Speeding Camera Van = Car Accident

 

Yesterday when pulling out of my neighborhood I noticed that a van equipped with speed enforcement cameras was parked across the street at the park. I didn't pay much attention to it as I was leaving, but it was still there when I returned from my errand, I didn't have anything to pressing to do at the moment, so I decided to check it out. I grabbed a book and a chair and sat out on my front porch just watching people's reactions to it. At first, I don't think I lot of people were noticing it, probably because the traffic was fairly light and nobody really had to slow down. The street that the van was parked on has a speed limit of 45, but people routinely go about 55, which is a little dangerous because of the park and library right there. Anyway, I started to get into my book and was enjoying the beautiful weather when I heard the first set of tires screech. I looked up, it wasn't too big of a deal I don't think because I didn't see an accident or anything. However, my interest quickly changed from my book and the weather to the camera.

Traffic was starting to pick up as it was about lunchtime. Around noon traffic is really heavy on the street because there is highway access about a mile down the road, there's a school nearby, a post office is close, there's shopping, etc. So anyway I decided to watch people's reactions to the cameras. Here in AZ the law is that there has to be a sign warning that speed is enforced by cameras x number of feet before the actual van; it's not much warning at although. So anyway, as traffic started to pick up I saw some crazy driving. People were slowing down to about 25 in a 45! This of course caused other people to have to hit their brakes. A few people swerved out of their lanes to get around the slow drivers either out of needing to move so they don't hit them or out of frustration that they were going so slowly. I could tell it was really causing a lot of road rage at least a few people. There is absolutely no reason to slow down 20 miles below the speed limit. People are just so afraid of getting a ticket though.

At this point I wasn't sure if I was happy they were enforcing the speed in my neighborhood or if I was upset it was making drivers drive so stupidly. For comparison reasons, there is a somewhat major intersection about 1/4 of a mile away from where the speed van was set up. A motorcycle cop sits there during the lunch hour rush and rush hour at least 2-3 nights a week. He's mainly looking for red light runners, but sometimes will get people for speed too. In all my years living here, I've never seen someone slam their brakes on to avoid a ticket from him, nor have I seen people drive as stupidly as the van cameras were making them drive. I think a big part of the reason people do slam their brakes on is because with a van camera they don't get to talk to a person like you would if you were being pulled over by a polic officer. People are afraid that if they're going 1 mile over they'll get a ticket. I don't blame them though, I've heard a lot of stories on this board about people getting tickets when they didn't even deserve them.

So I was thinking about all these things and was about to go inside as it was getting a little too warm (a little over 100). I stand up, still keeping my eye on the van when all of a sudden I see a car almost come to a dead stop in the middle of the road! Okay, that's a little bit of an exaggeration, but she was definitely speeding, probably going about 55-60 would be my guess based on all the traffic she was passing. I don't know if the camera went off first or if she was trying to avoid having the camera go off (obviously already too late) but she really slowed quickly by slamming her breaks on (where they squeeled) and the car behind her, which was tailgaiting her totally rear-ended her. The damage wasn't horrible, but the lady who slammed her brakes on couldn't open her trunk and it was kinda crumpled. Being a witness to the accident, I went over to both parties and asked if they were okay. They both were, but neither were too happy with the other person. The driver in the front blamed the driver behind her because he rear-ended her. The driver who hit the front car blamed her for slamming on her brakes. They of course called the cops. I told them what I saw. They didn't tell me if either party was ticketed or who was at fault since I wasn't a party to the accident.

Anyway, yesterday was really crazy with having that camera out there. A friend coming to visit said that some guy hit his brakes in front of him when he saw the speed camera signs and they weren't even speeding! Yesterday just affirmed my dislike of speed enforcement cameras. They make people act like idiots and as far as I can tell don't make it any safer for drivers or pedestrians. I now fully believe that they serve only one purpose, and that is to pay for all budget shortfalls of the cities that use them.

..

If I were you I'd call the local newspaper and have a chat with the city editor.

I'd also call the police chief and tell HIM what you saw and ask how this makes your street safer.

--
Currently have: SP3, GPSMAP 276c, Nuvi 760T, Nuvi 3790LMT, Zumo 660T

Violating the speed limit

Violating the speed limit and then not wanting to accept the consequences = car accident.
This is pointed towards both parties in the accident.

