Posted on 07/23/2011 11:57:32 PM PDT by nickcarraway
simple...you shoot the surveillance camera high on the pole first...from a distance...with armor piercing bullets...then take out the offending ones last....also with armor piercing rounds...
I Kid....I Kid...
But, but, but....those cameras were installed only for safety reasons!!! That’s what they told us!!!!!
http://www.trapster.com/
How about those paint ball weapons? They could probably hit the cameras from out of the range of their surveillance cameras.
The constitutional issue that concerns me is the lack of “due process” in these red-light camera proceedings.
The burden of proof should legally be with the prosecution. To get a conviction, an assistant DA should have to be present and make his case by showing not just that a moving violation occurred, but how they identified the driver. Lacking positive ID, the case should be dismissed.
It’s not against the law for me to simply be the registered owner of a car that runs a red light. It’s only against the law for me to be driving the vehicle when it runs the light.
It’s ridiculous to just look at the photo of the license plate, and mail a notice to the person they assume is the registered owner of that vehicle. The license plate might not be clear in the photo, or that plate might not be on the right vehicle, or the car might have recently been sold and not re-registered. And even if they get all that right, they still should have to positively ID the driver.
I also don’t think the registered owner of the vehicle should be coerced into helping the prosecution identify the driver.
In the part of the country where I live at least 5 of the 6 cars were native Americans. Probably 6 of 6.
I didn’t see it in the article, but an additional thing against red-light cameras is the fact that many people who normally might drive through a particular area, will avoid the area with red-light cameras to not risk getting a ticket. That means lost revenue for businesses and merchants. Plus all the extra people crowding the docket leads to increased expenses for the court. Red-light cameras are a bad idea whose time has passed.
In other parts of the country, there has been a 15 to 18% increase in the number of hit and runs, cops are trying to determine what is the cause, give them ten are twenty years. They may come up with an answer
Then how did I know at least a week or 2 ago that the cameras were going to be turned back on? I heard it on the radio and saw it on TV.
Yea I remember that one... snickering.. Seriously I know of at least one light camera that has a bad road senseor to change the light at night. It’s brrn bad for decades. It’s at Clinton Hiway and Tillery where Tillery and Shubert intersect at Clinton Hiway.
Maybe your smart meter told you for all I know. I did not hear about it until it happened.
Freepers rule the world, another good idea...:O)
My Cobra RADAR detector has a GPS receiver that has the coordinates of all this crap. It gives about a 400ft warning.
Good morning V, check these!
http://www.engadget.com/2007/12/27/angry-drivers-torching-traffic-cameras-in-england/
http://www.speedcam.co.uk/index2.htm
The area where I reside has on some main thorughfares traffic lights that show a count down , in seconds time, remaining for green to go to caution, plus 5-7 seconds of caution. No cameras, except in a few in Orlando.
When a driver sees the count down near 5 seconds you can and should decide your action with a stop or not! There is no surprises.
How about those paint ball weapons?
***************************************
Temporary and don’t inflict enough financial pain on the camera vendor.
Actual state-funded studies came to the same conclusion, so it isn’t just the insurance industry.
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.