Speed Cameras WHY are we investing so much in these?

As soon as these things start to pop up every where people are just going to find a way to make the camera not see thier plate. Sure you can outlaw plate covers... but they have reflective clear spray and there will only be more inventions to get around this the more you put up.

The yahoo main page article says they put on of these up near a mall and it make over a million in illegal red light stops in 3 months just one camera. Our tax dollars are used for officers to serve and protect society... it appears their using our tax dollars now so they can make more money thats just not right. Sure you can use these for surveillance to help solve real crimes... but to use these as a means to make money and write traffic citations without asking any questions at all it seems wrong. Our tax dollars should not be going towards methods police can use to make more money. Ok your not in it for the money well then stop writing tickets and use it for surveillance only... Your not doing that so your in it for the money.

It makes me furious that a cop must confirm the persons identity before writing a ticket to that specfic person... they don't just look at the plate and right it to the person who the car is registered too they ask questions. SOMEHOW cameras negate all of this... in a sense they have more power then cops when it comes to writing tickets because they verify much less. I live in NJ and I know theres no way we will ever allow these cameras because NJ actually cares about individual rights.... It just makes me so mad to see other states are actively adding these cameras. Put up as many cameras as you want to keep society safe.... as soon as your using these as a means to make money your crossing the line... anyone agree or disagree?
Additional Details
My tax dollars go to the police so they can serve and protect us... they do not go to the police so they can use technology to ticket me. Sending me a ticket in the mail does not keep society safe it just puts money in the PIGgybank.

Andy G {Join The Resistance}

When the use of these traffic cameras were first put in place, it was a proactive approach to stop commuters from running red lights. However, over time many cities saw two problems with the cameras.

1. It costs the city thousands of dollars a month to maintain
2. Citizens have taken the citations to court and many of them won and not had the infraction on their license.

Some communities are going as far as taking down cameras that they have installed years ago.

http://www.natchezdemocrat.com/news/2009/mar/19/miss-city-remove-red-light-cameras/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23710970

This MSNBC report shows A federal study found a small but measurable reduction in injuries nationwide in accidents at intersections monitored by cameras, though there was an increase in some kinds of collisions.

I personally hate the damn things.

trooper3316

National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration (NHTSA) studies have shown a 30 percent decrease in accidents where cameras are in use.

Although I don't agree with your numbers, if there is one million people running a red light every three months, a camera sounds like a good way to save hundreds of accidents, and many lives.

Falafel & Loofah Aficionado

Government revenue.

When you get a ticket from a camera, you get no points on your license since they can't identify the driver. They just mail the ticket to the address to which the car is registered, and it's a substantially lower fine than police-given tickets. The ticket is not to YOU, it's to the car owner. Since there are no consequences related to driving record and insurance, it doesn't matter who is "responsible", just so long as it gets paid.

I got one for 45 in a 30, for $42. Earlier this year I got a ticket from a cop for 76 in a 55 for $215.

15 mph over via camera: $42
21 mph over (reduced to 9 over in court): $215 including various fees

"NHTSA studies have shown a 30 percent decrease in accidents where cameras are in use."
This this this this.

It's called negative reinforcement, and it works for things like speeding.

Furthermore, you can have more troopers spending their time dealing with real crime, since the boring traffic offenses are more and more being handled by electronic systems these days.

Andrew K

Cameras are much more efficient than troopers, sadly. I'd hate to see any law enforcement officers lose jobs to this, though I think it would make things safer for everyone.

Also, if you watched Mythbusters, the supposed "clear reflective license plate spray" does not work.

natchomomma

The sad thing is that there are companies that make the systems and the police and government don't get most of the money, the manufacturers get it.
Statistics show that there are more rear end wrecks at these lights from people trying to stop in time so they won't get a ticket.

Rock Firestorm

They've been up for a long time and no one is hiding their plate. The reflective spray doesn't work all the time. So the only people coplaining are people like yoiu, people who speed a lot.

Perhaps following the law might help you out.

Hope this helps.

dadof7n2001

The simplest answer here would be, if you don't speed, or run red lights, what's the problem?
Obviously they are generating funds from the people who are "above the law" so if nobody violated traffic laws there would be no need for these cameras.

Mr Puma

First of all, you should read the WHOLE article. Second, running a red light is AGAINST THE LAW! If you do not break the law by running a red light then you have nothing to worry about. If you cut down on the number of car crashes due to red light runners, then insurance rates with go down. How many times have you had to wait after your light turned green for all the cars that are running their red light to clear the intersection so you can go? If you think about it I'd be willing to bet a box of donuts that you do that at 98 out of a 100 intersections.

You mentioned that the police are to "Serve and Protect". You are half right. There is no law anywhere stating that the police must protect you. If that were the case then the police force would have to be two thirds of the population. One policeman working an eight hour shift times three to follow you around 24/7. That ain't happenin'.

As for your argument about traffic cams being use strictly for revenue. Wrong! Yeah, they bring in more money to the city, which is a good thing. How many times have you b*tched about something in your area that needs to be cleaned up or fixed but the city has to make that a low priority because of the lack of funds. Cams will bring in that money and at the same time enforce the law. After all, that is the main purpose of the police, Law Enforcement.

As I stated earlier, if you are not running red lights or in any other way breaking traffic laws, then you have nothing to worry about. Those cameras, while not being High Def, are good enough to identify the licence number and the driver. I say put them up at every major intersection.

EddyJ

Your rant is idiotic. What exactly do you think "serve and protect" means? By you receiving a ticket for speeding, running a red light, the officers are protecting the public. How many people are killed every year because of someone speeding or running a red light? Answer, thousands every year. If someone receiving a ticket and paying a fine makes them slow down or come to complete stop then so be it. Sometimes it's the little things like a traffic ticket that ends up saving far more lives than catching only the murderers and rapists which by the way the police usually do a good job a doing. If you don't like giving extra money to the government then don't break the law. It is that simple genius.

capitalgentleman

I think you are missing the point.

Ottawa (Ontario) installed red light cameras due to the high number of collisions at some intersections. They have a few cameras that rotate around to a number of the busiest intersections. These intersections have signs to indicate that they could have cameras. I am not sure how much money has been made, but the number of collisions dropped dramatically, and stayed down.

If I know there is an area that uses speed cameras, I am going to slow down! (Not that I speed much anyway, but I sure would not in a place like that). Yes, they do collect money in a way that is much cheaper than using traffic police. So, police dollars can be used for them to go after serious criminals. OTOH, speeds are the main causers of accidents, which are a drain on the public purse - police, courts, and medical costs (which are a government responsibility here).

I think they are a great idea. You do not have the right to break the law. Speeding is breaking the law, and if you get caught, by whatever method, you deserve whatever punishment is legislated.

NAP BQ

Let's get real It is a big money maker, and allows the cops to spend more time at the donut shop while the camera does all the work for him! I will go buy some reflective spray to provent getting such a "lazy" ticket.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: