The time required to react to the light change, and to move into the intersection, and (in my city, which is the context of the bit you quoted) the second or two all-red cycle before this fellow got his green meant that the oncoming driver probably had room to stop even if he had waited until after his light had turned red to start braking. Either that driver failed to see the light at all, or consciously decided to run it. I wasn’t there of course, but I was here. Believe me, I have no sympathy for flagrant violators.
The cameras though, don’t make a distinction between such heinous behavior, and another type of red light violation. A driver has a lot to keep track of, even without self inflicted distractions, and making the call to proceed or stop correctly every single time is asking for a lot. I claim that with some experience, when these drivers misjudge the light timing, and end up running a red light, it will be only by a fraction of a second. When I have done such, I use it as a feedback source, and I am likely to error on the other (safer) side for a while. And that is what I meant by “pushing the yellow”. In my city, the lights are set up so that this type of violation is NOT a hazard, as the lights show red in all directions for 1.5-2 seconds before changing to green in any direction.
Such violations are clearly in another class of driver than those “in a hurry” or feel themselves “too important to wait”. Even though they have plenty of time to stop, they choose instead to accelerate, and often end up entering the intersection several seconds after the light has changed to red, increasing the hazard with excessive speed.
A police officer observing an offending driver will have a good idea as to whether a driver simply misjudged the timing of the light, or made a conscious “f**k it, I’m going through” decision. If the driver accelerated hard when the light turned yellow would be a good clue. The officer, and possibly later a judge based on the officers testimony, can deal appropriately with the two classes of offender.
Cameras, beyond not making such “fine” distinctions, will probably influence the behavior of the flagrant violators. These folks have plenty of time to stop, given the motivation of well known camera intersections. This is of course a good thing, but not all intersections have cameras, and several interviews have indicated the people ARE choosing routes with a mind to avoiding the camera intersections based on privacy concerns…certainly flagrant violators have the information and motivation to do the same.
The cameras do nothing, though, to improve the time-distance-speed judgment skill of the other “I misjudged it” type of violator. So it is going to be these folks who pay the tab for curbing the bad behavior of the flagrant violators.
The all-red-for-2-second lights allow the city to shorten the yellow, making error-of-judgment violations more common and increasing revenue. At the same time, this light timing encourages the flagrant violators (at non camera intersections) by giving them the expectation of a time cushion to accommodate their reckless behavior.