Speed cameras gone

Good news so far. But wait what will happen next. With this huge revenue from cameras I think gov will look for way to reintroduce them. Especially with all this debts they have to pay. So far I see this as good think that cameras get removed.

When going through Phoenix weekend before last I noticed that some of the warning areas from my GPS had already been removed.

Yes, I rejoice with you ... I think. The cameras definitely have their drawbacks. But we have to wait and see if the accident rate (especially the bad ones) go up in those areas. I get pretty upset when I'm riding down I-17 and some idiot passes me in a whissssh .. going 90 mph or higher. That abated somewhat when the cameras were in place.

Also, while we criticize the state and governor about the revenue aspect of the cameras, the fact remains that the science of "revenue in" and "spending out" is not rocket science. The revenue will have to come from some place as Arizona is already quite upside down financially.

So, I guess it's time for a qualified rejoice. I think.

My 2 cents.

The revenue source will be missed by the government, so they will have to determine another source for it. Perhaps they will raise property taxes or the sales tax rate. So which would you rather have, tax hikes or redlight cameras?

cutting spending is never an option?

I believe they don't shut down until July 14. In any case DPS will most likely be a little less talerant and a lot more visible for awhile as those tickets are not mailed.

is this an election issue like one in Ontario few years ago?

I would rather have the red light cameras. If you obey the laws it becomes a mute point. If taxed, then everyone suffers and you will never get rid of the tax.

Personally I would rather have the tax.

So property tax goes up $30 a year. Big deal. At least half the "tax" money is not going offshore to Australia. (G'day Mate!)

Also, most "taxes" are progressive, that is - they increase or decrease with the value of that which is being taxed. The red-light cameras are a fixed tax. In California at close to $500 for the first offence and points on your license (i.e. increased insurance costs), a family member getting a "rolling right on red" photo ticket can push some family (and fixed income) budgets over the edge.

Perhaps they should put red-light camera in predominately wealthy neighborhoods where people have a better chance of paying without hardship? But, something tells me that the wealthy suburbs with thier better designed intersections, and lingering yellow-light intervals, just are not as profitable a draw as the dense, older designed intercity.

Isn't that what is going on with Chicago's red-light cameras?

I guess one more reason to move to the suburbs if you can afford it....

Sure, nothing in life is fair. If you don't run the light, you don't pay the tax. Simple. And that works great if you are a hermit, live alone and have no family. But, we can't control our spouses, children and extended families to that degree.

I will always prefer a transparent, progressive form of tax, over for-profit law enforcement by a foreign, private corporation.

A lot of senior citizens who generally drive the speed limit, who do not run red lights and are on limited incomes would disagree with you.

Today's senior citizens grew up in a day when doing the right thing was drilled into you by your parents. Today, anything that gets in the way of the "individual" "doing his own thing" is looked on as a violation of their constitutional rights - pursuit of happiness and all that.

Those who break the law should be subject to the penalties.