Posted on 09/01/2006 8:58:53 AM PDT by Snickering Hound
So the study suggests it has to be cameras OR no cameras? No other solutions possible? What about increaseing the yellow light by a second or two. If the city was REALLY concerned about accidents, wounldn't that work?
"And the Houston cops are fighting for the ability to continue their dangerous chase policy (that often times ends when the perp crashes into some innocent civilian)."
Yeah, I don't know how a high-speed chase on public roads can be defended as any more responsible than getting into an unnecessary shoot-out in a busy street. Deaths and injuries to innocent bystanders are almost certain. But they don't seem to care about that. OTOH, I can see the other side of the argument, too, that if you don't chase then suspects know that all they need to do to end a chase is elevate speeds to a dangerous level.
Great Minds Think Alike. That thought was running through my head as I read the article.
My vote is for industrious vandals to paint the cameras.
I hear that police put their lives on the line every day. So does anyone who goes out to fill up with gas, goes out for a night's entertainment, or drives to work. All such citizens have been the victims of deadly carjackings and drive by shootings.
We need more peacekeepers and less "law enforcement" tax collectors.
No, you're right.
I think that people fail to appreciate the unintended consequences of nanny-state thinking.
If I'm tooling along toward an intersection and the light changes, I'm going to make a judgement based on a lot of variables whether or not I stop or continue.
I suspect that the first blink of yellow will cause otherwise sensible drivers to slam on the brakes.
Adding another variable (a camera) that jacks up the pressure on my decision making doesn't, IMHO, make the intersection any safer.
Time for some target practice with a scoped .22 rifle.
And if a driver spots you giving money to them, Mayor Bob-White wants you to call 311 to report that driver.
His priorities are screwed.
Especially when a collection agency may be jacking with the timing of lights. What you know from past experience with that light may no longer hold.
So mail the owner a speeding ticket (good enough for red lights, good enough for speeders).
In the event of stolen cars, the stolen vehicle report would invalidate the ticket the owner of the vehicle receives.
I know several people who've been carjacked and there was no attempt to prosecute the people who stole the cars when they were later recovered (with photo IDs of the theives still in the cars). So why chase? To total out the stolen car? Or because of too much caffine and too much exposure to COPS, SWAT and other programs?
The the city collects for the lawyers advertising on city benches at the intersection.
I do agree. I don't think many people make a habit of literally running red light - stretching the yellow a little maybe, but there's usually a little padding in the timing that will allow for that. People do sometimes inadvertently truly run red lights (done it myself once, that I know about, with a cop on the other side of the intersection - d'oh!) and I doubt if the presence of a red light camera is going to to much about that.
This is a shakedown at it's finest. It's not about safety, and it's all about the money.
I want the 3 police unions in Houston to state that they will require police to go before a judge for any and all red lights they run.
Happens all the time when there is no traffic around (but maybe pedestrians). Cops don't wait just like cops speed.
I don't see that as a perk of the job or badge. They do it in their private vehicles as well as cop cars (you may hear from time to time about officers who have fatal accidents who "were in pursuit" while driving around out of uniform on their own time in their own vehicles, funny how that is).
Going before a judge would put it all out there in public to see if they really were answering a call.
Red-light cameras?
Money shots?
mmmmmkay.
I must have missed that part in the last radio spot I heard him do. I swear, some days.
I saw his Westchase/park ?? town hall did not go the way he expected.
It's also the (law of the land) for every citizen to face his accusor in a court of law. So I would like to cross examine the camera your honor.
It'll give the politicians $125 more of your money that they otherwise would have had to hold a referendum to get hold of, reason enough in my book to say no to the cameras
Breaking the cameras American't won't break.
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.