And there was much rejoicing....

[jdowney]

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2010/05/06/20100506arizona-to-eliminate-speed-cameras.html

I don't even speed, there's just something basically offensive about remote control ticketing.

[Optimus Prime]

I think it's just the inherent dislike of Orwellian methods of law enforcement. I'm sure more than a few will be glad to see them go.

[Jsquared]

Man I gotta call my Grandma, she hates these things!

[Mortal_Wombat]

hahah after reading about the vandalism it reminded me of how the British deal with these damn things
http://www.rtfa.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/gatso_on_fire_rtfa.jpg
yes thats a burning tire stuck on the top of the camera lol!

[hunter_la5]

It's about time they got rid of those. Now if only they'd get rid of them everywhere else as well.

[okie shooter]

Though not a big fan of civil disobedance being uses as a justification for criminal dammage to property, and the fact that a person with no connection to the cameras in Airzona shot and killed a technician running the equipment on the highway disturbes me more. The fact that we all apalaud catching the so called "Dumb" criminals that commit crimes infront of camera but all seem to not like a camera that can capture the commision of a its a crime that most folks feel is some what victumless.

My take some what on this is if the state posts a sign warrning you the speed limit is to be enforced and posts a limit, if you break it, wether its a cop or the mail that delivers the ticket, are you innocent of the exceeding the limit if its one over the other(thus why most jursidictions take civil action over criminal with no proof of the driver).

Just my two cents, I don't always like big brother watching me either, and some what the reason for the enforcement was to raise revnue, but I would hope that AZ did require posting of signs warrning of the enforcement.

[Mortal_Wombat]

im normally not a fan either, but speed cameras just get under my skin for some reason
also actually hurting someone over a speed camera is just horrible.

[Patria Povo]

Seems pretty sensible to me. Ticket people breaking traffic laws while freeing-up sworn officers to catch the real bad guys!

[jdowney]

Just my two cents, I don't always like big brother watching me either, and some what the reason for the enforcement was to raise revnue, but I would hope that AZ did require posting of signs warrning of the enforcement.

That they did, or for the moment still do. Often there are two signs one 300' in advance and one next to the camera vehicle. How they still manage to issue tickets at all is beyond me. Photo vehicles are no longer manned, it is all done remotely now.

I think the dislike for these methods of enforcement has more to do with the dislike for having been spied upon than for the desire to avoid a justifiable ticket. In some cases (the only time I got one for example) I believe an officer in person would give a warning, warnings which are often welcomed and heeded. Its similar to me to how people are often much more rude on the internet than they would be in person - but internet participation is voluntary, driving in AZ really is not, practically speaking.

I've not seen anyone applauding that un-hinged idiot who murdered the tech. I'd hope that all opposition to photo enforcement is not to be tarred with the brush reserved for such individuals. Then again, I'm far to libertarian to approve of the use of tasers either, so I don't pretend to be impartial on this subject.

[okie shooter]

I guess my thoughts on the subject of oppsition to police powers and even the extension to opposeing traffic cameras comes from my days as a bailbondsman. In the day, I had to get folks out for various crimes, to include fleeing and eludeing.

One day, a guy I actually went to highschool with, was infront of the judge for the above crime. Instead of just giving time served when arrested plus fine and impacts to the driveing reacord, he basically read the riot act at the kid, but it did get me thinking and the kid too. He gave the kid a 90 days(which he suspended after the weekend which was the next scheduled court) but he also made the comments that next to attacking a police officer, fleeing and eludeing is the most serious crime a person can make to thumb their noses and middle fingers at the law enforcement agencies(by endangerment of the public and officers by commiting the act). Thus it did make me think, that the wanton distruction of property placed to enforce laws, by the goverment powers that be, IMHO falls far towards that catagory(again the eye in the sky has a partner on the ground writeing the ticket though).

Just because a tree falls in the woods and there is no one there to hear it does it make a sound? Thus speeders do in situations endanger all of us(I will admit I do speed too). Thus no matter how much I dislike the enforcement, I say whats the difference than the "eye in the sky" vs this, just the furthering away of human contact, but you cannot see the guy in the plane either. Thus its still a anonomious eninty giving the ticket.

Again not a big favorite of having such enforcement, but remember you have a choice, which is not to drive, as driving on highways and streets is a privlage left to the states to regulate, enforce and such. If you can find the right to Drive automobiles mentioned in the COUS please show it to me.


