Posted on 07/15/2002 11:23:54 AM PDT by Constitution Day
Edited on 04/13/2004 2:55:44 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Thats destruction of public property.
Using a paintball gun would be defacing of public property.
The correct solution would be to cut the power to the traffic lights, or eliminate the government funds that pay for the operation, maintenance and use of the cameras.
Gimme my durn muffler!!!
I’ve got another safer, cheaper alternative- How about not running red lights? As an added bonus you might be able to avoid the guilt of condemning an otherwise healthy person into a premature geriatric state…
I agree completely... Frankly, I'm getting firghtened of riding my motorcycle on the roads anymore. In my car, I NEVER just pull out when the light turns green. I wait and check for traffic, since it seems that trafic signals are now taken as "suggestions." I've actually counted seven seconds after my light turned green before it was clear for me to pull out... The result? Well, I've been rear-ended 3 times at trafic lights in the last 10 months!
Mark
Not if you're not running the red light while you're shooting out the camera. ;-)
Believe it or not, most of those cameras were intentionally designed to be bulletproof from airguns and small calibre firearms.
Well, if you can't bust the darned things, obscure the lenses. Semiautomatic paintball guns can be had with cheap laser sights these days, y'know. Crank back the ol' sunroof when nobody's looking and plink away.
The people who operate these systems are depending on everything working without constant human oversight, so if they have to clean or replace cameras more often than they'd expected, there goes the profit.
Just be sure to avoid repeating patterns regarding times and locations - eventually they'll put a real cop out there to try to catch the Mad Paintballer. Why, those harmless toys are probable classed as "firearms" in some jurisdictions, so do your homework on the risks involved.
I've heard these allegations for some time, and I seriously doubt this is the case. The appropriate yellow interval at a stoplight is dictated by the speed of the roadway and the distance at which the signal head can be seen by approaching motorists. An engineer who attempts to reduce the yellow interval below this "design" threshold is designing an unsafe traffic control device and is therefore exposing himself to disciplinary action from his state licensing review board.
I've made this offer on FreeRepublic before: I will represent anyone who believes they have been victimized by a "red-light camera" system in which the yellow interval has been reduced to a substandard level. I get 50% of whatever civil damages you net out after your legal fees are paid, with a special 10% bonus to be paid once the engineer's license to practice is suspended.
Is it really public property, or is it owned by the company that the municipality has contracted to rake in the dough, er, perform the work?
Perhaps some innovative company will begin manufacturing paintballs that, when applied to public property, might be mistaken for pigeon droppings! ;-)
In other words, the highest accident rates involving a vehicle running a red light do not necessarily occur at the intersections with the most violations.
As long as it is water soluable paint the police take a 'no harm done' attitude when it is private property. I would think the same would apply to public property.
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.