Thursday, April 22, 2010

Enforce Laws,0,3286125.story

Here in California they are considering putting speed sensors on red light camera so that they can cite drivers for speeding as well as for running a red light. I am unalterably opposed to red light cameras. I think that adding speed sensors to them simply makes a bad idea, even worse.

If there is an intersection that needs additional enforcement, it should be done by real, live officers. Red light cameras are a method of taxing the population, under the guise of safety and traffic enforcement. The only reason the state is permitting the use of speed sensors is because they have so little money now.

Some cities have altered the yellow light time just to get more money. They shorten the yellow light time knowing that some close calls will fall into the violation category. Traffic enforcement should be about safety and about opportunities for officers to investigate drivers. It should not be about raising money without raising taxes; that's what the SGT Says.


Bob G. said...

My father believed (before they even HAD red light camras) that officers that used to "control" the light timing manually (this does go back a few years) were trying to "get the quotas".
He might have been onto something there.

I totally agree that the CAMS are there to snag some quick moolah for city coffers...nothing more.

Then again, if more cities took better caution regarding their OWN spending and refrain from becoming all these little "welfare-states" (that depletes resources at alarming speed and stretches most police deaprtemnts in ways they couldn't imagine) ...we might not even be having this discussion, would we?

You are spot on with your's a bad thing going worse.
Stay safe and have a good weekend.

Bunkermeister said...

Thanks Bob's Dad!

Protect_and_Serve said...

You have the right to face your accuser. How is a camera going to testify against you?

Bunkermeister said...

Exactly, it is man vs machine.

Ann T. said...

Dear Bunkermeister,
It all seems very Orwellian to rely on these cameras. Furthermore, they're no good for not-traffic crimes if they're in the wrong place, or no one has time to read them or repair them.

Again and again, these personnel-saving devices do not really save on payroll for the city. But they lull the public into thinking things are covered. It is ridiculous.

Then, when the judge strikes them down as enforceable, they are a clear and total waste of money.

In. Sane. In Chicago I think they will try to use them for everything, but their use in traffic is already regularly dismissed in court.

Thanks for a topical post,
Ann T.

Bunkermeister said...

Thanks for your support Ann T.