Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

If it is so dangerous, why do police officers camp out on the highway pulling over speeders INSTEAD?

I don't oppose the enforcement of traffic lights but I do oppose automated ticketing systems.

1 posted on 12/17/2004 12:14:26 PM PST by weegee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: 1riot1ranger; Action-America; Aggie Mama; Alkhin; Allegra; American72; antivenom; Antoninus II; ...

Houston PING

Comical pimping for Mayor Bob-White...


2 posted on 12/17/2004 12:15:02 PM PST by weegee (WE FOUGHT ZOGBYISM November 2, 2004 - 60 Million Voters versus 60 Minutes - BUSH WINS!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: weegee

For a long time speeding tickets have been looked at for extra tax revenue instead of a real disinsentive for speeding. The lure of easy revenue has made big cities install cameras to automatically catch people and collect big bucks. We must resist this "big brother" effort at all cost. In the suburbs (where there's little crime) policemen routinely camp out at 25 and 30 miles speed traps in order to wring more money from taxpayers' pockets. The traffic court system is the only court system where the prosecutor, the policemen, and the judge's salaries are paid by the defendant's fines. So much for blind justice!


3 posted on 12/17/2004 12:20:03 PM PST by winner3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: weegee
Mandatory helmets for drivers and 20 mph speed limits will save lives too.
4 posted on 12/17/2004 12:21:29 PM PST by Fatalis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: weegee

Traffic cameras are nothing but a money machine. Accidents at intersections can be dramatically reduced simply by increasing the duration of the yellow light. But of course that doesn't involve a money grab so they won't do it!


6 posted on 12/17/2004 12:24:14 PM PST by JohnnyZ ("Thought I was having trouble with my adding. It's all right now." - Clint Eastwood)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: weegee

Looks like it's 7 to 1 in favor of murder.


8 posted on 12/17/2004 12:33:34 PM PST by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: weegee

The companies who install the cameras are pushing big-time for them, because they get a huge amount of the proceeds. In the Lenexa-Overland Park, Kansas areas it is 40% of the fines.


9 posted on 12/17/2004 12:55:24 PM PST by GarySpFc (Sneakypete, De Oppresso Liber)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: weegee
Exactly.
If "saving lives" is such a high priority to the City, then why does it take several months - often years - to get traffic signals installed at dangerous intersections in the first place?
Why does it take them YEARS to tear down abandoned houses which breed vermin or become crack-houses?

Public safety? Yeah, right.

cha-ching! cha-ching!

10 posted on 12/17/2004 1:03:08 PM PST by TheGrimReaper (o)(o)....Keeping abreast for 50 years now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: weegee
Ok, ok. Everyone get their flame guns ready and tell me why I've lost my mind, because I'm going to play devil's advocate here.

I don't oppose the enforcement of traffic lights but I do oppose automated ticketing systems.

Why? You asked why cops spend time chasing down speeders instead of sitting at intercetions to nab people for running a red light. First off, let's be a little practical, shall we? A cop waiting for speeders is usually in a spot where you can't see him until it's too late. If you're speeding and he's got his radar on you, you won't have time to slow down (assuming you don't have a RD). They hide because obviously you would slow down if you saw him way down the road. How effective would they be at getting speeders? Not very. The idea is to catch people doing what they would be doing if they DIDN'T know a cop was present. Now then, such a scenario at a 4-way intersection is simply not possible for a number of reasons. There is no place to "hide". Who in their right mind is going to run a red light with a cop sitting there in broad daylight? Additionally, even if someone did run a red light, with traffic going in 4 different directions a cop could only practically go after offenders going in the same direction as he is pointed, or perhaps in one additional direction. What a waste. Do you REALLY want a cop sitting at an intersection waiting for people to run a red light? Wouldn't you be saying to yourself "man, what a waste! nobody is going to run a red light with him sitting there! he should be out looking for real criminals!"??? But if there was a cop who happened to be at an intersection and he saw someone nearly crash into you by running a red light, and the cop gave that person a ticket, would you have a problem with that? Or would that be "big brother" in action? And if you don't have a problem with a cop giving a ticket to someone running a red light, what difference does it make if the cop saw the infraction sitting in his car a few feet away, or on a camera in the station a few hundred feet away?

