Traffic Cameras Promoted as Deterrent to Speeding

Howard has used red-light cameras since 1998. The county was included in a nationwide study of the effectiveness of red-light cameras conducted by the Federal Highway Administration. Overall, the 2005 study found, the devices were effective in reducing the most damaging side-angle collisions, though less destructive rear-end collisions increased as drivers stopped abruptly to avoid entering intersections on red lights.

Ultimately, the study, which tracked the costs of crashes, including car repairs, hospital bills and lost productivity from serious injuries, calculated that each camera resulted in a savings of $28,000 to $50,000.

As the use of red-light and speed cameras has grown, however, the devices have stirred controversy. Opponents say the cameras raise privacy concerns or become "speed traps," generating revenue for local governments and camera companies at the expense of unwary taxpayers.

In a statement, the American Civil Liberties Union of Maryland said it does not oppose the use of speed cameras, "provided that the cameras capture only those images that are necessary to enforce the traffic laws."

But the group said it is concerned that the data collected could be used for other purposes. "Government and privacy industry surveillance techniques created for one purpose are rarely restricted to that purpose, and every expansion of a data bank and every new use for the data opens the door to more and more privacy abuses," the statement said.

The ACLU in other states has defended drivers who received tickets as a result of speed cameras.

Robey said the automated cameras are far less intrusive than a police officer "shining a light in the car" or detecting the smell of alcohol or illicit drugs. He said the object of installing the cameras is not to raise money but "to save lives and reduce injuries."