 |
Business Directory |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Coupons |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Classifieds |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
| | Author | Messages | |
Jason
Posts:3378
 | | 10/08/2007 4:23 PM |
 Alert | Or so say those ignorant of the facts:
http://thenewspaper.com/news/15/1592.asp
"A New Times investigation found over 12,000 speed camera tickets from the Loop 101 freeway in Scottsdale were tossed out because they were issued to a corporation, trust, or government entity."
And here I thought it was all about the safety! We need only take $100 and register an LLC to avoid the tickets.
"The investigation also showed that <b>10,000</b> innocent motorists who had been mailed speeding tickets had their dismissed after they had proved their innocence. As a matter of policy, no human being, whether vendor or police officer, actually reviewed the tickets before they were mailed to ensure the correct individual was being accused."
Reeeealllly? If you believe the people here, you're only snapped if you're actually violating. When it's been shown that:
A) They actually cause an increase in accidents
B) They violate your constitutional rights (this was decided by a court of law, not me)
C) They routinely snap innocent people
Why are we rushing to install them here? | |
Joined: Jul 2005 | |
| | anewman
Posts:670
| | 10/08/2007 4:53 PM |
Alert | YEAP- It is me coming to disagree
I think the newtimes data may be scewed which all news is these days.
FACT: I work for a very large world wide company. Employees that drive our vehicles have been issued photo radar tickets from the man in the vans, red light enforcement, and the freeway enforcement zones. The ticket clearly states "You or your company is responsible for the ticket" In todays business all corporations have vehicles numbered or a Business Lic number on the vehicle. All of our employees have had to pay the fine because the ticket comes to the place of business which the vehicle is registered to.
How do the cameras cause an increase in accidents? Are you talking red light cameras or speed enforcement cameras?
Which constitutional right?
Though some people may be innocently snapped the fact is that the photo cameras make drivers more aware while they are driving- more cautious in intersections that are notorious for speeding, accidents, or red light running- and percentage wise are very accurate.
Oh yeah- If you are not breaking the law-- Why does it matter??
I welcome the photo radar- ticket these idiots and bring some more revenue into the city for improvements it needs.
I think they should have photo radar in every school zone and an infared photo radar in the HOV lanes!! | |
"The jouney of life is as much in oneself' as the roads one travels"
| |
|
| | caveman
Posts:1231
| | 10/08/2007 5:00 PM |
Alert | <div class='NTForums_Quote'>Posted By anewman on 10/08/2007 4:53 PM
How do the cameras cause an increase in accidents?
</div>
Simple, by people slowing down as they come to the light and speeding up afterwards. This happens all the time on the 101, drivers have adapted but this causes problems due to their speed not being constant.
<div class='NTForums_Quote'>
Which constitutional right?
</div>
dunno
<div class='NTForums_Quote'>
Though some people may be innocently snapped the fact is that the photo cameras make drivers more aware while they are driving- more cautious in intersections that are notorious for speeding, accidents, or red light running- and percentage wise are very accurate.
</div>
Red light cameras are one thing but speed cameras are another. There is none of this speed up and slow down with red light cameras although you may get more people mashing the gas to make it through the light and past the camera in time. That is debatable.
<div class='NTForums_Quote'>
Oh yeah- If you are not breaking the law-- Why does it matter??
</div>
You are right, in fact if you have nothing to hide lets just listen in on your phone calls. You have no need for privacy if you are doing nothing wrong, welcome to 1984.
<div class='NTForums_Quote'>
I welcome the photo radar- ticket these idiots and bring some more revenue into the city for improvements it needs.
</div>
This has been said 500 times here. Most of the money goes to the company Redflex traffic systems. If the city is getting so much money why do they deploy these in such a limited fashion. They could make a bundle on I-10 if they made revenue on this, BUT THEY DON'T.
