Imagine the shock I got when I opened my mail not long ago and found a moving violation traffic citation. What? Huh? It had been more than twenty years since I was cited by a California Highway Patrol officer for a moving violation. What was this?
The "this" was yet another of the infamous and controversial red light camera enforcement tickets. It was not a small matter. A conviction would cost nearly five hundred dollars. It could appreciably raise my already escalating car insurance rates. It could compel taking a written test and possibly even a driving test to renew my license.
When and where did this happen, I asked? But it was where that really stirred my curiosity. It was at a red-light camera installation at 52nd and Crenshaw Blvd. in L.A. I say L.A. because I knew the city had ended the use of red-light traffic enforcement cameras years earlier.
But not at this intersection. Checking further, this wasn't the only spot in the area with these cameras. Two more cameras were positioned just blocks apart on Crenshaw from this light. The lights were next to the Metro Rail line. I checked other areas that fronted the Metro Rail Line outside of the South L.A. area. There were no such cameras. The explanation I got from the L.A. County Sheriff's Dept. was that the cameras were at these locations because cars were running the tracks in front of the train and there had been accidents. In other words, the cameras were there to forestall accidents and presumably save lives.
The problem with that is that it would take a huge stretch not to believe that throughout the miles of Metro Rail transit not in South L.A. other motorists were also running through the tracks and endangering their lives. Yet there were no cameras at any other location other than at these South L.A. locations. There was no surprise then that almost all those cited, fined, and required to appear in court were either Black or Hispanic.
The two days I was in court that's exactly who was there and appeared before the judge. This was a new wrinkle to the driving while Black or Brown classic example of racial profiling. Now it was a case of being photo'd driving while Black or Brown being added to the lengthy category of examples of racial profiling.
This was not speculation hyperbole, or more empty racial carping. In May 2023, the Connecticut NAACP opposed a bill in that state's legislature that would place red lights and speeding cameras in high-risk areas like schools and pedestrian safety zones. The bill was pegged as a safety measure to reduce red light infringement accidents.
The NAACP argued that the red-light cameras "disproportionately affected minority communities, leading to a potential increase in traffic stops, citations and fines." The organization went further and flatly expressed the fear that the cameras would indeed be placed in mostly Black and Brown neighborhoods.
As a compromise, the legislature mandated that the State Department of Transportation review plans for any camera installation to assure that minority communities would not be targeted with the cameras.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