--
Nuvi 3790LMT, Nuvi 760 Lifetime map, Lifetime NavTraffic, Garmin E-Trex Legend Just because "Everyone" drives badly does not mean you have to.

blame game

Everyone is so quick to blame the enforcement rather than their own stupidity. This is the same idea as people on the highway dropping their speeds to well below the limit when they see a trooper in the median, thus causing rolling traffic jams. If drivers are aware of their surroundings and how fast they are going, there would be no reason to 'slam' on the brakes. In your instance, both drivers are idiots...one for speeding then slamming on the brakes, the other for tailgating.

"They make people act like idiots" - People aren't 'made' to act like idiots...they already are smile

--
Garmin Quest/Quest2/Nuvi660/Nuvi755T

Cameras do decrease safety

Cameras do decrease safety. City/State officials aren't really concerned with that. They are more concerned about the money they collect from tickets. There are numerous independent studies that show that enforcement cameras decrease safety. I will direct you to www.thenewspaper.com if you want to read them. The only ones that claim that they increase safety are usually sponsored by those who receive a financial benefit from the cameras. These include the camera companies and the insurance industry. The insurance industry receives an indirect benefit, because in some states, camera tickets carry drivers license points, which allow them to charge higher rates. I'm betting they hope other states eventually will eventually add the license points to camera tickets too.

decreasing safety

I don't debate that there may be more incidents where there are red light cameras or speed cameras or speed traps. BUT, the cause is the knee jerk reaction of idiot drivers when they come across these things, not the cameras themselves. Studies would probably show that there are more accidents opposite other accidents too. (IE accident on NB side of highway causes accident on SB side) Do you fault the accident on the other side of the highway or the rubbernecker that can't mind their own business.

--
Garmin Quest/Quest2/Nuvi660/Nuvi755T

Hmm

lizlovesmustangs wrote:

Yesterday when pulling out of my neighborhood I noticed that a van equipped with speed enforcement cameras was parked across the street at the park.

Seems like a logical place for speed enforcement to me.

(A Park is a area of land set aside for public use, as:
a. A piece of land with few or no buildings within or adjoining a town, maintained for recreational and ornamental purposes, where children are found playing, and family's out for a picnic.
b. A landscaped city square.
c. A large tract of rural land kept in its natural state and usually reserved for the enjoyment and recreation of visitors.)

lizlovesmustangs wrote:

The street that the van was parked on has a speed limit of 45, but people routinely go about 55, which is a little dangerous because of the park and library right there.

Ok, so the street has a habitual speeding problem, and one or many of your neighbors have complained to either their neighborhood representative or police or both, probably because the have children that play in the park.

lizlovesmustangs wrote:

At this point I wasn't sure if I was happy they were enforcing the speed in my neighborhood or if I was upset it was making drivers drive so stupidly.

Cameras don't make people drive so stupidly, they do that all on their own. The cameras just make them realize it.
I Must ask at this point, do you have children that play in that park, and cross the street to come home?

lizlovesmustangs wrote:

she was definitely speeding, probably going about 55-60 would be my guess based on all the traffic she was passing. I don't know if the camera went off first or if she was trying to avoid having the camera go off (obviously already too late) but she really slowed quickly by slamming her breaks on (where they squeeled) and the car behind her, which was tailgaiting her totally rear-ended her.

Wow, two people going 55-60 with the second one tailgating. Interesting that you don't think they should be ticketed for speeding, right there at a park, and the second ticked for tailgating.
A child being hit by a car traveling at 60 MPH would be unrecognizable as the child you knew.

lizlovesmustangs wrote:

Yesterday just affirmed my dislike of speed enforcement cameras. They make people act like idiots and as far as I can tell don't make it any safer for drivers or pedestrians.

Speed and RedLight cameras don't make people drive like idiot's, people make that decision on their very own.

lizlovesmustangs wrote:

I now fully believe that they serve only one purpose, and that is to pay for all budget shortfalls of the cities that use them.

As all tickets do, even those that are hand written by a police officer.

So my suggesion to all Slow down, or pay the price for breaking the law of the land, use a poi file in your GPS!, and drive like there is a child playing on that street, and could dart across at any second.

There really are reasons for speed limits and the laws along with the devices to enforce them. Just drive safely.

And remember the more the van is there, the better the traffic flow will get, with out problems and speeding.

--
Using Android Based GPS.The above post and my sig reflects my own opinions, expressed for the purpose of informing or inspiring, not commanding. Naturally, you are free to reject or embrace whatever you read.

