Hello I’m Charlotte Bellis and you’re watching Newsy.com.

“We see this as a benefit for us to increase the safety of the traveling population.”

“Money. Absolutely. It’s money for the city.” (FOX 4)

Red-light cameras have been a hot-button issue in recent years. The cameras photograph drivers running red lights. The owners of the offending vehicles are then sent traffic tickets.

FOX News brings us the view from those who contend red-light cameras increase traffic safety.

“Nationwide, serious accidents at monitored intersections are down, and cities are issuing fewer citations.” (FOX News)

CNN brings us critics who argue red-light cameras are really just revenue generators.

“This light has been the largest money generator for the city of Atlanta. It produces a lot of revenue. From the reports about 1.3 million dollars off of this intersection last year. Just this intersection? Just this intersection.” (CNN)

A number of U.S. cities have been caught shortening the duration of yellow lights specifically on traffic signals that have cameras. According to the National Motorists Association, in 2005,  

“Union City, California was caught trapping motorists with a yellow signal time 1.3 seconds below the minimum established by state law. As a result, the city was forced to refund more than $1 million in red light camera fines.” (Motorist.org)

Despite allegations of misconduct in the use of red-light cameras, The Cochrane Collaboration recently released a study that found strong evidence that red-light cameras are beneficial to communities. Science Blog reports…

“Red-light cameras could be important in reducing the number of dangerous right-angle collisions at intersections, and have advantages over increased police enforcement in that they run 24 hours a day and do not involve high-speed chases.

The cameras also are “immune from charges of discrimination, as they detect only those vehicles that have violated a traffic signal.” (Science Blog)