If speed-enforcement cameras prompt drivers to slow down, how many people would argue against them? As it turns out, plenty. And they are complicating the challenge of road construction accidents and safety in states in which prohibitions on such cameras don’t exclude road-work zones. With most states yet to deploy such systems or pass laws governing their use, the anti-camera sentiment could be a major impediment.

伊利诺斯州,首次允许speed-radar enforcement in 2004, limits the use of cameras to issue speeding tickets for violations in construction zones and toll roads, according to the Governors’ Highway Safety Association. In 2010, research showed that work-zone cameras slowed cars and trucks by 3 to 8 mph, cut the percentage of speeding vehicles and reduced fatal crashes. Other states followed Illinois’ lead. The state’s speed-enforcement cameras “are doing a good job. They’re sending the right message,” says Bill Frey, executive director of the Associated General Contractors of Illinois. “The public doesn’t realize it’s for their safety. We’re not out to get them.”

根据该网站上发布的数据，在过去的15年中，工作区风险管理计划的结合有助于将美国的工作区交通事故数量减少到2014年的669人，从2000年的1,026人减少到669人。workzonesafety.org. The methods include planning, signage, traffic control, speed-limit enforcement and driver education.

Over those years, research has filled in the statistical picture about the sources of danger. Younger and older drivers tend to speed more than middle-aged motorists, a recent study of Minnesota drivers has shown. And other studies have demonstrated that heavy trucks are involved in about a third of all work-zone fatalities. Last month, six people died in a five- vehicle crash along Interstate 80 near Lexington, Neb., when a distracted truck driver rear-ended a minivan in what the local newspaper described as a “head-to-head” crossover construction zone. Charged with numerous violations, the driver allegedly entered a 9-mile-long work zone where the speed limit was reduced to 65 mph from 75 mph.

Banned in 14 States

自动化的高速公路雷达相机系统似乎是逻辑上的步骤。但是14个州禁止了他们，尽管其中一些州为工作区和学校例外。

Associations that advocate for drivers and their rights have mostly bad things to say about cameras. They claim the cameras end up being government cash cows, generate false readings, are prone to error, deprive drivers of basic rights and actually can make highways and roads more dangerous. The Maryland Drivers Alliance’s assessment was that the safety benefits have been mixed, citing a U.K. study that the alliance claimed demonstrated “that speed cameras did not reduce accident rates in highway work zones.” In general, radar-camera systems enrich suppliers and contractors involved in providing equipment, the alliance claims on its website.

A better strategy, drivers groups say, would be to hire more state troopers to watch work zones. Yet patrol cars in work zones may be limited by the nature of the construction to sitting in only certain places and may not have room to pull drivers over.

Whether the cameras help is not a purely academic question for the driving public. Roughly 85% of the victims of work-zone accidents are drivers and passengers.

在允许雷达相机系统进入工作区域的七个州中，包括科洛拉多，伊利诺伊州，路易斯安那州，马里兰州，俄勒冈州，田纳西州和华盛顿州，都不会使用摄像头。罚款也有所不同。华盛顿州收取$ 137的首次违规行为。根据州官员的演讲，在伊利诺伊州，最初的违法行为将获得375美元的罚款。

In Pennsylvania, two state senators have proposed a five-year pilot program. One of them, David G. Argall (R), said in an email statement that several highway construction workers and their families had asked for stronger safety incentives in work zones.

Simply increasing work-zone length or lowering speed limits won’t do the job, says James Baron, a spokesman for the American Traffic Safety Services Association, a Fredericksburg, Va.-based association of road-safety-related manufacturers and service providers. Because work zones come in so many different types and move with the work progress, stretching out the zone and further lowering speed limits isn’t a good idea, he says.

人性也带来障碍。联邦高速公路管理局的工作区管理计划经理Jawad Paracha解释说，驾驶员倾向于忽略迹象和警告，并以他们感到自在的驾驶速度进行速度。

A better approach would be to install intelligent systems that connect to message boards and change as sensors feed in new data about weather, time of day, traffic conditions and new surroundings, Baron says.

Research Backs Camera Use

马里兰州的SafeZones倡议是最具争议的摄像头速度执行计划之一，2009年在其头六周发行了近8,800张门票。

在马里兰州高速公路管理局网站上的一份文件中，该部门声称，在工作区域，Safezones的汽车数量降低了80％的汽车数量。它还指出，在SafeZones摄像机发出的近100万次引用中，仅退还了两张票，因为它们是错误的。

State officials claim the cameras have a 95% rate of capturing legible photos of speeder license plates, but that wasn’t always the case. A state audit in 2012 found that SafeZones cameras failed to capture clear enough photos of speeders’ license plates, so only 44% of cars caught speeding by the cameras received tickets. The office estimated that the lost revenue from those uncalibrated cameras was at least $850,000.

The state’s original request for proposals to install cameras and collect fines required cameras that could capture legible photos of license plates 95% of the time. That number was reduced to 90% while the state considered bids for the contract to install the cameras and collect the fines.

In February, state senators suggested repealing the right to use cameras. Now, the program’s fate remains uncertain.

在大多数情况下，研究支持在工作区中使用相机。2010年的一项俄勒冈州的一新利luck项研究发现，照片雷达执法“对减少建筑工作区中超速车辆的数量有重大影响，”导致速度平均降低了23.7％。拆除相机后，驾驶员恢复了通常的速度，标牌和工人的存在“对超速行动没有明显的影响。”

Similar studies in North Carolina and Arizona found decreases in crashes and average speed from both mobile-camera enforcement and fixed-camera enforcement. The 2009 Arizona study showed that crashes during non-peak traffic periods decreased by 44% to 54% and average speed decreased by 9 mph.

Using a driving simulator and eye-tracking glasses, a 2016 experiment in Minnesota examined whether “Your Speed Is”-type signs—often used in tandem with cameras—distracted drivers. The experiment found that the speed display signage was not a significant distraction.

尽管进行了支持的研究，但在加速相机方面，州议员可能会谨慎行事。

当印第安纳州去年考虑摄像机速度执行账单时，对手担心是否没有实时警察对摄像机的审查是否会违反正当程序，以及摄像机供应商是否会收到每张票的收入。似乎可以肯定的是：雷达速度 - 执法系统将需要冠军，这些冠军可以证明工作区摄像机不是一种新型的速度陷阱，但对驾​​驶员本身是至关重要的保护。