Cops love them, but intersection cameras are driving some in the city into a red rage
By David O’Neill
Florissant and Arnold have them. Brentwood is considering them, and St. Peters is in the process of installing six. And before the year is out, they may find their way into St. Louis as well. In case you’ve missed them, red-light cameras are spreading throughout the metro area, perching atop red lights at busy intersections as if in some futuristic Orwellian re-envisioning of The Birds.
Who will be next? “There are 91 municipalities in St. Louis County with their own traffic courts, and it’s their call whether they want to put the cameras up,” says Mac Scott, a spokesman for St. Louis County Executive Charlie Dooley. “I think a lot of places are looking for them.”
One hope is that the cameras will reduce the number of accidents at busy intersections by giving red-light runners pause. When a motorist runs a red light, a camera flashes and, voilà, police officers have proof of the infraction. The offender finds a letter in the mail about a week later, promising a ticket and a fine in the painful neighborhood of $100.
Ostensibly the cameras are intended as a deterrent to risky driving practices—but not everyone thinks they’re a good idea. One Department of Highways & Traffic employee, who asked not to be identified, argues with their accuracy: “A camera takes your picture and you’re guilty? How do you subpoena a camera?”
You may not be able to call the camera to the witness stand, but as Deputy Chief Mike Townsend of the St. Peters Police Department tells it, the evidence will be hard to dispute: The system proposed for his jurisdiction will take a close-up photo of the driver and the car’s license plate, and a 12-second video will capture the infraction—all of which will be viewable online. “You’ll have the opportunity to dispute it,” he says, “but if the photo is of you, it’ll be hard to fight.”
Some insist that the cameras, though plainly visible, are a civil-rights violation of sorts. Neil Richards, a Washington University constitutional-law professor whose curriculum includes information privacy, has been a vocal opponent: “They have their merits, but we don’t want to live in a surveillance society.”
Some of the opposition to red-light cameras “is that they’re too useful,” Richards says. “The camera gets your plate number, which leads to accessing your address or other information, so it’s like authorities are tracking your progress around the city—and a lot of us don’t like that.”
