we the people hate them for their efficiency and wanted them removed so that we don't get caught quite so often.
Nobody wants a ticket, but this false statement fits exactly into the marketing photo radar companies love to use when selling their wares to naive city and state governments.
This makes no sense at all. Red light cameras don't fight rudeness or aggressiveness, whoever (dis)likes it. They fight illegal activity.
Illegal or not, most photo radar advocates like cameras are not concerned with curtailing "illegal activity". They are instead motivated by irrational fear ("that guy needs to slow down until I am comfortable with what they're doing,"), jealousy ("that guy needs to slow down like I do,") or their personal desire for vengeance ("I want to get even with those jerks that cut me off all the time!")
Don't think so? You need to be honest with yourself. State legislators here have been voting for photo enforcement for personal reasons since the beginning of the programs here. While I can't link to either of these resources as citations (my state's legislators debate photo radar bans on CCTV and discussing the issue via email with various legislators), they would talk about their own feelings of "being scared to drive on the freeway", needing to "enforce the laws on the books to get dangerous drivers off the road", etc. The speaker of our state house himself personally refused to allow any photo radar ban to come up for a vote because he "personally approved of the cameras" and thought "they were a good thing for the state," regardless of statistics.
Their candid, honest comments are something all photo radar advocates should be willing to admit to themselves - before they start judging anti-photo advocates. And they shouldn't be trying to automatically fine people for "sin taxes" to make their budgeting jobs (and subsequent re-election) easier.