Red-light cameras, originally implemented in an attempt

[manhhiep2509]

Red-light cameras, originally implemented in an attempt at increasing the safety of intersections, have been precisely the opposite: drivers are afraid of expensive citations and often brake suddenly as they approach camera-equipped intersections, so they cause rear-end accidents.

A. in an attempt at increasing the safety of intersections, have been precisely the opposite: drivers are afraid of expensive citations and often brake suddenly as they approach camera-equipped intersections, so they cause
B. while attempting to increase safety at intersections, have had a precisely opposite effect: drivers, who are afraid of expensive citations, often brake suddenly as they approach camera-equipped intersections, thus causing
C. in attempting to increase safety in intersections, have precisely had the opposite effect: drivers fear expensive citations, approach camera-equipped intersections, often brake suddenly, and cause
D. as attempts to increase intersections' safety, are precisely the opposite: afraid of expensive citations, drivers approach camera-equipped intersections and brake suddenly, thus causing
E. in an attempt to increase safety at intersections, have had precisely the opposite effect: fearing expensive citations, drivers approaching camera-equipped intersections often brake suddenly, causing

The explanation of answer choice C says that The construction "in attempting..." needs to refer to the subject of the main clause. In this case, that creates a nonsensical meaning: namely, that the cameras themselves were in the process of "attempting to increase safety."

The answer choice D and B have the same error, but I can understand such flaw in answer choice C. However, I cannot figure out why v-ing in a preposition can refer to subject, i.e Red-light cameras, and not refer to people who carry out such cameras. Is such interpretation always applied or just used in some specific cases? Please explain further.

[RonPurewal]

If you see "in __ing", it should describe whoever or whatever is doing the __ing. Therefore, that person/thing should be mentioned in the sentence.

The only exception I can think of: If "__ing" is the name of something (= not an action), then this doesn't apply.
This equipment is used in boxing.
(Here, "boxing" is not an action; it's the name of a sport. Therefore, this sentence is no different from ...used in hockey or ...used in baseball.)

[ShriramC110]

Hi Ron,

Two back to back modifiers should normally be avoided.
How come answer choice E is the best then?

[aflaamM589]

Hi Ron,
Is ,thus causing in D wrong because of redundancy and therefore thus is omitted in choice E?

[aflaamM589]

If you see "in __ing", it should describe whoever or whatever is doing the __ing. Therefore, that person/thing should be mentioned in the sentence.
.[/i])

Does same reasoning hold true for A ?
A--> in an attempt at increasing
Thanks

[aflaamM589]

Can someone help me on this one?

[aflaamM589]

Can someone help me on this one?
I've edited my queries to be a little more specific.
Thanks for your time : )