Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Traffic Camera Victim ‘Pays Back’ Police Dept.
Nanny State Liberation Front ^ | 06/09/2010

Posted on 06/09/2010 8:11:25 AM PDT by HandsOffMyFreedom

If you’ve ever been issued a traffic ticket by a red light or speeding camera, you will revel in the bittersweet justice one luck recipient bestowed upon his local nanny state police department.

Upon receiving a speeding ticket in the mail, Brian McCrary followed the citation’s payment instructions and attempted to pay his $90 fine on the Bluff City Police Department’s (BCPD) website. Much to his surprise, he discovered its domain name was about to expire.

Instead of paying his fine, McCrary saw it as a rare opportunity to literally ‘pay back’ the police department for violating his civil liberties with ‘Big Brother’ traffic cameras ...

(Excerpt) Read more at nannystateliberationfront.wordpress.com ...


TOPICS: Government; Humor; Local News; Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: biggovernment; crime; internet; libertarian; nannystate; policestate; redlightcameras; revenuetickets
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-211 next last
To: aSeattleConservative

Its called Free Speech, not whining and its in the Constitution. I know thats a forbidden document up in your area but you can find it online.


101 posted on 06/09/2010 1:05:33 PM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: texan75010

Why don’t cops pay a fine everytime they speed?


102 posted on 06/09/2010 1:06:39 PM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Dutchboy88

Apparently, you just finished your “Nanny State” propaganda course. How’s that working out for you?


103 posted on 06/09/2010 1:08:12 PM PDT by alarm rider (The left will always tell you who they fear the most. What are they telling you now?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: dila813

I’d sell it back for having the charges dropped so my insurance rate wouldn’t go up AND a sign placed at the intersection warning drivers of the camera. The point is supposed to be to stop people from running red lights. Of course we know it’s really to generate revenue. I wonder if cities with high ticket counts get kickbacks from insurance companies. If they don’t, they should. Now that would be a way to REALLY generate revenue!


104 posted on 06/09/2010 1:23:27 PM PDT by Terry Mross
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
"give it up dutchboy, you didn’t read the story, made a fool of yourself, and cannot dig out. The London has cameras all over the place and crime is still rising. Most of the cameras aren’t event monitored unless they know a crime has been committed. Forget cops sitting in the donut shop, lets put them in a lazy boy watching the revenue stream in from these cameras.

If this post has a point it was lost in the donut shop. When you get out of fourth grade, give us a shout.

105 posted on 06/09/2010 1:24:56 PM PDT by Dutchboy88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: Dutchboy88

Ahhhh, so the speeding ticket morphed into a red light ticket. You claim red light cameras increase safety. You deny red light cameras are about safety and not revenue.

Perhaps you should leave the donut shop sport.


106 posted on 06/09/2010 1:26:40 PM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: Dutchboy88

I doubt that the ‘rest of us are happier’.

I’m over 40. I realize that sometimes, people do stupid things and ‘get away’ with them. It happens. I’m glad there wasn’t a cop there, but to be honest, something ‘stupid’ like that hasn’t happened in over a decade.

Youth is wasted on the young, don’t you know?


107 posted on 06/09/2010 1:28:04 PM PDT by Ro_Thunder ("Other than ending SLAVERY, FASCISM, NAZISM and COMMUNISM, war has never solved anything")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
"Ahhhh, so the speeding ticket morphed into a red light ticket. You claim red light cameras increase safety. You deny red light cameras are about safety and not revenue.

Evelyn Woods Reading Dynamics course coming to you this Christmas. Open, follow, go to another blog site, start over.

108 posted on 06/09/2010 1:40:05 PM PDT by Dutchboy88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: Dutchboy88

Nice try dutch boy, too bad your deflection isn’t working.


109 posted on 06/09/2010 1:41:14 PM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: ArrogantBustard

But they never did explain the three sea shells.


110 posted on 06/09/2010 2:19:35 PM PDT by Sgt_Schultze (A half-truth is a complete lie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Dutchboy88

A guy breaks the law by running a red light, almost killing someone (probably) and thinks it is a violation of his civil liberties that he gets a ticket by machine?
****************************************************
Not likely ,, The vast majority of red light camera tickets are for making a right on red without coming to a full and complete stop ,, the cameras are for revenue generation only .


111 posted on 06/09/2010 2:33:33 PM PDT by Neidermeyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Dutchboy88
I did not say that. The video led them to the car, where they found weapons and other evidence. That was probable cause for holding him and interrogating him. The video alone did not convict him.

-PJ

112 posted on 06/09/2010 2:33:47 PM PDT by Political Junkie Too ("Comprehensive" reform bills only end up as incomprehensible messes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: ExTexasRedhead

So what? The fact still stands.


