Viewers respond to a signature story from Ohio on the controversial use of traffic cameras to ticket motorists for traffic violations.
Read the Full Transcript
And now to Viewers Like You, your chance to comment on some of our recent work.
Many of you wrote us about last weekend's updated signature story from Ohio on the controversial use of traffic cameras to ticket motorists for traffic violations. Some of the viewers we heard from defended the practice.
Patrick Devine said: Love them. Reduces the number of police officers needed for traffic control so they can enforce other areas … Red light cameras have been proven to save lives.
Thomas Langr added:
I'll be in the minority here, but after seeing all the accidents caused by motorists breaking the rules, and so many close calls myself, I see a place for them.
We've had them in South Australia for years … These cameras will always be regarded as revenue-raisers until the money from fines is used for road safety not general revenue.
There was also this from Nathan Engle: I definitely see the argument that it's toxic to turn municipal fines into a for-profit venture … but I'm not at all comfortable standing on the side of people trying to argue that it was no big deal that they blew through a red light.
But others felt there was no need for traffic cameras, and that they do nothing to stop traffic violations.
Mike Millan said: These are just revenue generating machines that do nothing to decrease traffic problems. They should be taken down and outlawed.
Mikemann McMahon wrote:
Our experience with them in Minneapolis was dubious, and was determined unconstitutional by the state supreme court.
Sean Burns had this to say: Just another way to turn "law enforcement" into a cash machine for the city.
And finally there was this from HKrieger: I once worked as a photographer, but this seems like a more profitable way to make money with a camera.
As always we welcome your comments. Visit us at pbs.org/newshour, on our Facebook page, or tweet us @newshour.