Speed cameras, I’ll agree with, but here in North Texas, Red Light cameras have actually resulted in a significant drop in wrecks.
But yeah, speed cameras need to be burned out/shot on a regular basis – make their maintenance cost more than the revenue they generate.
on 04 Dec 2008 at 9:22 am OrangeNeckInNY
Looks like there might be an uprising soon to be happening in The People’s Republic of Britishland.
on 04 Dec 2008 at 9:53 am A Texan
I’m against the things, and I salute those few Brits who haven’t yet been de-balled or re-educated into sheep-hood for doing this work with the limited tools they have available. No one is hurt, but Der Stadt is given a message. Were such things to become widespread in the US (esp. down South), I’d expect that many of them would get shot up or simply vaporized with explosives.
Everyone who reads this should understand how all of the red light cameras work – the company that builds and installs them gets a percentage of the revenue. Both the jurisdiction and the company have a BIG incentive to make the yellow lights shorter – because it takes people months to adjust, resulting in literally hundreds of tickets at EACH light. There’s no leeway given – if you miss by 1/10 of a second, you’re out hundreds of dollars.
The old saw of “its for your safety” is a crock of shit, both for speed and red light cameras. Its about the revenue, it is simply another tax.
This quote, from Ayn Rand’s “Atlas Shrugged” is instructive:
“Did you really think we want those laws observed?” said Dr. Ferris. “We WANT them to be broken. You’d better get it straight that it’s not a bunch of boy scouts you’re up against… We’re after power and we mean it… There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What’s there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted — and you create a nation of law-breakers — and then you cash in on guilt. Now that’s the system Mr. Reardon, that’s the game, and once you understand it, you’ll be much easier to deal with.”
on 04 Dec 2008 at 2:00 pm emdfl
IIRC the stats say that red-light cameras may result in fewer intersection accidents, but rear-end collisions show a dramatic increase.
on 04 Dec 2008 at 8:23 pm OA
“Speed cameras, I’ll agree with, but here in North Texas, Red Light cameras have actually resulted in a significant drop in wrecks.”
Speed cameras, I’ll agree with, but here in North Texas, Red Light cameras have actually resulted in a significant drop in wrecks.
But yeah, speed cameras need to be burned out/shot on a regular basis – make their maintenance cost more than the revenue they generate.
Looks like there might be an uprising soon to be happening in The People’s Republic of Britishland.
I’m against the things, and I salute those few Brits who haven’t yet been de-balled or re-educated into sheep-hood for doing this work with the limited tools they have available. No one is hurt, but Der Stadt is given a message. Were such things to become widespread in the US (esp. down South), I’d expect that many of them would get shot up or simply vaporized with explosives.
Everyone who reads this should understand how all of the red light cameras work – the company that builds and installs them gets a percentage of the revenue. Both the jurisdiction and the company have a BIG incentive to make the yellow lights shorter – because it takes people months to adjust, resulting in literally hundreds of tickets at EACH light. There’s no leeway given – if you miss by 1/10 of a second, you’re out hundreds of dollars.
The old saw of “its for your safety” is a crock of shit, both for speed and red light cameras. Its about the revenue, it is simply another tax.
This quote, from Ayn Rand’s “Atlas Shrugged” is instructive:
“Did you really think we want those laws observed?” said Dr. Ferris. “We WANT them to be broken. You’d better get it straight that it’s not a bunch of boy scouts you’re up against… We’re after power and we mean it… There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What’s there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted — and you create a nation of law-breakers — and then you cash in on guilt. Now that’s the system Mr. Reardon, that’s the game, and once you understand it, you’ll be much easier to deal with.”
IIRC the stats say that red-light cameras may result in fewer intersection accidents, but rear-end collisions show a dramatic increase.
“Speed cameras, I’ll agree with, but here in North Texas, Red Light cameras have actually resulted in a significant drop in wrecks.”
There’s always a first, I reckon.
Lots of red light camera info (as well as plenty of other related stuff) :
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/04/430.asp
emdfl, that jibes with what I remember as well.