For a long time speeding tickets have been looked at for extra tax revenue instead of a real disinsentive for speeding. The lure of easy revenue has made big cities install cameras to automatically catch people and collect big bucks.

So, would you rather have YOUR taxes raised, or would you rather keep having people who break the law to pay fines? Are you opposed to traffic fines for speeding and running red lights? If there are no fines, then what incentive is there for people to obey the law? Yes, those fines pay the salaries of cops and services, but if there weren't fines, then that money would have to come from somewhere else, like your back pocket. Which is the better scenario? And if you aren't opposed to traffic fines, are you just opposed to the laws being efficiently enforced? Would you prefer inefficiency?

We must resist this "big brother" effort at all cost. In the suburbs (where there's little crime) policemen routinely camp out at 25 and 30 miles speed traps in order to wring more money from taxpayers' pockets.

The law is the law. There's a simple solution if you don't want to get a speeding ticket. Obey the law. And if you don't like the law, change it. Get the speed limit raised. Police have been pulling people over for speeding for a long time. Sherrif Taylor in Mayberry, North Carolina on the Andy Griffith show pulled people over for speeding. That's your idea of "big brother"?

Mandatory helmets for drivers and 20 mph speed limits will save lives too.

But that's not the law, is it?

The use of police as tax gatherers is causing respectable middle-class folks to develop contempt for them. This impedes legitimate law-enforcement activities.

Again, I'd much rather have law-breakers pay taxes, than have mine raised. Since when is enforcing traffic laws not a "legitimate law-enforcement activity"? Should there be no traffic laws? It makes no sense to have laws you have no intention of enforcing. If you aren't going to enforce a law, don't have it, period. Or perhaps you want traffic laws enforced, but you don't want police spending an inordinate amount of time doing it? That's understandable. After all, we can't have a cop at every intersection watching for red-light runners, can we? So...if that's not practical, but yet we want traffic laws enforced, what would a solution be? Hmmmm...let's see...what's that? You think maybe they should put a camera up at intersections where there's been trouble??? Hey, that's not a bad idea. You might be on to something...it frees the cops up for "legitimate law enforcement"...people won't run red lights anyway with a cop sitting there...people will probably do it less if they know they might get caught on camera...yeah, I think you've got a pretty good idea there.

Okay, I've got my asbestos suit on...blast away. :-)

12 posted on 12/17/2004 1:13:33 PM PST by GLDNGUN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: weegee

With automated ticketing systems, how would they deal with "left turn yield on green" intersections? A driver wanting to make a left turn might have to wait through many light cycles if he can't creep forward and wait for traffic to clear. If oncoming traffic is inconsiderate when the light turns yellow, someone turning left is often stuck until just when the light turns red.


15 posted on 12/17/2004 1:43:24 PM PST by Callirhoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: weegee
Computers f' up.

I oppose this 100% in my town.

25 posted on 12/18/2004 8:00:03 PM PST by Dan from Michigan ("BZZZZZT You are fined one credit for violation of the Verbal Morality Statute")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: weegee
There is an article in The Columbus Dispatch today and various law enforcement agencies were quoted, pimping these systems to the public.

A thought that immediately ran through my head:
Columbus has neighborhoods that are unsafe to live in without bars across your windows and the hoods govern the streets. The police response? Let's put cameras at intersections to catch red light runners.

The company's proposal included the potential $4.5 million of annual revenue to the city. The city politicians may have a fleeting thought of despair for a life lost to a traffic accident. They will mourn for years over lost revenue they can not spend.

31 posted on 12/19/2004 11:43:59 AM PST by Ghengis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: weegee

I'm so glad the uber liberals haven't gotten these cameras in where I live. Let the coppers catch you fair and square. Not some Big Brother camera


37 posted on 12/22/2004 11:07:12 AM PST by dennisw (Help put the "Ch" back in Chanukah)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson