I didn't recommend red light and speed cameras as a solution because, in my mind, these are scarcely different from sting-style enforcement actions -it's only a question of knowing where such cameras are located, and scofflaw motorists know to go slow through such-and-such an intersection or stretch of road.

As another point, as Terry rightly points out below (and here in hell, I shiver!), expenditure on such cameras does nothing to address the problem of cyclists running lights and stop signs. This may not immediately concern you much if you're not also a driver, but as a life-long non-driver myself, I bristle at the idea of any enforcement techniques or strategies targeting cyclists alone, and would not wish it on any particular class of road user --the problem is NOT one category of vehicle or the other, it's INDIVIDUALS who believe that they are allowed to selectively obey traffic laws and shirk safety at their convenience.

Furthermore, it's clear from the number of violations we can all observe on a daily basis that the people choosing to break the law don't consider their own lives, the lives of others, and the conscience of others important enough, and neither do they consider the outlay of $200+ or so damaging enough to at least avoid the risk of a citation. Even if such cameras could identify each and every law-breaker, regardless of their means of transport, we'd see them shrug it off. "Oh," they say, "well, I'm used to it...I expect a ticket every three months or so. It sucks, but it ultimately means a few less nights out or a few less restaurant dinners this month." The penalties for these idiots need to be more financially damaging, to the point where it stops being a minor inconvenience and starts being the sort of thing that might actually affect their ability to survive. It's imperative that these dangerous behaviors be viewed as such an undesirable option that a extremely large majority of Portland will consider it a risk that just isn't worth it.