Posted on 07/23/2011 11:57:32 PM PDT by nickcarraway
Tell that to our mayor in Houston. The voters voted it out. She recently turned them back on without a peep to the voter until the day she turned them on.
Can we say under the table deal?
Wow, that's a lot of monetary public safety!
Why with revenues like THAT Ft. Lauderdale HAS to be the safest city in the country to drive in.
It give a warm a fuzzy feeling knowing that public servants have such caring hearts for the well being of drivers to take so much of their money.
lol!!
This is great.
If they were for safety's sake they wouldn't use them.
There have been reports of intersection accident rates in some area's going up after implementing them.
Cry me a river.
When revenue drops, they shorten the yellow lights...
Bull. Most of the cities installing these devices gave a lot of lip service to increasing safety, but what really sold them was the representations by the vendor of increased revenue. Some vendors even convince the municipality to decrease the yellow-light duration as a way of further augmenting revenue.
And I wonder if any studies have examined the effect of these devices on rear-ender accidents caused as panicked drivers slam on their brakes instead of safely proceeding through the intersection?
More on previous comment: some evidence that cities shorten yellow light duration to increase revenue:
http://blog.motorists.org/6-cities-that-were-caught-shortening-yellow-light-times-for-profit/
Government/socialism at all levels local, state and federal is the cancer that is destroying America and our way of life.
There are many; the supermajority show that the cameras do increase the number of rear-end accidents at intersection.
Other studies show that if the concern is T-bone accidents at intersections, *lengthening* the yellow light at an intersection actually reduces accidents an average of about the same amount as the best case presented for the cameras. Cost to city: $0.
These cameras are ALL about revenue.
Back in the 90’s in Anchorage the problem quickly became how to keep people from shooting them in town. It got outta hand quick, and the Az Company left town with their cameras; of course the city had to pay a big fee to get out of contract and it about destroyed Begich’s career as he was the crook behind the scam. State passed a law for future, no red light cameras anywhere in Alaska.
Back in the 90’s in Anchorage the problem quickly became how to keep people from shooting them in town. It got outta hand quick, and the Az Company left town with their cameras; of course the city had to pay a big fee to get out of contract and it about destroyed Begich’s career as he was the crook behind the scam. State passed a law for future, no red light cameras anywhere in Alaska.
Alaskan’s bring a smile to my face.....
Sadly, they learned from the Alaska experience and when they brought them to Texas, they encased them in armored boxes and put a surveillance camera high above on another pole to watch the entire installation.
Yes they do!
They’ve been caught at it several times, but get away with flimsy excuses, correct the lights temporarily, and the cycle starts over again, and again, ......
— and cognizant of the fact that it costs $158 to pay by mail but $277 if you lose in court — most simply choose to pay by mail. Or at least they did in the beginning of the program.
But therein lies another constitutional issue. Lawyers argue that it is improperly coercive to penalize citizens for availing themselves of the courts.
Glad to see I am not the only one to notice this constitutional issue.
Of course our MSM is very busy indoctrinating us to believe that we really do not have ANY rights, cops are infallible, they always KNOW who the guilty party is immediately on meeting them. etc.
Pay attention to the activities of “Law Enforcement” on any TV show, our “Rights” are smirked at and skirted at every opportunity.
Warrant-less searches “I think I hear some one inside, hand me that rock”, intimidation of “suspects” - Yah Sarge, he tripped, and hit his head”, it goes on and on.
The cameras ARE for revenue, our rights are ignored in the quest for unenumerated taxes.
And politicians wonder why they are despised!
I’ve seen those other studies. If it was about safety, the yellow light can be lengthened a minute amount and make a huge difference. But, as you said, this is about revenue.
Time for some clever FR person with an interest in electronics to give us the plans for portable tightly focused microwave energy emitters.
Aw gee, the camera overheated again!
A good laser might do some good too, and they are already available.
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.