Don't Fix, Scrap Photo Radar

IndependenceInstitute ^ | Thursday, February 21, 2002 | Reid Lusk

[backhoe]

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Independence Institute <IndependenceInstitute@i2i.org>

To: <>

Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 6:20 PM

Subject: Don't Fix, Scrap Photo Radar; I.I. Newsletter

Hello Friend,

Monday's going to be a busy day for us. Dr. Merrill Matthews, director
of the Council for Affordable Health Insurance, is going to be in town.
We're taking him, along with our own health care babe Linda Gorman, to
the Capitol for a briefing with legislators. You can meet him that
evening here at our offices where he'll unveil a prescription drug plan
for Colorado's seniors. That's Monday the 25th, reception at 5:30,
presentation at 6:30. Free for members, $5 for non-members. Just RSVP
today to Ron Bain at ron@i2i.org or 303-279-3656.(We'll supply the
munchies, Dr. Matthews will provide free samples of Viagra)

I received many positive comments about last week's note on Governor
Owens' signed pledge to Americans for Tax Reform to "oppose and VETO ANY
AND ALL EFFORTS to increase taxes."  Well, he doesn't stand alone on
that principled pledge.  President George W. Bush made the same written
promise.  My hunch is that W learned from his old man's unkept "Read my
lips, no new taxes" promise.  I doubt breaking that vow will become a
family tradition.

Beyond the President, the guv is joined by 25 gutsy state Colorado
legislators, who signed the same pledge.  You can find their names on
the ATR web site: http://www.atr.org/pdffiles/state_pledge_signers.PDF

There is constant pressure from special interests to get these
courageous men and women to weasel out of their pledges. The only thing
keeping them from doing so is their honor and integrity. We owe them our
respect.

Because it happened during the cloudy time that my daughter became
terminally ill, I don't think I properly praised another man of
integrity.  Congressman Bob Schaffer could have easily turned his back
on his term limit pledge. Nothing could have stopped him, except his
honor. Thanks Bob.

I found the news coverage on Schaffer's (as well as Tom Tancredo's
upcoming) difficult decision interesting. They were all over it. Why?
Because they hate term limits. But they love tax increases. Could that
be why there's rarely coverage of tax pledges?

Is human cloning just around the corner? Colorado lawmakers are arguing
a ban on cloning. Joining me this week on Independent Thinking will be
Dr. Curt Freed from the University of Colorado Health Sciences Center.
He believes such a ban isn't needed. I.T. will be shown Friday night at
8:30, and repeated Saturday afternoon at 2:00, on KBDI Channel 12.

Dave Kopel says John Ashcroft's John Walker Lindh comments were
inappropriate. I don't know if I agree. Check his latest for National
Review: http://www.nationalreview.com/kopel/kopel.shtml

Enjoy this week's op-ed on Denver's embattled photo radar program by new
Independence Feature Syndicate writer Reid Lusk.

Be sure to RSVP for Monday!

Jon Caldara
President
Independence Institute

========================================================================

Independence Institute
Feature Syndicate Opinion-Editorial

For Immediate Release February 21, 2002

DON'T FIX PHOTO RADAR - SCRAP IT!
By Reid Lusk

It looks as though the end may finally be near for Denver's embattled
photo radar program. If stubborn, revenue-hungry city officials have
their way, however, it is just the beginning of another fight that will
ultimately result in the flawed program resuming operation again.

Recently the City of Denver indefinitely suspended its use of the
controversial camera-equipped white vans designed to automatically snap
photos of speeding drivers. The city decision came reluctantly after a
ruling by Denver County Judge Mary Celeste that found Denver's system to
be operating illegally. Since its inception in 1998, Denver's photo
radar program has apparently violated city law by enlisting a private
contractor, ACS State and Local Solutions, to prepare and mail fine
notices to speed limit scofflaws. Celeste said Denver also broke state
law by basing its payments to ACS on the volume of tickets generated.

A pending class-action lawsuit against ACS and the City of Denver claims
the contractor and city each netted about $3 million from photo radar
fines in 2000, with ACS's portion determined according to the total
number of images taken. The plaintiffs are demanding that all fines paid
under the program be returned with interest and the city be slapped with
punitive damages for its misconduct.  But you won't find Denver
officials admitting wrongdoing and apologizing. Instead, the city's
attorneys are quickly scrambling for a legal fix to get photo radar up
and running again in short order.

Photo radar loyalists within the walls of municipal government are
echoing the tired refrain, as they have for years, that use of the
technology is primarily a "safety measure." The claim that photo radar
ever had anything to do with traffic safety now rings pathetically
hollow in light of these troubling revelations of profiteering. The
safety argument falls flat on its face when one demands concrete proof
that the presence of the photo units actually increases anyone's safety.
Denver's response is that traffic slows down significantly in photo
radar zones. But does this automatically equate to safer roadways?