Speed Cameras and/or Traps

I have to agree with BobDee. My street has a speed limit of 45 MPH, but with a one mile stretch of straight road, cars will routinely try to do whatever the max the car can do within that one mile. For sure it is well above the posted speed limit. Down on the interstate (4 lanes) the speed limit is 65 except for some small towns that dropped it to 55. They were writing tickets right and left for over the limit, until they were contested as an illegal speed trap. It was ruled illegal in the courts and several of the small towns had to pay back all of the fines. I do believe the points were removed from the records also.

A final note: One of the funniest sights I have ever seen is a LEO driving in the right lane of a four lane highway doing 55 in a 65 MPH zone. He will have two lines of vehicles behind him driving the same speed as he. You aren't breaking the law if you pass him until you exceed the 65 MPH limit, so if I can get close enough to him to pass, I do. This only works if enough people turn left to open up the lane. As soon as I pass, I look in my rear view mirror and watch everyone that wouldn't pass before, now slowly creep past the LEO. I am laughing all the time. Tooooooo funnny.

Curt

--
The biggest troublemaker you'll probably ever have to deal with, watches you from the mirror every mornin'.

I must be getting old

BobDee wrote:

Interesting that you don't think they should be ticketed for speeding, right there at a park, and the second ticked for tailgating.

Hmmm, I didn't get that from the OP.

Shoulda coulda

It doesn't matter how people should react to red light and speed cameras. All that matters is how people do react to them and whether that reaction increases or decreases the risks involved in driving.

People are not machines.

If the result of an enforcement camera is more property damage, more injury, and more death then the logical course of action is to remove the camera.

Agree

zakany wrote:

It doesn't matter how people should react to red light and speed cameras. All that matters is how people do react to them and whether that reaction increases or decreases the risks involved in driving.

People are not machines.

If the result of an enforcement camera is more property damage, more injury, and more death then the logical course of action is to remove the camera.

Fully Agree.

Is the speeding going to cause more problems than the camera? If not, then the camera needs to be removed.

If speeding is indeed dangerous there, assign a motorcycle cop, that will reduce speed immediately.

--
http://www.poi-factory.com/node/21626 - red light cameras do not work

Cost?

nuvic320 wrote:
zakany wrote:

It doesn't matter how people should react to red light and speed cameras. All that matters is how people do react to them and whether that reaction increases or decreases the risks involved in driving.

People are not machines.

If the result of an enforcement camera is more property damage, more injury, and more death then the logical course of action is to remove the camera.

Fully Agree.

Is the speeding going to cause more problems than the camera? If not, then the camera needs to be removed.

If speeding is indeed dangerous there, assign a motorcycle cop, that will reduce speed immediately.

What department can afford to place an officer there 24/7/365?

--
Nuvi 3790LMT, Nuvi 760 Lifetime map, Lifetime NavTraffic, Garmin E-Trex Legend Just because "Everyone" drives badly does not mean you have to.

not 24/7/365

onestep wrote:

What department can afford to place an officer there 24/7/365?

You don't need to - once or twice a week for a few weeks, on varying days of the week, and all the regulars on that road will realize it's now a speed trap and act accordingly.

passing caps

CurtHinson wrote:

A final note: One of the funniest sights I have ever seen is a LEO driving in the right lane of a four lane highway doing 55 in a 65 MPH zone. He will have two lines of vehicles behind him driving the same speed as he. You aren't breaking the law if you pass him until you exceed the 65 MPH limit, so if I can get close enough to him to pass, I do. This only works if enough people turn left to open up the lane. As soon as I pass, I look in my rear view mirror and watch everyone that wouldn't pass before, now slowly creep past the LEO. I am laughing all the time. Tooooooo funnny.

Curt

Actually this is not as funny as you think. Living in Chicago area for many years I learn that passing police car may cost you at least a lot of time. Not always but it is still a risk. For some reason if you get past them (inside of speed limit of course) they may respond to it as if you challenge them. And if they are for some reason pissed off then there is always something they can find to ticket you for. And it even get worse if you are from out of state or living far away. Will you for example travel 200 or 300 miles to contest $200 ticket in court at later date?
By the way, You are lucky to know that you are at the moment not breaking any laws. Personally I don't even pretend to know most of them. wink

Point Misunderstood

I probably could have titled this better. I wasn't trying to come off as saying people shouldn't get ticketed for speeding at all. That's why I pointed out that the police officer who sits at the corner and tickets people was a safe way of doing it. I greatly appreciate him being there, especially with a park right there. The point I was trying to make was that the police office sitting at the corner never causes these kinds of reactions because there aren't signs warning he is up ahead, so by the time people go by him it's too late. I DEFINITELY think people should get tickets for speeding, especiallywith a park right there. However, what I noticed was people being more concerned with the traffic van than how safely they were driving. I fear that if a child were crossing the street they may have gotten hit because people were so distracted by the signs and the van.