<div class='NTForums_Quote'>
I think they should have photo radar in every school zone and an infared photo radar in the HOV lanes!!</div>
Sweet, you must like traffic accidents. Hell lets just drop the speed limit to 45 so we can give out more tickets. Welcome to post 9/11 the police state. | | | |
|
| | anewman
Posts:670
| | 10/08/2007 5:21 PM |
Alert |
<Simple, by people slowing down as they come to the light and speeding up afterwards. This happens all the time on the 101, drivers have adapted but this causes problems due to their speed not being constant.>
Really? I drive the 101 quite often and the accidents are normally not anywhere near the enforcement zone. Usually the 101 accidents are within 2 miles of the 202 exchange and the I-17 exchange.
At times when people can speed on the 101 the majority of the accidents are from people going far and above the speed limit. Almost every 101 fatality has been from 1 or more vehicles traveling over 90mph.
<You are right, in fact if you have nothing to hide lets just listen in on your phone calls. You have no need for privacy if you are doing nothing wrong, welcome to 1984.>
Um 1984 passed. So did Y2K. How do you go from speed enforcement to listening devices? Pretty big leap there. Oh by the way- that technology already exists too. Cell phones and cordless can be listened in on and it is not that exspensive.
<
This has been said 500 times here. Most of the money goes to the company Redflex traffic systems. If the city is getting so much money why do they deploy these in such a limited fashion. They could make a bundle on I-10 if they made revenue on this, BUT THEY DON'T. >
I have not seen any stats on this. It would be interesting the see the proposal and the cities revenue return from this.
I am sure it is limited because there have been some issues with them, plus cost, and people over reacting.
<Sweet, you must like traffic accidents. Hell lets just drop the speed limit to 45 so we can give out more tickets. Welcome to post 9/11 the police state.>
Speed limit in a school zone is less than 45- if you didn't know that- maybe that is the problem!
Seriously though- I would rather see a car accident than a kid being hit by a car that was traveling to fast in the school zone.
I didn't say anyhting about lowering speeds?? Just re read it and nope- still nothing about lowering speeds. ????
Relax- the government is not trying to get you. I think if you are posting on this thread they probably could have found you by now! <img src='http://www.85239.com/desktopmodules/ntforums/images/emoticons/whistling.gif' height='20' width='20' title='Whistling' align='absmiddle'> | |
"The jouney of life is as much in oneself' as the roads one travels"
| |
|
| | Jason
Posts:3378
| | 10/08/2007 5:37 PM |
Alert | | . | |
Joined: Jul 2005 | |
|
| | Jason
Posts:3378
| | 10/08/2007 5:37 PM |
Alert | Posted By anewman on 10/08/2007 4:53 PM
YEAP- It is me coming to disagree
I think the newtimes data may be scewed which all news is these days.
They're not the only source for some of this data. This is the only source I've found which actually puts a number to the people who are innocent but ticketed anyway. This does confirm what other articles say though:
A) There is no review before sending the "ticket"
B) There are mistakes
FACT: I work for a very large world wide company. Employees that drive our vehicles have been issued photo radar tickets from the man in the vans, red light enforcement, and the freeway enforcement zones. The ticket clearly states "You or your company is responsible for the ticket"
FACT (you'd know this if you'd researched it): You did not receive a ticket.
How do the cameras cause an increase in accidents?
Red light cameras I have factual evidence for. They cause people to slam on their brakes which people behind are not prepared for. Essentially, cameras exacerbate the real problem: Distracted and improperly trained drivers. Paradoxically though, there is evidence to support an increase in T-bone accidents. Perhaps this is because people no longer fear entering an intersection once their light goes green and forget their duty to check for red light runners.
Which constitutional right?
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/16/1688.asp
Though some people may be innocently snapped the fact is that the photo cameras make drivers more aware while they are driving- more cautious in intersections that are notorious for speeding, accidents, or red light running- and percentage wise are very accurate.
No, the facts do not bear this out. If they did, why is there an increase in accidents?
Oh yeah- If you are not breaking the law-- Why does it matter??
Again, this goes back to a loss of rights for something that isn't even helping. You should be wary of anything that takes away your rights and puts them into the hands of a private for-profit company, let alone one that routinely botches their job.
I welcome the photo radar- ticket these idiots and bring some more revenue into the city for improvements it needs.
