Where Do Speed Cameras Work? Data Might Hold the Key

Depending on the state they happen to be driving in, people behind the wheel face vastly different chances of being caught speeding on camera. The nation is sharply divided on the effectiveness and the ethics of speed cameras, a key piece of smart city technology. But the answer to whether they work to improve traffic safety, and if so, where, may lie in the data.

Government Technology analyzed and mapped data from the Governors Highway Safety Association and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) about speed camera legislation and locations nationwide as of April 2025. At least 311 individual communities are now running traffic safety speed camera programs.

WHERE ARE SPEED CAMERAS LEGAL?

State laws reveal a divisive split, hinting how differently states feel about automated cameras issuing tickets. Fifteen states (gray on the map) currently have no specific regulations, while another 24 (green) explicitly permit their use. Another nine (red) have outlawed speed cameras entirely. Fines range from a maximum penalty of $40 to $500 depending on the state. This patchwork of regulations visualizes the strained and ongoing debate about their effectiveness and appropriateness.

However, the reality is more nuanced as speed cameras have also become a battle between states and local governments. In Iowa (yellow on the map), some local jurisdictions face having to turn cameras off after the state denied permits under a new process aimed at limiting how the cameras can be used. Meanwhile, in Texas, a speed camera program in Bexar County was halted as a clash between local and state rules cast doubt on the legality of issued tickets.

A NATION DIVIDED ON SPEED CAMERAS

Looking beyond the simple "banned or not" question reveals further complexities in speed camera use across the country's smart city initiatives.
In five states, the number of cameras a locality can deploy is capped based on population, reflecting concerns about oversaturation. Some jurisdictions even mandate the physical presence of a police officer for violations to be ticketed. More commonly, 12 states authorize speed cameras in work zones, often stipulating that ticketing occurs only during construction. School zones are another key area, with 13 states permitting their use, frequently limiting enforcement to when school is in session.

Arity, a mobility analytics firm using driving data to improve road safety, argues that while speed cameras can be a valuable tool, their effectiveness can be undermined by flawed placement. According to Kamron Clifford, a driving behavior data and insights expert with Arity, many jurisdictions rely too heavily on crash data or law enforcement patrol data, leading to suboptimal results.

Clifford also raised concerns about inherent biases in traditional methods.

“You’ll end up with those measures being placed where people are shouting the loudest, or you might have the opposite, where you might see enforcement reflecting over-policing patterns in certain communities as well,” she explained.

Relying solely on patrol data, she added, merely mirrors existing enforcement patterns rather than identifying truly risky areas.

RETHINKING SPEED CAMERA LOCATIONS WITH DRIVER DATA

“We all know that there can be many risks that don’t result in an accident,” Clifford said. “If you only focus on where collisions have happened, you’re not looking at where the next collision is going to occur.”

She asserted that untapped potential lies in analyzing driver data such as traffic volumes, average speeds and speed distributions.

“Moving to a more data-driven approach, one that’s more objective, can help cities avoid targeting certain groups or certain neighborhoods and can ensure that speed cameras or other safety measures are equitably distributed across cities,” Clifford said. “Certainly they probably are aware of the hot spots, but they may also be blind to some of the hot spots, and that’s where data can paint a different picture for them.”

Yet, Clifford cautions, data alone is not a solution. 

“You need to be able to leverage that data, be able to explore that data, and to use that information to make decisions and improve the road network,” she said.

Arity views road safety as a multifaceted issue, advocating for a combination of technological solutions, including traffic-calming measures such as speed bumps and speed cameras. However, their core belief is that the implementation of these tools must be rooted in solid data that demonstrably proves their effectiveness, an answer they believe driver data can provide.

“It would be unfortunate if we all waited for enough crashes to happen to take action when there’s another source that could tell you there’s some overall bad behavior happening at this location,” Clifford said.