new & interesting places for your GPS

Watch out in AZ

 
Quote:

The Arizona Department of Public Safety (DPS) boasted yesterday that it had arrested a Nevada resident based solely on claims made by a speed camera. According to the state police, automated ticketing machines on the Loop 101 freeway snapped photographs of the Ford Mustang belonging to Jennifer Lynne Bitton, 24, on twenty-two occasions. Bitton could end up behind bars because, police say, she passed one camera at 92 MPH in the 65 MPH speed limit zone.

Even though they have been caught numerous times ticketing wrong individuals, and having equipment malfunctions, they are still trying to "make an example" of this woman based off of speed cameras.

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/24/2441.asp

--
I knew I shoulda made a left turn at Albuquerque! -- Bugs Bunny

Re: Watch out in AZ

shinyplate wrote:

--
I knew I shoulda made a left turn at Alburqueque! -- Bugs Bunny

It's spelled "Albuquerque".

And yeah, glad she's off the road. Will continue to watch out for others like her.

Krieger

Huh?

I think you missed the point, Krieger. The OP was saying they have been fining the wrong people, and the system is flawed.

--
"Delete nothing, back up everything"

In AZ the summons must be served

In AZ the summons must be served... so they now have located her.
Speeding in excess of 20 mph over the posted limit is a felony, so she will lose her license and spend some "quality time" in Joe Arpaio's tent city.... at 110 degrees currently.

The photos published in the paper have been pretty detailed and clearly show the driver.... ask Matt Leinert and the rapper/dog fighter .... recently caught.

as for the article ........

Re: Huh?

CGY Guy wrote:

I think you missed the point, Krieger. The OP was saying they have been fining the wrong people, and the system is flawed.

Not really, CGY Guy - I just don't agree with it, that's all.

It's the article's author who misses it, by trying to tie-up this case to camera glitches.

Nobody likes getting a ticket, particularly if is perceived as unfair -however, is it reasonable to believe that different cameras throughout the highway all 'malfunctioned' 22 times, exactly at the moment when she was driving in front of them?

This is clearly an habitual speeder, that thought that as long as there was no cop in sight, she could get away with it, so I'm just glad I don't have to share the road with her anymore.

The law is still broken, even when there is no officer present to witness it, and claiming that she didn't know because in Nevada is different should take her nowhere out of it.

Ignorantia juris non excusat - Ignorance of the law does not excuse.

Krieger.

20 Malfunctions?

If even more than one of the 20 violations was a mistake I would be surprised. This woman sounds like the poster child for local communities wishing to install cameras. Personally if I lived in that area I would be calling in wondering why they hadn't removed her from the road at say violation 5 or 6 call it a public saftey service.

Re: 20 Malfunctions?

mourton wrote:

If even more than one of the 20 violations was a mistake I would be surprised. This woman sounds like the poster child for local communities wishing to install cameras. Personally if I lived in that area I would be calling in wondering why they hadn't removed her from the road at say violation 5 or 6 call it a public saftey service.

Exactly my point.

The process is largely automated, so I imagine there are few persons (if any) that could detect right away how many and how often the same driver gets citations, so hopefully this case will serve as a trigger for the system to flag down extreme offenders.

Krieger.

If only it were about safety

The State of Arizona has now proven that red-light cameras in that state are not there as safety measures. They are there for fundraising. The following has been enabled in the FY2009 state budget, which takes effect today:

The state plans to install up to 100 mobile and stationary photo-enforcement cameras to catch speeders on highways across Arizona.

The lion's share of revenue from the $165 citations would go to the general fund, leading critics to say the effort is motivated more by revenue than public safety.

Additionally, counties are upset that, despite prior assurances to the contrary, they'll have costs in handling citations through local courts but have been excluded from the ticket revenue.

The photo-enforcement plan was first aired by [Governor Janet] Napolitano early this year during her State of the State address. She has estimated that the network of cameras could net the state $90 million in fiscal 2009 and more than $120 million in 2010.