Most drivers who unsuspectingly happen upon one of these white vans will
instinctively hit their brakes, become distracted, and take their eyes
off the road to focus on either the van or their speedometer. Compare
that to a motorist exceeding an artificially low speed limit by 10 to 15
m.p.h. - like every other vehicle in the vicinity - but driving
responsibly with the median flow of traffic. Assuming he or she doesn't
have the added stress of photo radar to interfere with his or her
driving, do we really have to speculate on which scenario is most likely
to cause a problem?

An alternative effort to curb other unsafe behaviors, such as aggressive
driving, tailgating and lane hogging, should be pursued more vigilantly
by police officers whose sound judgment can never be replaced by any
mechanical contraption.

Clearly there are a multitude of factors besides excessive speed
contributing to unsafe roadways. Refocusing policy to target bad driving
in general rather than just speed violations would best serve the public
interest with regard to traffic safety.

But the city's plans and public interest apparently run contrary to one
another because photo radar is a cash cow for municipal government. This
is why Denver is desperately clinging to photo radar and grasping at
straws to justify its use to an increasingly skeptical public.

                                                  ###


                          Copyright ©2002, Independence Institute

INDEPENDENCE INSTITUTE is a non-profit, non-partisan Colorado think
tank. It is governed by a statewide board of trustees and holds a
501(c)(3) tax exemption from the IRS. Its public policy research focuses
on economic growth, education reform, local government effectiveness,
and Constitutional rights.

JON CALDARA is President of the Institute.

REID LUSK is a volunteer researcher and writer for the Independence
Institute.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES on this subject can be found at:
http://independenceinstitute.org/ResearchAreas/PersonalFreedom/index.htm
or
http://independenceinstitute.org/Centers/Transportation/index.htm

NOTHING WRITTEN here is to be construed as necessarily representing the
views of the Independence Institute or as an attempt to influence any
election or legislative action.

PERMISSION TO REPRINT this paper in whole or in part is hereby granted
provided full credit is given to the Independence Institute. To
subscribe to or unsubscribe from this e-mail list, please send an e-mail
to ron@i2i.org.



<<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>>
*
afe behaviors, such as aggressive
driving, tailgating and lane hogging, should be pursued more vigilantly
by police officers whose sound judgment can never be replaced by any
mechanical contraption.

Clearly there are a multitude of factors besides excessive speed
contributing to unsafe roadways. Refocusing policy to target bad driving
in general rather than just speed violations would best serve the public
interest with regard to traffic safety.

But the city's plans and public interest apparently run contrary to one
another because photo radar is a cash cow for municipal government. This
is why Denver is desperately clinging to photo radar and grasping at
straws to justify its use to an increasingly skeptical public.

                                                  ###


                          Copyright ©2002, Independence Institute

INDEPENDENCE INSTITUTE is a non-profit, non-partisan Colorado think
tank. It#"&546-??--@@þÌ.?@,-@?9@--??--@@--??--@

[backhoe]

Photo_Radar:

To find all articles tagged or indexed using *Photo_Radar, click below:
	click here >>>	Photo_Radar	<<< click here
(To view all FR Bump Lists, click here)

[muawiyah]

The only folks who argue against the use of traffic cameras are those who want to run redlights and drive recklessly with impunity.

This is why we have to beef up the Second Amendment and require ALL motorists to be armed while driving, with a loaded pistol or shotgun in an appropriate place near the driver.

Pedestrians must also be armed to make sure the guys trying to run them down at street cornes do not do so - at least not without a fight!

A well armed citizenry will be safe from both its government and the other citizens.

[Atlas Sneezed]

Photo radar is generally used to enforce speed limits that are unjustifiably low compared to engineering standards. The same idiots who want to restrict your guns also want to restrict your speed. Low speed limits are freebie stop and sniff opportunities for cops.

[muawiyah]

Actually, not if they are smart cops. Those speeders around here'd as soon run down a cop as to stop and let her search their car for booty.

And who says I have any guns? I was merely proposing a way we could eliminate police and/or remote site camera enforcement of the laws. There's no fundamental reason the people themselves cannot undertake to make the other guy much more polite!

And you arm those pedestrians on those city streets in business districts, and no one will care what the correct engineered speed limit ought to be -

[teeman8r]

speeding is a victimless crime, subject to fines based on damage or injury one may do while speeding... any fines should be instituted at the scene of the accident for which speeding may be a factor.

as a write-in candidate for governor of Maryland, i am making the elimination of radar traps a key plank in my platform, Tom Taylor, Maryland's Write Choice

[2nd_Amendment_Defender]

Photo radar, another way to get money out of your pockets into peoples' hands in government authority so they can waste it like they seem to do with the money they already take out of us.

[2nd_Amendment_Defender]

If they were really interested in doing the community good with photo radar they would sentence speeders to community service and not fine them to get more $$$.