I'm sorry I didn't make my point more clear. Again, I'm not saying people shouldn't be getting tickets. I'm not saying there shouldn't be enforcement by a park...in fact I GREATLY appreciate that. What I am saying is that I would rather have a police office sitting there because then people don't act like huge idiots distracted by all the signs and this big van with a big pole sticking out of it on the side of the street.

I have been reading this site....

for quite a long time and wonder! I am travelling a lot and know that traffic cameras in many parts of the world is accepted as a tool to increase the traffic safety. And they do!
But it seems that the opposite is the case in the US! How come this difference? rolleyes

--
Nüvi 765T, Nüvi 1390T, Nüvi 2559 and 2695 LMT, GPS12, GPS18 (used in nRoute and Oziexplorer on laptop), GPSmap76CSx, SonyEricsson X1 (For OziExplorer CE maps)

Because

geske wrote:

for quite a long time and wonder! I am travelling a lot and know that traffic cameras in many parts of the world is accepted as a tool to increase the traffic safety. And they do!
But it seems that the opposite is the case in the US! How come this difference? rolleyes

The US (and Canadian) model is aimed at maximising profit and revenue. The rest of the world is actually focused on safety.

Not certain that the UK and France would agree to be included with your definition of the 'rest of the world', mind you.

--
Currently have: SP3, GPSMAP 276c, Nuvi 760T, Nuvi 3790LMT, Zumo 660T

A minor correction..

bramfrank wrote:
geske wrote:

for quite a long time and wonder! I am travelling a lot and know that traffic cameras in many parts of the world is accepted as a tool to increase the traffic safety. And they do!
But it seems that the opposite is the case in the US! How come this difference? rolleyes

The US (and Canadian) model is aimed at maximising profit and revenue. The rest of the world is actually focused on safety.

Not certain that the UK and France would agree to be included with your definition of the 'rest of the world', mind you.

I wrote: "in many parts of the world"! wink

But as far as I know, UK and France are not expressing their resistance to this kind of traffic regulations as far as I am aware.

But I listen to your comment!

--
Nüvi 765T, Nüvi 1390T, Nüvi 2559 and 2695 LMT, GPS12, GPS18 (used in nRoute and Oziexplorer on laptop), GPSmap76CSx, SonyEricsson X1 (For OziExplorer CE maps)

Geske just remember you are

Geske just remember you are on a website based on thwarting traffic cameras. Most opinions here are quite biased.

In England the locals have taken up the hobbie of destroying the cameras/gatso as quickly as they can. One of their favorites is to throw an old tire on it and set it afire.

--
Nuvi 3790LMT, Nuvi 760 Lifetime map, Lifetime NavTraffic, Garmin E-Trex Legend Just because "Everyone" drives badly does not mean you have to.

Burn the cameras, I like the idea

onestep wrote:

Geske just remember you are on a website based on thwarting traffic cameras. Most opinions here are quite biased.

In England the locals have taken up the hobbie of destroying the cameras/gatso as quickly as they can. One of their favorites is to throw an old tire on it and set it afire.

At last, now the sheeple of GB have awakend and are willing to remove the socilast idiots running their country. Death to the red light/speed camera.

--
"Ceterum autem censeo, Carthaginem esse delendam" “When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.”

Socilast?

Double Tap wrote:
onestep wrote:

Geske just remember you are on a website based on thwarting traffic cameras. Most opinions here are quite biased.

In England the locals have taken up the hobbie of destroying the cameras/gatso as quickly as they can. One of their favorites is to throw an old tire on it and set it afire.

At last, now the sheeple of GB have awakend and are willing to remove the socilast idiots running their country. Death to the red light/speed camera.

New word: What is a "socilast" and does "it" has something to do with traffic?