Except that most of the money goes to an Australian company, Redflex.
I think they should have photo radar in every school zone and an infared photo radar in the HOV lanes!!
Perhaps your first thought should be setting up legal school zones? I don't get this one. Other states do not have such sloppy and ill-defined zones as ours. Heck, even Tempe does not have them near the high schools. Those are well defined and reasonably set up.
Infrared? How are you going to sort out the engine and exhaust system of the car? | |
Joined: Jul 2005 | |
|
|  | Jason
Posts:3378
| | 10/08/2007 5:43 PM |
Alert | Um 1984 passed. So did Y2K. How do you go from speed enforcement to listening devices? Pretty big leap there.
Ummm...where have you been? DPS wants to use these cameras for spying.
I have not seen any stats on this. It would be interesting the see the proposal and the cities revenue return from this.
Redflex takes between $40 and $60 per ticket. The rest is left for the court system, traffic survival school and approximately 20-30% (IIRC) goes to the city. | |
Joined: Jul 2005 | |
|
| | anewman
Posts:670
| | 10/08/2007 6:00 PM |
Alert |
<div class='NTForums_Quote'>
FACT (you'd know this if you'd researched it): You did not receive a ticket. </div>
Actually I did receive a ticket in 2003 from a man in the van. I was a department supervisor for the service department of the corporation I work for and handled all the tickets that came in for the 15 guys in that group.
Oh and just last Thursday I was looking at a Red Light run ticket from one of our drivers. I gurantee I have seen more of these tickets than you.
<div class='NTForums_Quote'>
Red light cameras I have factual evidence for. They cause people to slam on their brakes which people behind are not prepared for. Essentially, cameras exacerbate the real problem: Distracted and improperly trained drivers. Paradoxically though, there is evidence to support an increase in T-bone accidents. Perhaps this is because people no longer fear entering an intersection once their light goes green and forget their <b>duty</b> to check for red light runners. </div>
Dude you need to get a new non bias reference. This little piece came from your source.
<This report documents the safety impacts of those cameras based on 7 years of crash data for the period January 1, 1998,
through December 31, 2004. Consistent with the findings of a previous Virginia study (Garber et al., 2005), this study finds that
cameras are associated with an increase in rear-end crashes (about 27% or 42% depending on the statistical method used as shown in
Tables ES1 and H1) and a decrease in red light running crashes (about 8% or 42% depending on the statistical method used as
shown in Tables ES1 and H2). This report also shows that there is significant variation by intersection and by jurisdiction: one
jurisdiction (Arlington) suggests that cameras are associated with an increase in all six crash types that were explicitly studied (rearend,
angle, red light running, injury red light running, total injury, and total) whereas two other jurisdictions saw decreases in most
of these crash types.>
This report done in Virginia shows a much wider result than what you have supplied. In some cases worse, some cases better, and in some it changed.
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/16/1688.asp
Taken from the front page of your source:
This is a journal covering motoring issues around the world from a political perspective.
Not what most researches would consider a viable source. Political perspective is a big no no when it comes to quantitative and qualitative research.
I do not feel the photo radar, red light cameras, or man in the vans, are an infringment of my rights. If I am driving stupid I deserve to get a ticket.
Unlike you I have a CDL which means I can no longer go to traffic school even if I get a ticket in my personal vehicle. This was a recent change in the state of Arizona- is that an infrigemnt on my rights too?
| |
"The jouney of life is as much in oneself' as the roads one travels"
| |
|
| | anewman
Posts:670
| | 10/08/2007 6:08 PM |
Alert | <div class='NTForums_Quote'>Posted By Jason on 10/08/2007 5:43 PM
<div class='NTForums_Quote'>Um 1984 passed. So did Y2K. How do you go from speed enforcement to listening devices? Pretty big leap there.</div>
Ummm...where have you been? DPS wants to use these cameras for spying.
<div class='NTForums_Quote'>I have not seen any stats on this. It would be interesting the see the proposal and the cities revenue return from this. </div>
Redflex takes between $40 and $60 per ticket. The rest is left for the court system, traffic survival school and approximately 20-30% (IIRC) goes to the city.</div>
No revenue huh?