(Source: http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2008/06/27/20080627bu...)

Let's see... $90 million the first year, $120 million in year two. At 165 bucks a pop, that's about 545,455 citations in year one and 727,273 citations in the second, not counting the ones that get tossed. That's 105 tickets per camera per week in year one, and 140 per week in year two. I doubt the most dedicated patrol officer alive could reach that level of profita... excuse me, efficiency.

Your GPS won't be much help with those mobile cameras, either.

Oopsie....

Krieger wrote:
shinyplate wrote:

--
I knew I shoulda made a left turn at Alburqueque! -- Bugs Bunny

It's spelled "Albuquerque".

Krieger

Hate it when my fingers don't work with my brain. smile

Common misspelling. Thanks for the help. And yes...you totally missed the point.

--
I knew I shoulda made a left turn at Albuquerque! -- Bugs Bunny

speed cameras

I've seen many red light and speed cameras (I think). They are all positioned perpindicular to the flow of traffic at the cross walk. How do they get a picture of a license plate from that position ??

gusb

--
augie billitier I2,c330,660

Speed, red light and traffic cameras

gusb wrote:

I've seen many red light and speed cameras (I think). They are all positioned perpindicular to the flow of traffic at the cross walk. How do they get a picture of a license plate from that position ??

gusb

The difference? Typically, Redlight cameras will look like a birdhouse a few feet back from the intersection on a pole about 12 feet high. Kind of looks like a box with 6 tinted windows ( when activated you will see a big flash (you just got a ticket)). A traffic flow camera is what you typically would see on a highway about 30-40 feet high. It really just monitors traffic flow speed for those eye witness news reports of your daily commute. the camera on a line above an intersection is really for emergency vehicles. When you approach with a flashing strobe (red, white, blue) the camera will change the light to green so they have the right of way. The speed camera is more of a radar gun type camera with a camera to take a picture beside it. Kind of looks like two mailboxes next to each other. Anyone else want to elaborate more?

When they take a picture, there are a series, close up of driver, license plate, and other angles to "match" the registered owner with the car. If you are not the regsitered owner, you probably will not get a ticket since they can't "prove" who was driving..

Exactly right...

Felix Krull wrote:

The State of Arizona has now proven that red-light cameras in that state are not there as safety measures. They are there for fundraising. The following has been enabled in the FY2009 state budget, which takes effect today:

The state plans to install up to 100 mobile and stationary photo-enforcement cameras to catch speeders on highways across Arizona.

The lion's share of revenue from the $165 citations would go to the general fund, leading critics to say the effort is motivated more by revenue than public safety.

Additionally, counties are upset that, despite prior assurances to the contrary, they'll have costs in handling citations through local courts but have been excluded from the ticket revenue.

The photo-enforcement plan was first aired by [Governor Janet] Napolitano early this year during her State of the State address. She has estimated that the network of cameras could net the state $90 million in fiscal 2009 and more than $120 million in 2010.

(Source: http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2008/06/27/20080627bu...)

Let's see... $90 million the first year, $120 million in year two. At 165 bucks a pop, that's about 545,455 citations in year one and 727,273 citations in the second, not counting the ones that get tossed. That's 105 tickets per camera per week in year one, and 140 per week in year two. I doubt the most dedicated patrol officer alive could reach that level of profita... excuse me, efficiency.

Your GPS won't be much help with those mobile cameras, either.

Its all about the money

--
Garmin:GPSMAP196, Nuvi 670,Nuvi 755T

Re: Oopsie....

shinyplate wrote:

...And yes...you totally missed the point.

Fair enough. Care to explain what's your point then? I'm really intrigued by your take on this article now.

Krieger

sponsored links



Navigation



User login

Leave this blank! This field helps block spambots.

poi factory



Who's online

There are currently 9 users and 73 guests online.

Online users

  • woopop
  • suuncom
  • camano7
  • hercegovac
  • alleghany
  • etrippe
  • Bogamil
  • rajendrasen
  • wdjohnson2