I understand we disagree. I'm not offloading responsibility of specific incidents to the system. Drivers are still responsible for their actions.

Revenue from traffic cameras goes to mostly the police, not for making roads safer. If we made roads and public transit better we wouldn't need the cameras so they're temporary at best.

As far as safety goes, the data I've seen shows they initially work, then only for about 100m. Red light cameras are the same, they create rear end collisions due to unsafe breaking from someone who should have used the orange light, but was afraid of a ticket.

What I'm saying is we have a systemic problem with known structural solutions. Any initiative that doesn't push for the structural solutions is just prolonging the status quo.

Then when you factor the human/political element it's even worse. These cameras create real frustration and resentment among a large portion of the population. These are just people trying to work and access important services. We want them to do it without driving, and if they do drive they should be driving on streets and roads instead of unsafe stroads. When we urbanists push for cameras instead of structural reforms, then urbanism will will get lumped into that frustration and we get more carbrained politicians that make the situation worse for everyone not in an SUV.

I think we both agree on the end goal, so I don't really want to argue, I'm just afraid that this path leads us to a worse outcome once you factor in human emotions and politics.