Kristen M. Daum LANSING — Drivers might think twice about speeding or running red lights if they knew they could be caught - and Michigan communities could be safer as a result. That’s the hypothesis behind a bill moving through the state legislature that would allow communities to install surveillance cameras at intersections and use images from them to crack down on dangerous driving infractions. But civil liberties groups and some police organizations strongly oppose the legislation, calling it an invasion of privacy and a poor substitute for typical police work. House Bill 4763 has support from a bipartisan group of lawmakers. It was debated for the first time Tuesday before the House transportation committee. There has not been a vote. Scroll down to read the full bill and analysis. State law currently prohibits so-called “red light cameras” but proponents of the House bill said the technology could improve public safety. “There is concern about excessive and aggressive driving in our communities,” said Rep. Thomas F. Stallworth III, a Detroit Democrat and one of the bill’s co-sponsors. “For me, this is an opportunity to begin sending a clear message that speeding is not tolerated and it provides an opportunity for law enforcement to have additional tools in their toolkit and deploy their resources more effectively.” Monroe County Deputy Sheriff Dave LaMontaine, of the Police Officers Association of Michigan, argued the cameras can’t make the same judgment call an officer on the ground might make. “A citizen has a right to face their accuser and it changes the very nature of the police-citizen relationship when that accuser is a high-tech camera on a pole,” said LaMontaine, whose organization represents 22,000 officers statewide. The bill would set statewide standards for the cameras, including how the images from the devices could be used in court. All images would need to be reviewed by a police officer and any violations prosecuted could result in a civil infraction, punishable by a fine of no more than $130. Revenue from the fines would be split evenly between the state and the local government involved. The community would have to bear the cost of installing, operating and maintaining the equipment and could use the fine revenue to defray those expenses. The owner of the vehicle would be the target of the fine, not the person driving it at the time of the violation. If the legislation were to become law, it’s unclear whether Lansing is a community that would consider using the technology. Interim Police Chief Mike Yankowski said he hasn’t had a chance to review the legislation, which was introduced two weeks ago. Rep. Tom Cochran, D-Mason and a member of the House transportation committee, said he “is totally in support” of the bill. “This is all about public safety, plain and simple for me,” said Cochran, a former Lansing fire chief who said he’s responded to countless accidents at intersections. “This is about people changing their behavior hopefully so we don’t have incidents where people are injured or killed or worse.” Opponents of the bill suggested lengthening the duration of yellow lights could be a better alternative — an idea that has the attention of Rep. Wayne Schmidt, R-Traverse City, the primary sponsor of the bill and the chairman of the House committee. “We’re going to continue to work on these bills,” Schmidt said Tuesday. “This is just the first blush.” Red light cameras continue to be a hot topic in many legislatures nationwide. According to the Governors Highway Safety Association, 24 states have red light cameras operating in at least one location. Nine states prohibit their use.
Posted on: Thu, 06 Jun 2013 00:19:52 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015