113 posted on 06/09/2010 2:35:22 PM PDT by Locomotive Breath
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: a fool in paradise

‘cause no one gets those, or worse, when T-boned.


114 posted on 06/09/2010 2:36:12 PM PDT by Locomotive Breath
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Locomotive Breath

I can look for oncoming traffic when I start up from a red light.

Nothing I can do to stop a jackass from rear ending me and I’ve had it happen twice.


115 posted on 06/09/2010 2:40:32 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (Throw the bums out in 2010.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: jerri

I don’t think the cameras cause rear end collisions. It’s the people behind you that aren’t paying attention.
******************************************************
That’s damn near moronic, cars on the road have widely varying capabilities. I was rear ended once on a major highway ,, came over a rise and traffic was snarled. I was driving a VW GTI and still had my autocross competition tires mounted from the weekend... the car behind me was a Vega station wagon with skinny cheap tires and the car behind him was a 1 ton 4wd truck with an full bed of construction tools... The people behind me didn’t stand a chance.. That GTI could stop FAR quicker than they could.

We have cameras in use where I live ,, I have come close to being rear ended many times.


116 posted on 06/09/2010 2:41:54 PM PDT by Neidermeyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: a fool in paradise

When your light turns green, you wait for all the cars on the cross street to stop at their red light? No wonder you’re getting rear ended.


117 posted on 06/09/2010 2:45:55 PM PDT by Locomotive Breath
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: Locomotive Breath

I got rear ended by a rich b&&&& on a cellphone wasn’t paying attention. I was behind another car that was stopped because of a pededstrian on the crosswalk crossing with the light. Another time I was rear ended by a teenager on a cellphone who was oblivious to traffic being stopped while the lead car was waiting to turn left.

You can see if someone is approaching a traffic light at a high rate of speed. You are to enter the intersection when it is safe to do so. If the cars ahead of you are blocking the intersection, it doesn’t give you just cause to pull out and block the next cycle of traffic.

I have been hit from the left by a car that ran a light (elderly couple who’d left a doctor’s appointment). And even then I used to wait for “clearance” before pulling into an intersection. 18 wheeler in the left lane, I figured it was safe to enter the intersection blindly because he also pulled out and I had the light (he’d take the blunt if anything was coming through illegally). Except he stopped short when he saw the elderly couple coming through (his big vehicle blocked my view).

But to just say “dammit I have a right to floor it on green” is dumb. Law says otherwise.


118 posted on 06/09/2010 3:01:56 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (Throw the bums out in 2010.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too
"I did not say that. The video led them to the car, where they found weapons and other evidence. That was probable cause for holding him and interrogating him. The video alone did not convict him."

You missed my point...I have no idea if there is a situation where, say, the DC sniper was video taped. You said the 6th Amend. was violated since the guy in the original story did not have the benefit of confrontation with real live witnesses. QED, it was a bogus conviction.

I proposed a similar situation whereby the evidence that is available has no human witnesses to convict, but rather resides solely on a machine and asked if you would support that. Don't bring in search issues and probable cause, because the same thing could be said for convicting on the red light run. The fact of the matter is, we like photo evidence for other crimes because if the photo says he did it and he did it, then he did it. Even the original guy didn't argue that he was wrongfully convicted, he argued that it wasn't fair to get caught. Such logic is bogus, not the conviction.

Thus, you are not offering a rebuttal to a legitimate conviction of a true crime, you are offering what is frighteningly close to a liberal's excuse for a crime to go unpunished. Pookie shouldn't be put to death for killing the cop because just the gun, his admission, and other evidence proved he did it. But, he's a black muslim, and no one willing to speak saw him actually shoot the gun, so let him go and let him write books and let him be famous. If I had a photo of the shooting, but no humans, would you agree with this left-wing cause? This is nonsense.

The guy in the original story was speeding, not a red light (okay, let's get over this difference). Who cares? He broke the law, got caught by a tattle tale machine, tough luck, bub. Lay off the gas next time and you won't have a problem. Keep speeding and you kill innocent old ladies, bunnies, and puppies (all the red neck antinomian hippies jumped me with this brainless argument, so here it is in print). Rant away you knuckle draggers.

119 posted on 06/09/2010 3:28:04 PM PDT by Dutchboy88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: Neidermeyer
"The vast majority of red light camera tickets are for making a right on red without coming to a full and complete stop ,, the cameras are for revenue generation only ."

Not so. Here in the death capitol of the world, PHX, the job of the cameras was to stop the late entering of the intersections by guys pushing the edge. It worked to lower the death statistics and scare the p-waddling out of the folks that believe "no one is watching". I say, "good" and if that raises revenue, "even better", and if you don't like it, then lay the heck off the gas pedal at the intersection. Do the right thing, don't kill the puppies and gerbils and all the other wildlife the bozos arguing against this claim I am trying to protect.