From YOUR SOURCE: Oh and it is local!!
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/18/1815.asp
Arizona Takes Over Scottsdale Freeway Speed Cameras
The state of Arizona takes the first step in its plan to deploy freeway speed cameras statewide by taking over the Scottsdale program.
The city of Scottsdale, Arizona will vote today to hand over its freeway speed camera system to the state and finalize a switch in the private company that actually operates the system. The move is part of a plan by Governor Janet Napolitano (D) to install speed cameras on every major freeway in Arizona. Napolitano last week thwarted a last-minute attempt by the state House of Representatives to block the massive ticketing expansion through a budget amendment.
The Loop 101 cameras have generated millions in revenue this year alone. As of last month, the system issued 32,236 tickets worth a minimum of $5,222,232 in 2007. By the end of June, officials expect that figure to top $7.5 million. To ensure no interruption in ticketing, the state police will transition into nominal authority over the program between July and December this year by using Scottsdale's vendor contract and holding trials in the city court system. In return, Scottsdale will be allowed to keep all of the profit. As the vendor does all the work, the state's takeover is more of a formality dealing with the handover of paperwork, permits and responsibility for some of the court operations.
Today's vote comes as a blow to Australian camera vendor Redflex, which had operated the Loop 101 ticket system since February 2006. When contract renewal became an option, Scottsdale decided to switch to ATS, even though the costs charged will be essentially the same. ATS will install new cameras and pocket $47.48 for every ticket it is able to issue, in addition to a $16,566 monthly fee for the set of six cameras. The per-ticket bounty increases to $52.23 if the number of citations issued drops due to HOV lane construction set to begin in September.
A study of the effects of the first 110,962 tickets issued in 2006 -- worth $17 million -- documented a 54 percent increase in rear-end collisions and a 9 percent increase in injuries from rear-end collisions. These collisions happened as motorists nearing the cameras panicked and braked suddenly to avoid receiving a citation. They were then struck from behind by surprised motorists who had been following closely.
The full text of the city's contract with ATS and notes on its agreement with the state is available in a large 11mb PDF file from the city of Scottsdale here.
OOPS!!
Go ahead and point out the 54% increase in rear end collisions.
This goes away as people become aware of the cameras. How many rear ends occured in that zone before the cmaeras? Umm not many!!
Oh yeah and did you read the part where Redflex got the boot?
The camera system will supply Maricopa with a couple more jobs. Some one has to deal with all the complaints and all the tickets.
Anyone else think Maricopa could benefit from a few million dollars??
| |
"The jouney of life is as much in oneself' as the roads one travels"
| |
|
| | Jason
Posts:3378
| | 10/08/2007 6:23 PM |
Alert | You don't feel that it violates your rights? Did you even read the link I provided?
As far as the sources, you need to read a little closer. The website is not the source, it is what they link to that is. I'm also not referring to the vans that they use, but the cameras, which issue snitch notices. <i>You do not receive a ticket until a process server delivers one.</i>
<div class='NTForums_Quote'>This goes away as people become aware of the cameras.</div>
Where's your data for that huh? You're going to accuse me of using a biased source (how can you say that if you're not even going to read the linked articles and studies?) and then spout this off? | |
Joined: Jul 2005 | |
|
| | Jason
Posts:3378
| | 10/08/2007 6:27 PM |
Alert | A Long Term Study of Red Light Cameras and Accidents (Australian Road Research Board, 2/1/1995)
Article Excerpt:
The results of this study suggest that the installation of the RLC at these sites did not provide any reduction in accidents, rather there has been increases in rear end and adjacent approaches accidents on a before and after basis and also by comparison with the changes in accidents at intersection signals.
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/00/6.asp | |
Joined: Jul 2005 | |
|
| | Jason
Posts:3378
| | 10/08/2007 6:28 PM |
Alert | No revenue huh?