--
Nüvi 765T, Nüvi 1390T, Nüvi 2559 and 2695 LMT, GPS12, GPS18 (used in nRoute and Oziexplorer on laptop), GPSmap76CSx, SonyEricsson X1 (For OziExplorer CE maps)

Maybe I am on the wrong site..

onestep wrote:

Geske just remember you are on a website based on thwarting traffic cameras. Most opinions here are quite biased.

In England the locals have taken up the hobbie of destroying the cameras/gatso as quickly as they can. One of their favorites is to throw an old tire on it and set it afire.

I thought the website was about making POI's and not thwarting traffic cameras??

I thought the POI's for traffic cameras was made in order to give you a warning: traffic camera ahead, or..??

--
Nüvi 765T, Nüvi 1390T, Nüvi 2559 and 2695 LMT, GPS12, GPS18 (used in nRoute and Oziexplorer on laptop), GPSmap76CSx, SonyEricsson X1 (For OziExplorer CE maps)

No, you are not on the wrong site

geske wrote:
onestep wrote:

Geske just remember you are on a website based on thwarting traffic cameras. Most opinions here are quite biased.

In England the locals have taken up the hobbie of destroying the cameras/gatso as quickly as they can. One of their favorites is to throw an old tire on it and set it afire.

I thought the website was about making POI's and not thwarting traffic cameras??

I thought the POI's for traffic cameras was made in order to give you a warning: traffic camera ahead, or..??

the issue over traffic cameras in the US and Canada is over two mistaken beliefs. People have the mistaken belief that driving is a right and not a privilege granted by the state. The second mistaken belief is that people have "a right to privacy" when in their automobiles driving on public streets. The courts have repeatedly stated that a person has no right to privacy in a vehicle on a public street.

A third issue is that of revenue generation. In many localities red light and speed cameras are being touted as sources of revenue to the decision makers rather than a safety device. As drivers modify their behavior and anticipate the devices, revenue begins to decline. The issue is the contract signed by the authority having jurisdiction requires the device to return a specific amount of gross revenue, and as driver habits change, that revenue declines - sometimes dramatically.

When this happens, some - and it is a very small percentage - jurisdictions will attempt to increase revenue by resorting to changes in signal timing or reductions in the authorized speed limit on a portion of the road where the camera is located. This issue is what most of the complaints are about - changes to enhance revenue in order to keep the jurisdiction from having to make up the difference between the projected revenue and the actual revenue generated by the device.

--
ɐ‾nsǝɹ Just one click away from the end of the Internet

Now that doesn't make a bit of sense

nuvic320 wrote:

Fully Agree.

Is the speeding going to cause more problems than the camera? If not, then the camera needs to be removed.

Cameras don't cause problems, the people getting the tickets, and doing the speeding cause the problems by not bothering to stay within the laws that rest of us do.

nuvic320 wrote:

If speeding is indeed dangerous there, assign a motorcycle cop, that will reduce speed immediately.

Motorcycle cop's have a way of tucking themselves away so not to be seen by motorists, using angles,obstructions, or whatever they can find to hide behind, so if your speeding your going to get the ticket.

On the other hand

Unless your a total knuckle head, you will slow down for a camera intersection and stop red as well.

One thing you can count on with a camera, there are no surprises like a Motorcycle cop coming out from behind that billboard, and it's out in the open and always there day after day.

If your a member of the POI-Factory just download the Speed and Red light camera Files, If your not a member, there is no better time to join than now.Then you will know where the cameras are! It's really that easy.

--
Using Android Based GPS.The above post and my sig reflects my own opinions, expressed for the purpose of informing or inspiring, not commanding. Naturally, you are free to reject or embrace whatever you read.

Informative

a_user wrote:
geske wrote:
onestep wrote:

Geske just remember you are on a website based on thwarting traffic cameras. Most opinions here are quite biased.

In England the locals have taken up the hobbie of destroying the cameras/gatso as quickly as they can. One of their favorites is to throw an old tire on it and set it afire.

I thought the website was about making POI's and not thwarting traffic cameras??

I thought the POI's for traffic cameras was made in order to give you a warning: traffic camera ahead, or..??

the issue over traffic cameras in the US and Canada is over two mistaken beliefs. People have the mistaken belief that driving is a right and not a privilege granted by the state. The second mistaken belief is that people have "a right to privacy" when in their automobiles driving on public streets. The courts have repeatedly stated that a person has no right to privacy in a vehicle on a public street.

