Video at source.
Posted on 03/19/2006 1:08:06 PM PST by Cagey
OMAHA, Neb. -- A product claims it will give red-light cameras a run for your citation money, but does it work? Is it legal?
Television station KETV tested Photoblocker, which Monte Bowman plans to start selling in Council Bluffs, Neb., on Tuesday. It's a product that's supposed to make a car's license plate invisible to red-light cameras.
That city has seven cameras mounted at five intersections. If a car runs a red light, a flash goes off and the camera takes a picture of the license plate. Then, the vehicle's owner gets a $65 ticket in the mail, regardless of who's driving.
That's where Photoblocker comes in, and Bowman's claim is that drivers using it will no longer get caught.
Bowman is a self-described "business troubleshooter and visionist."
He said the Council Bluffs law is unfair because regardless of who's driving, the owner gets a ticket if his vehicle runs a red light.
"I'm not doing this because I sanction red-light runners," Bowman said. "They're the last people in the world I want to see on the road. I want to see the red-light runner be the one targeted with the ticket."
A bottle of Photoblocker is $38 on the Internet. The makers, Phantom Plate Inc., say that if a driver sprays the "invisible formula" on his or her license plate, Photoblocker will "reflect the traffic enforcement camera's flash ... rendering the picture unreadable."
KETV took a can of Photoblocker to Pottawattamie County Attorney Matt Wilber.
"As long as law enforcement has been issuing tickets, people have been trying to figure out ways around them, whether it's radar detectors, license plate holders, or this new kind of paint," Wilber said.
Wilber said Photoblocker violates the Iowa law involving defacement of a license plate.
"It would be our interpretation that the law that says, 'No foreign materials on your license plate,' would be applicable to this product as well," Wilber said.
Wilber said users would be subject to a $10 ticket for improper display of plate. He admitted that enforcement would be difficult, since the Photoblocker sprays on clear.
"I'd say the biggest issue is, does it actually work? If it doesn't, or they're over-representing how well it works, that it would certainly seem like we'd have a consumer fraud issue that the attorney general's office would be interested in," Wilber said.
KETV spent two days with Council Bluffs police, purposely running red lights and activating the cameras to see if Photoblocker really does render the picture unreadable. Police blocked off the intersection of Seventh and Willow streets, and a police car ran the red light.
The experiment was performed again after the vehicle's license plate was treated with Photoblocker. The station followed the instructions precisely. They say the license plate should be clean and dry, and short, even strokes should be used until the plate is saturated. Then, per instructions, the group waited until Photoblocker was dry and repeated until a glossy coating was built up. When the plate was completely dry, the police car ran the red light three more times.
It takes 24 hours for the results to be delivered from the cameras to the Council Bluffs Police Department. When the police vehicle's images were accessed, the license plate number of 87657 were easy to read.
"Yeah, it's crystal-clear," said Officer Chad Meyers. "I don't think the image has been changed one way or another."
Meyers and a reporter looked at every picture -- both before Photoblocker was applied and after. The license plate was completely readable in every shot.
The station called Phantom Plate with the results. A representative said police "are going to rig the system to make sure the product fails."
"You were there with me," Meyers said. "We followed the directions on the can to a T. The picture speaks for itself. It just doesn't work."
Phantom Plate's response: "The product may not be 100 percent effective, but if it saves you one ticket, it's done its job."
The label on Photoblocker says: "Manufacturer makes no representation or warranty regarding effectiveness of this product. All sales are final."
Video at source.
Mud works every time.
Well, it worked on your photo!
For better or worse, these robocops are the wave of the future.
Video cams are here to stay as well.
Some people will say this is the same as squad cars replacing horses, and radios replacing police dispatched from the station.
No word on the impact on the donut industry.
The focus is on the wrong part of the story. It is not if this product will block a License Pate, the story should be on the illegality of “Red Light Cameras.” Notice that the owner of the car is give a ticket, regardless of who is driving. What if there are identical twins, and one borrows the car and runs the light? They say that if you were not driving to tell them who was. So now they want you to report someone else which is not the job of the owner. There is no do process because one cannot questions the Camera. What if there were extenuating circumstances, like waiting to make a left turn, or there was a traffic delay that caused you to be stuck in the intersection? In addition, the company that owns the cameras get a cut of the ticket money. So it is in there best interest to catch more people. In fact one company was tried for adjusting the stop lights and cameras to create more runners than would happen naturally.
No this is part of the Government Media complex. Create an illegal ticket scheme to rise money then use the press to push it.
Is that all? In Fresno they would get a ticket for 370 dollars. Well, that is before the pulled the system out. There were problems with it and the greedy city wasn't making enough money.
Is it legal? Is it legal to have cameras when you have a right to face your accuser? Is it right when the American Left (the great champions of right to privacy) sets up these cameras?
The local governments' hope is to create an effective ''in terrorem'' effect and cash in on those vehicle owners (whether having been the driver or not) who would rather write the check and mail it in than spend the time and inconvenience at a crowded local traffic court with some failed lawyer as an uncaring, hardened and police oriented JP or municipal judge. The attempt at oppression and tyranny has devolved to the city hall who, like most levels of government, considers due process and constitutional immunities as merely quaint antiquities taught in junior high civics class.
We had a big discussion on this earlier in the week. The cameras were ruled illegal and turned off in Minneapolis.
It' nothing more than a Big Brother fundraiser which will soon expand to speeding tickets, seat belt violations etc.
Some towns are tired of pulling crushed bodies out of crushed SUVs crushed by collisions at redlight intersections.
"There's a ______ born every minute."
"A ____ and his money soon are parted."
That's the propaganda they use to justify them.
I'd be interested in seeing that court order.
Try "Photo Cop Ruled Unconstitutional " 3/15/06
We had 182 posts. Good thread.
Thanks---
A polarizing filter on the camera would counter the glare.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.