I never said that. Even your quote of me shows that. Please, read better.  | |
Joined: Jul 2005 | |
|
| | maricopacabana
Posts:348
| | 10/08/2007 7:29 PM |
Alert | | At this point regarding camera use here, the plan is a sworn officer will revue photo's before tickets are issues. As far as Innocent people being snapped, that's a way of life. This happens without using cameras already. The police cite you, you have your day in court and are either found guilty or not guilty. The system works well for that. | | | |
|
| | caveman
Posts:1231
| | 10/08/2007 7:35 PM |
Alert | <div class='NTForums_Quote'>Posted By anewman on 10/08/2007 5:21 PM
ying to get you. I think if you are posting on this thread they probably could have found you by now! <img src='http://www.85239.com/desktopmodules/ntforums/images/emoticons/whistling.gif' height='20' width='20' title='Whistling' align='absmiddle'> </div>
Its not the government I worry about it is people like you that try to force their will on others.
| | | |
|
| | caveman
Posts:1231
| | 10/08/2007 7:36 PM |
Alert | <div class='NTForums_Quote'>Posted By maricopacabana on 10/08/2007 7:29 PM
At this point regarding camera use here, the plan is a sworn officer will revue photo's before tickets are issues. As far as Innocent people being snapped, that's a way of life. This happens without using cameras already. The police cite you, you have your day in court and are either found guilty or not guilty. The system works well for that.</div>
The point is not that there are innocent people being snapped here and there but the sheer number of people being ticketed that should not. With the scare tactics that come from these companies I wonder how many people paid when they were completely innocent.
| | | |
|
| | Jason
Posts:3378
| | 10/08/2007 8:23 PM |
Alert | | I'm saying that they need to put more officers on the road to catch worse driving offenses that happen with alarming regularity. I see people weaving, driving recklessly, running right on red, running stop signs, aggressive driving, and more. Red light cameras do not handle these situations. They become a revenue stream for the camera company, the traffic school company and lastly, the government. | |
Joined: Jul 2005 | |
|
| | anewman
Posts:670
| | 10/08/2007 9:12 PM |
Alert | <div class='NTForums_Quote'>Posted By caveman on 10/08/2007 7:35 PM
<div class='NTForums_Quote'>Posted By anewman on 10/08/2007 5:21 PM
ying to get you. I think if you are posting on this thread they probably could have found you by now! <img src='http://www.85239.com/desktopmodules/ntforums/images/emoticons/whistling.gif' height='20' width='20' title='Whistling' align='absmiddle'> </div>
Its not the government I worry about it is people like you that try to force their will on others.
</div>
Caveman-
I am not imposing my will on anyone- never do. Started out by saying I do not have the same concerns as you and Jason. I didn't bring this up just stated my opinions.
Yours are different thats fine. If the cameras come or not - I don't really care-it is not going to affect the way I drive.
<img src='http://www.85239.com/desktopmodules/ntforums/images/emoticons/cool.gif' height='20' width='20' border='0' title='Cool' align='absmiddle'> | |
"The jouney of life is as much in oneself' as the roads one travels"
| |
|
| | Jason
Posts:3378
| | 10/08/2007 9:46 PM |
Alert | | That's the thing, it won't affect the way I drive either. | |
Joined: Jul 2005 | |
|
| | Rabbit
Posts:250
| | 10/09/2007 9:04 AM |
Alert | quote]Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
not that being able to drive without having your picture taken is an essential liberty...but still. its all baby steps toward...something.
slightly off topic, but, how many of you let them look in your bag when you leave best buy and places like that? let them check your reciept, etc? most people dont even question it...and just hand it over to have their stuff searched...why?
its similiar with cameras. take your picture in your car, pretty soon theyre taking pictures while youre doing other things...etc.
*shrug* | |
"Sometimes I think you have to march right in and demand your rights, even if you don't know what your rights are, or who the person is you're talking to. Then on the way out, slam the door." | |
|
| | Jason
Posts:3378
| | 10/09/2007 9:38 AM |
Alert | | It's no wonder people have no problem with this abuse of their rights. They've already been abused so much, they don't recognize the difference any more. | |
Joined: Jul 2005 | |
|
| |
| | You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
| |
ActiveForums 3.6 |
|
|
|