Since we constantly battle against bad government — it being necessary to pare government down to its essential kernel, where it protects rather than tramples our rights — we sometimes lose sight of the fact that good government is both possible and necessary.
Now, many folks will raise an eyebrow, here. “‘Good government’ isn’t just about protecting our rights,” they might say. “It’s about providing key services. Like roads. Traffic lights. That sort of thing.”
Sure, we need roads. And safety measures. Nevertheless, good government is not about overkill.
Take automated intersection policing. That is, the infamous “red-light cameras.”
The New York Post reports that one camera — one intersection robot (better term, eh?) — snapped 1551 infractions on July 7. That was $77,550 for one camera for one day. No wonder that one city councilman likes it. And says it makes roadways safer.
But over at Reason, Zenon Evans marshals some skepticism. “A British study on speed cameras last year determined that ‘the number of collisions appears to have risen enough to make the cameras worthy of investigation in case they have contributed to the increases.’” These dangerous effects don’t appear to be limited to the other side of the pond, either: “[M]any reports,” Evans concludes, “have indicated that red light cameras in the U.S. increase accidents.”
More policing isn’t necessarily better policing. The old rule about traffic safety is that the rules should be set to what most people would drive without the rules.
Let’s remember: rewarding ineffective, counter-productive policing with lots of money is a bad way to govern the governors.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
5 replies on “Red Light Robots”
Traffic circles, which are used in much of the world, EXCEPT the US, have been repeatedly studied and repeatedly shown to be not only substantially safer but also to move vehicles through intersections in half the time.
Save time require more real estate, require less energy, generate much less revenue for the government.
And much safer.
You begin with the premise, “Since we constantly battle against bad government — it being necessary to pare government down to its essential kernel, where it protects rather than tramples our rights — we sometimes lose sight of the fact that good government is both possible and necessary.”
Please name one contemporary or historic government that is not or was not naked force and didn’t grow in duress and evil. Even the most benign of governments involve unwelcome coercion and unnecessary taxation.
Isn’t it obvious that even our own government, which supposedly had the most benign and citizen-friendly constitution began ignoring the constitution almost immediately and has grown into one of the most evil empires that has ever existed, killing many millions of innocent people throughout the world?
If government can be pared down to its essential kernel, give us some contemporary examples. If good government is possible, show us.
“Good government” is the most obvious of oxymorons and I’m amazed that you of all people do not realize it.
sheldon, you make a great point. and calling this government evil is a long overdue conversation that needs some prime time. the progressives and warmongers who think they need to rule the world have crossed the line so many times now that Putin is making the case in the greater world that we are no longer to be trusted. i think few, other than the UK, Germany & a few other broke Europeans believe we are still the moral compass of the world. they like our people, our culture but are moving to a position that our government is no longer to be believed or trusted.
Sheldon — I said good government is “possible.” I didn’t say it had been achieved.