120 posted on 06/09/2010 3:32:37 PM PDT by Dutchboy88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

LOL...Seattle bashing (I love it).

Speaking of the Constitution: “We have no government armed with the power capable of contending with human passions which are unbridled by morality and true religion.”
“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

So the question is: is it immoral for local law enforcement agencies to use technology to catch lawbreakers, or is the act of breaking a law that was made to protect innocent people immoral?


121 posted on 06/09/2010 3:42:24 PM PDT by aSeattleConservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Dutchboy88

Did you even read that post? The idea is that the yellow is supposed to be long enough for people to drive through if they can’t stop safely when the light changes from green. Doing so is not “breaking the law”. That’s why you have the yellow in the first place.


122 posted on 06/09/2010 4:00:26 PM PDT by Hepsabeth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan
Of course Texas has laws against speeding. I never suggested otherwise.

So those laws are unjust?

What’s my point? It’s obviously that Seattle encourages drivers to report speeders, which is a Nanny State mentality.

It doesn't matter where I live, I don't have any twisted "loyalty" to someone that is recklessly driving down a street or highway endangering innocent lives. Should I be "loyal" to someone that very well might be drunk or high on drugs and not report it to the police?

So if you're driving down the freeway with your wife and small children and someone recklessly speeds by you at 90-100 MPH, you just ignore it?

So if I’m speeding and you don’t like it, move over to the right lane and mind your own damn business. If Mr. Law-Dog thinks I’m a nuisance, he’ll make it his business.

Public safety is MY business. Again, unlike you I have no twisted "loyalty" to people that don't respect the moral laws of man. I'd not only report you in a second, I'd stop and give the police officer the full details of your disrespect for your fellow human beings.

123 posted on 06/09/2010 4:10:59 PM PDT by aSeattleConservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Tigerized

I couldn’t agree with your post more. So let me ask you this: if that same government totally ignored people who break the laws of civil society, would they not be adding to irresponsible behavior by allowing it to occur?


124 posted on 06/09/2010 4:13:55 PM PDT by aSeattleConservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

Ping


125 posted on 06/09/2010 4:15:13 PM PDT by Professional Engineer (Conservative States of America has a nice ring to it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TankerKC

I’m defending the role of a legitimate government in a moral society; that of enforcing “just” laws. Do you not agree with that statement?


126 posted on 06/09/2010 4:15:43 PM PDT by aSeattleConservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: HandsOffMyFreedom

read about the nanny state.


127 posted on 06/09/2010 4:21:55 PM PDT by jokar (The Church age is the only age man will be able to glorify Christ, http://www.gbible.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dutchboy88

aka Big Government Conservative.


128 posted on 06/09/2010 4:25:22 PM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: aSeattleConservative

The passive citizen - is he just lazy or is liberty too much for him?


129 posted on 06/09/2010 4:28:34 PM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: dragnet2

You sound like a cop hater! (do I really need a sarcasm tag with you?) ;-]


130 posted on 06/09/2010 4:30:06 PM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: aSeattleConservative
police services are a joke

Let's see he's 11 miles over the speed limit and a danger to society? You protest too much.

The speed trap camera will generate over a million dollars split 50/50 with the private company that owns the camera.

Cui bono? Certainly not the free people of the United States of America.

131 posted on 06/09/2010 4:37:14 PM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: aSeattleConservative
speeding recklessly

They should be pulled over for reckless endangerment, but how often does that happen? When's the last time you saw someone stopped for tail-gating or excessive lane changing?

Study after study show that drivers never drive faster than they are comfortable with.

132 posted on 06/09/2010 4:39:24 PM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Hepsabeth
"Did you even read that post? The idea is that the yellow is supposed to be long enough for people to drive through if they can’t stop safely when the light changes from green. Doing so is not “breaking the law”. That’s why you have the yellow in the first place."

I'm sorry, I cannot follow your remarks. Which post? Several goof balls noted that it wasn't a red light. What does going through a yellow light have anything to do with this?

133 posted on 06/09/2010 4:40:13 PM PDT by Dutchboy88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: Locomotive Breath
Statistical garbage. They're not comparing apples to apples. Thousands run "red" lights, that is the very last second from yellow to red.

Now if someone runs a solid red light. That is a danger, but no camera is set to capture those egregious and truly dangerous violators because there's no money in it.

134 posted on 06/09/2010 4:43:31 PM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: aSeattleConservative
You become responsible by being given responsibility that starts over yourself first.

No nanny state in the world's known history ever created a responsible citizenry.

You're asking the impossible and it is a lie.

Government rarely protects. Caveat emptor is the rule and the Natural Law.

135 posted on 06/09/2010 4:45:52 PM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: aSeattleConservative
If it weren’t for irresponsible people driving 50 MPH on side streets where 7 year olds frequent (schools) there wouldn’t be as much as a need for these sort of measures.