A third issue is that of revenue generation. In many localities red light and speed cameras are being touted as sources of revenue to the decision makers rather than a safety device. As drivers modify their behavior and anticipate the devices, revenue begins to decline. The issue is the contract signed by the authority having jurisdiction requires the device to return a specific amount of gross revenue, and as driver habits change, that revenue declines - sometimes dramatically.

When this happens, some - and it is a very small percentage - jurisdictions will attempt to increase revenue by resorting to changes in signal timing or reductions in the authorized speed limit on a portion of the road where the camera is located. This issue is what most of the complaints are about - changes to enhance revenue in order to keep the jurisdiction from having to make up the difference between the projected revenue and the actual revenue generated by the device.

Very informative, thanks!

--
Nüvi 765T, Nüvi 1390T, Nüvi 2559 and 2695 LMT, GPS12, GPS18 (used in nRoute and Oziexplorer on laptop), GPSmap76CSx, SonyEricsson X1 (For OziExplorer CE maps)

What is a "socialist"

geske wrote:
Double Tap wrote:
onestep wrote:

Geske just remember you are on a website based on thwarting traffic cameras. Most opinions here are quite biased.

In England the locals have taken up the hobbie of destroying the cameras/gatso as quickly as they can. One of their favorites is to throw an old tire on it and set it afire.

At last, now the sheeple of GB have awakend and are willing to remove the socilast idiots running their country. Death to the red light/speed camera.

New word: What is a "socilast" and does "it" has something to do with traffic?

A socialist is dimwit that believes the government exists to care for us and protect us from all harm, cradle to grave and have someone else pay for it.

--
"Ceterum autem censeo, Carthaginem esse delendam" “When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.”

Oh, you mean a socialist!

Double Tap wrote:
geske wrote:
Double Tap wrote:
onestep wrote:

Geske just remember you are on a website based on thwarting traffic cameras. Most opinions here are quite biased.

In England the locals have taken up the hobbie of destroying the cameras/gatso as quickly as they can. One of their favorites is to throw an old tire on it and set it afire.

At last, now the sheeple of GB have awakend and are willing to remove the socilast idiots running their country. Death to the red light/speed camera.

New word: What is a "socilast" and does "it" has something to do with traffic?

A socialist is dimwit that believes the government exists to care for us and protect us from all harm, cradle to grave and have someone else pay for it.

Never heard that definition before wink

--
Nüvi 765T, Nüvi 1390T, Nüvi 2559 and 2695 LMT, GPS12, GPS18 (used in nRoute and Oziexplorer on laptop), GPSmap76CSx, SonyEricsson X1 (For OziExplorer CE maps)

So your calling most of us Socialists?

Double Tap wrote:

A socialist is dimwit that believes the government exists to care for us and protect us from all harm, cradle to grave and have someone else pay for it.

You did forget to mention this fact also:

A real Dimwit is someone who knows that a enforcement camera is ahead and still gets a ticket.

Since when is a Socialist someone who obeys the speed limit and red lights?

--
Using Android Based GPS.The above post and my sig reflects my own opinions, expressed for the purpose of informing or inspiring, not commanding. Naturally, you are free to reject or embrace whatever you read.

I forgot to mention:

BobDee wrote:
Double Tap wrote:

A socialist is dimwit that believes the government exists to care for us and protect us from all harm, cradle to grave and have someone else pay for it.

You did forget to mention this fact also:

A real Dimwit is someone who knows that a enforcement camera is ahead and still gets a ticket.

Since when is a Socialist someone who obeys the speed limit and red lights?

I love when a straw man is set up to knock down. I did not write that one that obeys the speed limit and stops for red lights is a Socialist. However one that uses a straw man debate
tactic is a ???

--
"Ceterum autem censeo, Carthaginem esse delendam" “When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.”

Knock it off guys!!!! Miss

Knock it off guys!!!!

Miss POI

Very interesting

tomturtle wrote:

Cameras do decrease safety. City/State officials aren't really concerned with that. They are more concerned about the money they collect from tickets. There are numerous independent studies that show that enforcement cameras decrease safety. I will direct you to www.thenewspaper.com if you want to read them. The only ones that claim that they increase safety are usually sponsored by those who receive a financial benefit from the cameras. These include the camera companies and the insurance industry. The insurance industry receives an indirect benefit, because in some states, camera tickets carry drivers license points, which allow them to charge higher rates. I'm betting they hope other states eventually will eventually add the license points to camera tickets too.

The information in the link above should be provided to any city considering red-light cameras.