That they did, or for the moment still do. Often there are two signs one 300' in advance and one next to the camera vehicle. How they still manage to issue tickets at all is beyond me. Photo vehicles are no longer manned, it is all done remotely now.

Boy with that much warnning I guess thats why the Airzona department was already doing away with them when this law came up, they were effective in slowing down speeders it would seem, maybe the threat of enforcement is as good as fake cop cars place in Okmuguee Oklahoma(a small town that used their old cars with maniquins on the main north south highway thru thown to slow down traffic)

[jdowney]

Again not a big favorite of having such enforcement, but remember you have a choice, which is not to drive, as driving on highways and streets is a privlage left to the states to regulate, enforce and such. If you can find the right to Drive automobiles mentioned in the COUS please show it to me.

Never said it was a right, I said it was a practical necessity for most people in this country. By way of comparison, I rarely fly any more - it is a convenience for most and a practical necessity for only a few.

I don't understand why opposition to photo enforcement is taken to be an endorsement of vandalism, but that seems to me to be your drift.

As you say, air monitoring still requires an officer to pull over the speeder and write the ticket. A similar, and much more cost effective, method I've seen in Albuquerque is to station a radar officer on an overpass and have several other officers pulling speeders over and writing the tickets. I don't really have a problem with these methods, and I'll admit the distinction is vague, but the completely remote law enforcement is somehow just too KGB for my taste. It is not a direction I'd like to see our country go.

Don't get me started on "crimes" such as fleeing and eluding. Balancing police powers and civil liberties is always a sticky area, as there is an inherent contradiction involved. I suppose it would be a non-issue if we could trust that police officers were able to exercise good judgement at all times.

[okie shooter]

Jdowney, I didn't mean it in that way, sorry if it was taken that way, just there also is a great chuckle when these cameras get defaced and the case in England the guy blew it up, so I was not directing it directly at you, and am sorry if you felt that. Just a general rant by me on the subject. Though when bonding out DUI's for years the comment was always I have the right to drive, how can they suspend my D/L without due process of law, to which I would tell them the comment about privlages not written in the COUS are left to the states to regulate, thus not protected the same as rights.

[jfowl31]

Seems pretty sensible to me. Ticket people breaking traffic laws while freeing-up sworn officers to catch the real bad guys!

Surprisingly, I agree with PP here! I've never had a beef with automatic things like this or red light cameras. I've never really understood why people would have a problem with them.

I kinda see it like this new law in Arizona... don't break the law, and you have nothing to worry about.

Don't speed and you don't get tickets. What makes me madder than anything is when I see an officer sitting on the side of the road when I know he could be doing better things with his time....... like patrolling my neighborhood to make it safer.

p.s. it only surprising I agree with PP because lately I've been disagreeing with everyone...... NOT because he is a crazy AUSSIE...... well maybe a little of that too.

[jdowney]

Thanks Okie, I know you didn't mean it personally, just seemed like it was getting into generalizations. I seem to have collected a lot of, "alternative" style friends over the years, so I tend to see the police power thing and associations of dissent with vandalism from a different slant.

Man, don't know if I can handle jfowl agreeing with PP.... I'm going to have to get Tenfeathers' line from that other thread on a t-shirt "Reality is ruining my life" :D:D:D

[RandyCOG3]

CAUTION: THREAD HIJACK AHEAD

Sorry, but those cameras, to me, do not fit the description of "law enforcement". I'd be OK with it, if the envelope containing the ticket also contained a slip of paper that says something like "Here's a ticket. We have NO IDEA who did it, thusly it's not a criminal or civil infraction, it's just our way of generating revenue, and possibly slowing down some of the drivers on that tiny 1/2 mile of road. You're obviously from out of town, or oblivious to the camera signs, so we're pretty sure you'll just pay the fine rather than fight it in court. Have a nice day."

Heard something on a radio talk show a few weeks ago. some poor woman kept getting tickets, and the pictures clearly showed it was the wrong make, and model, and color, and slightly wrong license plate number, too. "Humans" are supposed to review each ticket before it gets mailed, but the "humans" screwed up, over and over and over and weren't too keen about undoing the damage either. Obviously, a human cop wouldn't make that sort of error. "Innocent until proven guilty" still carries a lot of weight with ME.