Don’t we have this thing called a “speed bump”?

Of course, speed bumps generate zero revenue for government.

You're a milking cow, stop being so happy about it.

You have hooves - kick man, kick!

136 posted on 06/09/2010 4:48:48 PM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Americanexpat

Excellent. I’ve seen some on Chicago’s south side that look beaten.

They point upwards, backwards or at the wrong angle.

Of course the south side is mostly black and they take their civil liberties seriously.

In fairness, the north side has a large police population as homeowners so maybe those tickets are taken care of.


137 posted on 06/09/2010 4:51:07 PM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: aSeattleConservative

“is it immoral for local law enforcement agencies to use technology to catch lawbreakers,”

If the motivation is the crime its one thing, if the motivation is revenue its another. Everyone knows that police dept’s enforce traffic laws more aggressively when budgets are tight.

Police are hardly the ones to preach about morality. They speed illegally all the time.


138 posted on 06/09/2010 4:51:10 PM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

Park an empty squad car and you’d get the same effect. Moving it every once in a while.


139 posted on 06/09/2010 4:53:47 PM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: TNdandelion
chances are good he could have plowed into someone who had a green light./i>

Nonsense. These cameras pick the person last entering the intersection. 99+% of those clear safely and always have.

140 posted on 06/09/2010 4:55:10 PM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: aSeattleConservative

I don’t agree that is what you are doing.


141 posted on 06/09/2010 4:55:47 PM PDT by TankerKC (R.I.P. Spc Trevor A. Win'E American Hero)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: Dutchboy88
This is truly bizarre thinking.

Correct, but say it again while looking in the mirror.

Use of hyperbole should be limited to the Religion Forum.

142 posted on 06/09/2010 4:57:07 PM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD

“Park an empty squad car and you’d get the same effect. Moving it every once in a while.”

No revenue enhancement there.


143 posted on 06/09/2010 4:59:02 PM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: XenaLee

These laws violate Natural Law and commonsense thinking. You cleared the lane safely.

Good government recognizes Natural Law and punishes violations of it.

These laws are like gun control with all the emphasis on control. In this case revenue they can’t raise through taxation.
It isn’t about safety.

Follow the money.


144 posted on 06/09/2010 4:59:22 PM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: aSeattleConservative
I think you're on the wrong website.

It doesn't matter where I live, I don't have any twisted "loyalty" to someone that is recklessly driving down a street or highway endangering innocent lives. Should I be "loyal" to someone that very well might be drunk or high on drugs and not report it to the police?

First, minding my own damn business doesn't equate to having some "twisted loyalty." Second, speeding doesn't equal endangering innocent lives. It just pisses you off so you want control someone else's business. Third, speeders are not necessarily drunk or high. If they're swerving, sure go ahead and report them.

So if you're driving down the freeway with your wife and small children and someone recklessly speeds by you at 90-100 MPH, you just ignore it?

See. There you go. You equate speeding with reckless driving. That's your opinion. It doesn't make it so. I bet you'd crap your pants on the Autobahn driving next to all those reckless speeders. But to answer your question, no, I wouldn't report it.

Public safety is MY business.

No. You just think it is because you like to control others' behavior.

I'd not only report you in a second, I'd stop and give the police officer the full details of your disrespect for your fellow human beings.

Well if you do that in Texas, the LEO will tell you to get your ass back in the car and be on your way. And if you did it at night, you'd likely get a gun in your face for endangering the LEO's life. They don't appreciate "helpful" citizens who try to interfere in their business of public safety.

145 posted on 06/09/2010 5:00:52 PM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (Integrity, Honesty, Character, & Loyalty still matter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: HandsOffMyFreedom

Cool! I’ve noticed that, with a lot of sites, it can pay to pay attention to the whois expiration dates.


146 posted on 06/09/2010 5:02:10 PM PDT by Oceander (The Price of Freedom is Eternal Vigilance -- Thos. Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dutchboy88; driftdiver
When you get out of fourth grade, give us a shout.

Driftdiver, this college kid wades into our playground and calls us dumb kids?

He's too smart for us. Let's go play!

I love freedom.

147 posted on 06/09/2010 5:02:18 PM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD

“He’s too smart for us. Let’s go play!”

The range or fishing?

“I love freedom.”

Ain’t it grand!


148 posted on 06/09/2010 5:07:12 PM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: Dutchboy88; Political Junkie Too
we like photo evidence for other crimes

Exactly. This crime isn't like other crimes. It is a revenue generating scheme.

Crimes must be real not created by government.

149 posted on 06/09/2010 5:14:56 PM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: Terry Mross

They get kickbacks from Scottsdale, AZ Company


150 posted on 06/09/2010 5:54:27 PM PDT by dila813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-211 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson