Red Light Cameras: Ineffective At Preventing Crashes

Surprise, surprise. The red light cameras have been ineffective at preventing crashes and are simply a way for the state to extort more money from its victims. Brought to you by the People's Republic of Illinois.

Shocker: Red Light Cameras Are "About the Money"

Here is a great editorial from the Washington Times dispelling the myth that red light cameras are about safety.

When will the sheeple learn that the government is not the gentle, caring "protector" and "facilitator of justice" that has been propagandized for so long?

Single Atlanta Red Light Camera Brings in $1.3 Million

Red light cameras are installed to save lives, not extort money from the public, right?

St. Louis Aldermen Don't Pay Red-Light Tickets

Local government officials are finding out that it's not so fun being on the wrong end of the looting equation, and they have used their government position to correct this.

The same little men that pushed to get the red-light cameras installed have reneged on their obligation to pay the fines associated with their Orwellian creations.

[Alderman Stephen] Gregali said he received a ticket a few months ago and thought it should be thrown out because the light turned while he was in the intersection. Most drivers who want to contest a red-light camera ticket must plea their case in traffic court. Instead, Gregali forwarded his ticket to the police chief's office.

One wonders if a common man's success would match that of Gregali's if the old "the light changed while I was in the intersection" defense was offered up by an unconnected serf.

Mississippi Bans Red-Light Cameras

The state of Mississippi passed a law on Friday banning the use of red-light cameras, which gives me much needed hope that perhaps there actually are leaders out there who support a free society. Of course, the cynical side of me wonders why the governor of a state would sign a bill that prevents more revenue for his power-thirsty machine. Could a decent man in politics actually exist?

Previous postings on red-light cameras here and here.

Red Light Cameras - Revisited

A judge has upheld a red light camera ticket against a driver in California despite its direct confliction with state law.

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/26/2699.asp

"Appellate court in Los Angeles, California rules that red light cameras tickets can be issued by companies with illegal contract arrangements.

"The defendant in the case argued that this ticket was invalid because it had been issued by a private company and the city of Lancaster who were operating together under an arrangement specifically forbidden by the state's red light camera statute. The law requires that camera contractors be compensated on a flat-rate basis to remove the financial incentive for the company to issue more tickets. Lancaster is one of dozens of California cities ignoring this mandate by using a "cost neutral" formula that adjusts the rate paid based on whether the number of tickets issued falls within a certain range."

I wonder what would turn up if this judge's financial records were audited. Do you think a connection would be found with the private red light camera company?

Red Light Cameras

According to the police chief of Hazelwood (suburb of St. Louis, MO), it is “none of our business” how much money he donated to a new “advocacy group” whose goal is to promote the use of red light cameras. Lest we forget, the police chief is merely (or used to be) a civil servant whose employer is the people, who have a right to know where their tax dollars are being spent and what kind of public/private relationships are being created. Naturally, we the people should not be concerned about the conflict of interest that arises from a police chief who personally finances a group whose purpose is to directly subsidize his precinct’s revenue. That’s none of our business.

http://www.stltoday.com/blogzone/political-fix/political-fix/2009/02/whos-paying-for-new-red-light-camera-advocacy-group/