A blog for Optotraffic
Header image

May 13:  Like everyone else we appreciate compliments. In particular we like hearing from our law enforcement partners, such as this note we recently received from the Police Chief in New Miami, Ohio.

“We chose Optotraffic to help our modest police department enhance the safety of our Village. Yet, with their assistance and expertise, we not only have accomplished that goal but we have achieved an unanticipated culture of safety in our entire community. We simply could not have done that without them.”

Thanks, Chief!

May 7: Recently, the well-respected Insurance  Institute for Highway Safety conducted a public opinion survey about red-light and speed cameras in Washington, DC, which has aggressive enforcement and relatively high fines. Here’s the link to the study: http://www.iihs.org/news/rss/pr042513.html

Some highlights of the findings:

  • 87% favor red-light camera enforcement and 76% support speed camera enforcement.
  • Just over half support adding cameras at stop signs and 47% support adding cameras at crosswalks. The percentages are much higher, however, among individuals who generally walk rather than drive.
  • 58% of the people surveyed had actually received citations generated by automated systems – primarily speed cameras. Of that number, 59% of people who received citations acknowledge that the citation was deserved.

April 17:  A letter was recently published in the Baltimore Sun that was pro Automated Speed Enforcement.  Sadly, it was generated by a fatality, but it sums up quite elegantly what we believe at Optotraffic.  To read this article, click here.

January 30:  Optotraffic offers the most sophisticated technology in Automated Speed Enforcement, designed initially for the U.S. space program. But we do not rely solely on technology – no matter how advanced. In fact, before a traffic citation is issued four different individuals must review the violation in the Optotraffic process:

1. After a speed violation occurs, a photo is taken of the speeding car. At that point, an Optotraffic technician reviews the photo to make sure there is a clear photo of the license plate.

2. The photo is then sent to a second person who views the photo in more detail to make sure that there is in fact a violation and no extenuating circumstances. That reviewer then requests ownership information from the appropriate state department of motor vehicles.

3. When ownership information is returned, the photo is again reviewed by a third individual who double checks that there is a violation and the description of the vehicle from the DMV matches the vehicle in the photo.

4. Finally – and most importantly – a sworn police officer reviews the photo and ownership information yet again before he or she issues a citation.

 

January 7:  The Optotraffic team is committed to highway safety, particularly around schools.  That’s why we come to work each day. But, of course, getting positive feedback about our work is always appreciated. That’s why we were pleased to read the very positive report on our program in Prince George’s County, Maryland by the top news radio station in the region. It includes comments by AAA, an organization that has been critical  of automated speed enforcement in other jurisdictions. Here’s the link to that WTOP coverage: http://www.wtop.com/58/3178138/Study-Speed-cameras-slowing-down-Prince-Georges-drivers

July 2:  This past week, we had the opportunity to meet scores of city and town officials at the Maryland Municipal League annual meeting.  We answered lots of questions from mayors, council members, and administrators about how to make their school zones safer.  What we heard again and again is how important this is to their constituents.  We all realize that our children are often most at risk on their way to and from school and Optotraffic’s mission is to make those trips much safer.

April 2:  Optotraffic is currently deploying the largest array of portable speed cameras in the U.S. in Prince George’s County, Maryland.  We were pleased to see more dramatic proof that our cameras reduce speeding in school zones. The Police Department reports that in a comparison of a dozen deployments in January and February this year, speeding citations fell an average of 42.58 percent; from a low of 19 percent to a high of 75 percent!  When drivers know that speed cameras are present, they simply slow down and that’s good for the school kids, crossing guards and the entire community.

March 26:   In an overall depressing assessment of speeding, the Governors Highway Safety Association this month noted that deaths caused by speeding are actually on the rise.  Speeding was cited as the cause in 10,530 deaths in 2010.  This amounts to 31 percent of all fatalities—a seven percent increase since 2000.  GHSA notes the decline in police officers to enforce speed laws and calls for the expansion of automated enforcement such as speed cameras, particularly in school and work zones.  The full GHSA announcement can be found here.

March 12:  In past blogs, we’ve mentioned the bewildering opposition of the Mid-Atlantic AAA to speed cameras.  In a recent “Fact v. Fiction” report, the Maryland State Highway Administration took the Triple A to task for its statements calling for speed cameras to be switched off when highway workers weren’t present.  The SHA pointed out that work zones are more dangerous for drivers than workers.  The agency explained that 80 percent of work zone crashes injure drivers and passengers.  The good news is that when speed cameras were installed in Maryland highway work zones, speeding dropped 75 percent.  Here’s a link to the Highway Administration report http://www.roads.maryland.gov/OC/Fact-vs-Fiction.pdf.  We hope the AAA reads it!

February 27:  We were amused recently to see advice from a company hawking a monitor that supposedly tracks your speed and, according to the company, can be used to fight speeding citations in court.  Not really.  Police deployed speed cameras, such as those manufactured by Optotraffic, have their calibration verified independently by the police.  A self-installed monitor does not meet that standard of calibration and is inadmissible in court.  Of course, the same company has advertised sprays that they claim obscure license plates from cameras, but fail to mention that such sprays don’t work and are illegal in most states.