitive sense to me: most people have regular commutes, and you learn to follow the traffic laws after the first handful of tickets.

[1] https://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/lake-county-news-sun/...

[2] https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a15135851/rear-end-cra...

[3] https://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/calculator/factsheet/...

I appreciate the links. It looks like red light cameras are indeed much less effective (and maybe even counterproductive) in the rest of the US. As a pedestrian, I consider them a blessing in NYC.

There are speed traps on some neighborhood streets in Chicago that are so hair trigger sensitive (or maybe just miscalibrated?) that locals just don't drive down that street. They go a block out of their way to not pass that camera. Even some people who live on that block do this.

The messaging isn't really that mixed. Folks mostly want the police to enforce and investigate more important matters than they do now (speeding vs overly tinted windows, for example, or home invasions vs sleeping in a park).

edit: removed snark.

Ok, where does theft, assault, property crime, shoplifting, and trespassing fit in our hierarchy of enforcement?

Higher or lower than speeding?

because many of the "defund police" were a direct result of police enforcement actual violent crime.... not them attempting to enforce "sleeping in the park" laws

Also as a side note, overly tinted windows (speaking as someone that drives a car with overly tinted windows) can be dangerous at night, more so than speeding.

> It seems law enforcement is both a problem when they enforce the law, and a problem when they do not enforce the law.

It’s about accountability and not treating everything as a problem for law enforcement.