On a related matter, I came home one day, and found a large, fat envelope in the mailbox. In it was a letter that said something like "You, or somebody else, was driving your vehicle over the Howard Frankland Bridge on (the date) at about 9:42 AM. We're taking a survey of drivers, and we'd like to know where you came from and where you were going, to help us figure out traffic patterns. Included is a map. You may keep the map." It was from the FL D.O.T. Holy crap! I was caught doing nothing wrong! How intrusive is THAT? What if I was cheating on the then-Mrs., and she got to the envelope first?? NOW the tinfoil hat comes out of the vault... what ELSE have they photographed me doing, that wasn't against the law, that's digitized and in some database somewhere, for God knows WHAT reason? FL got caught, and subsequent stopped due to public outcry several years ago, when the State was going to sell Drivers' License photographs to some company in some other state. WHY? What was that company going to do with them? Probably some sort of facial-recognition research, which is my most benign guess. In Ybor City, the "party" part of Tampa, I forget whether it was Tampa, or the county Sheriff, installed sidewalk cameras with some facial-recognition software to cut down on crime, catch criminals via the software comparing the pictures with mug shots already obtained in previous arrests. Nobody was happy about that, but, after a while, a year or two IIRC, they took them down, having caught exactly ZERO bad guys with software.

As gun owners, we're almost universally opposed to anybody retaining OUR information after the background check is finalized. And yet there are cameras out there, with NO regulations regarding who gets YOUR picture, of YOUR car, and does with it whatever they may choose. It is, after all, perfectly legal to take pictures or video under most circumstances. Not audio, but pics are OK.

King of the Hill episode, Dale Gribble, I mean, Rusty Shackleford, asks Hank something regarding the post office... Hank wonders how Rusty knew he was at the post office..."Here's the picture of you in line there, that I just downloaded.." Obviously not do-able, but, funny-ish... erm, maybe not so funny.

I'm not too happy about Google's Street View, or whatever it's called, either. There, for all the world to see, was MY Jeep, in MY driveway. They took it down after I emailed them to say that my security cameras (camera vs. camera, HA!) were in plain view, and therefore they were endangering my safety. I don't have any links, but there's been various internet postings...some poor bastard get's his pic taken coming out of a gay nightclub, couples fooling around in public, etc.

And, of course, there's an episode of Top Gear, in England, IIRC, and Jeremy has somebody else's face picture mounted on a small stick, with eye holes cut out, and whenever he went past a traffic-cam, they got a shot of that guy's face. I guess in England, the World's Capital of intrusive cameras, they're at least reasonable enough to want a photo of the offender.

RandyCOG3

[Cavalryman]

Sooo...If we put these things on the Arizona border, can we at least send tickets to people who illegally enter the country too fast?

[Evilblackgunsrfun]

they have had those ticket machines here in Ohio and Wv for a few years now.

[DAA1]

I have to say if there were a couple of these around where I live I bet my city could generate a lot of revenue. The widened a lane here recently and I thought it was because there were too many folks running the left turn signal, now twice as many run the signal and NOBODY cares at all.

Traffic laws depend on people being courteous, but not in this place. Everyone is out for themself and could care less what color the light is or WHO has the right of way. I am thinking 100.00 a crack at each violation, and use the extra money that I promise you will be generated because these folks around here are about as ignorant of the law as they are about most everything else, to pay for some more cops.

Then when they can't pay their tickets call the tow truck and take their ride. Serves two purposes, reduces the traffic, and educates the simple minded folks.

Win win for EVERYONE.
:airtight:

[mistersquiggles]

we had hem here in corpus christi, theyre still up but not functional..... i was in court one day for my dog getting out of the yard and while waiting on my docket i saw a guy try to fight a photo ticket... his argument was that it was some private company and not a law enforcement agency that gave him the ticket so he shouldnt have to pay... the judge asked him if he indeed did run the red light, and he said yes.... the judge dismissed the tickets that were mailed and then had the bailiff issue him tickets for admitting it, and then asked him if his law enforcement agency was good enough to comply with..... i almost choked to death trying to hold back the laughter......

ours are red light cameras for the most part but theres a few radar cameras.... they were supposedly shut off due to too many people slamming on their brakes at yellow lights trying to avoid the ticket.... dont know whether theyre gonna go back operational again or not, but i like patria's idea.... frees up the police to do real policing..... just hope it doesnt cause too many accidents due to paranoid or just plain dumb drivers