[norcal joe]

Something is strange here. The last paragraph of the article says:

West told Sacramento Bee that three amendments needed to be added in order to pass the bill, which include clarifying the angle of the camera, how long records of penalties will be retained and how many occurrences of street racing would enable the installation of a camera.

The last part suggests that these cameras would only be set up in locations where there is a history of street racing (which has become a big problem in many cities in California). Up until then in the article, it made it seem like these cameras would be set up everywhere in the state. Great journalism by the left, once again.

[uranium penguin]

“The last part suggests that these cameras would only be set up in locations where there is a history of street racing (which has become a big problem in many cities in California). Up until then in the article, it made it seem like these cameras would be set up everywhere in the state. Great journalism by the left, once again.”

And.. as a Warm up act.

They are going to have a shoot out the cameras event

[norcal joe]

Yes, there IS more to this bill that the article left out. From the LA Times:

In its latest iteration, Assembly Bill 645 would establish a five-year pilot program in six cities — San Jose, Oakland, Los Angeles, Glendale, Long Beach and San Francisco — to allow speed cameras on select corridors:

- School zones

- City streets with the highest incidences of fatal and severe injury crashes, designated as “safety corridors”

- Streets with a history of races and side shows

[null and void]

Up until then in the article, it made it seem like these cameras would be set up everywhere in the state. Great journalism by the left, once again.

Because the camel will never stick its whole head into the tent, eh?