That may all be true, but choosing to allow them does create a precedent for automated “unmanned” enforcement of all kinds, which I’m not exactly ok with personally. It is usually terrible for privacy as well, as there’s no guarantee how that data is handled or where it goes.

There are many issues with the area where I currently live, but I would consider the blanket ban on automated enforcement a big plus. It doesn’t mean traffic enforcement can’t be high-tech; it simply means that a citation cannot be issued by an automated system - a human needs to witness the violation, interpret the severity, and personally write and deliver the ticket to the offender.

Speed cameras can also just be implemented very poorly sometimes. The outcomes you cite only happen if the implementation is sound. If corruption in policing already exists these systems can create an opening to exacerbate it. For example, I used to live in a city that had used cameras for so long, the stretches of road covered by them were common knowledge to speeders. The cameras did shape behavior but only in the specific zones they covered. The local police relied on speed cameras and red light cameras so heavily, they served to substitute for in-person enforcement activities instead of augmenting them. That led to the police basically forgetting how to even do traffic enforcement very much at all. They would say “look how much revenue we’re collecting!” at press events, but in reality they were using it to disengage, which created a palpable feeling of lawlessness on the streets. All of that put together led to worse issues than before the cameras were installed, even for things that weren’t related to traffic laws at all.