Astroturfing For Speed Cameras 342
New submitter dalosla writes "Chicago's mayor is pushing to change red light cameras near schools and parks into speed cameras. Just about everybody sees it as a cash grab by the city. Today's Chicago Tribune has an article about how the expanded speed camera program would benefit Redflex, the company Greg Goldner, one of the mayor's long time political supporters, lobbies for. This is of merely local interest, but of wider interest in the article would be information about Goldner's astroturfing for Redflex around the country. Redflex is the sole financial supporter for the Traffic Safety Coalition, a 'grassroots' organization to promote more traffic camera usage and fight any attempts to restrict such cameras. Goldner has already successfully facilitated the killing of one anti-camera ballot measure in Texas."
Think of the children! (Score:5, Insightful)
The West can fight this very, very easily... (Score:5, Insightful)
... or, really, anywhere with a ballot initiative process.
Citizens should push for ballot initiatives that require that all money collected for traffic and parking offenses goes back to the citizens as a tax credit. This should have broad popular support in most places.
Yeah, the police/DoT would have to raise taxes to replace the lost revenue... but it would create a system where they have no fiscal incentive to engage in highway robbery, which is what traffic enforcement these days amounts to.
Re:Think of the children! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Don't speed. (Score:4, Insightful)
I like how you propose "don't speed" as a solution, while simultaneously saying you got a speeding ticket you didn't deserve.
So apparently "don't speed" isn't actually a valid defense.
Re:Think of the children! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The West can fight this very, very easily... (Score:4, Insightful)
You'd think this, but over in Europe, there's a few countries (at least the UK) that use the cash generated from speed and red light cameras that goes straight into the Treasury's coffers and used to try and plug any deficits to little avail. The knock on effect from this is that the police need to catch at least the same number of people or more to commit a traffic violation in order to keep the country's finances in check. This of course means quotas.
The end result? Government mandated highway robbery.
Re:How to disable these cameras for cheap (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:How to disable these cameras for cheap (Score:3, Insightful)
So what you're saying is that your friend is a vandal -- and too stupid to avoid admitting it to any random person who asks in a store much less avoid getting caught to begin with?
I'm not a big fan of red light cameras for a number of reasons, but damaging other peoples' property is not the right answer.
Re:City overpaying? (Score:1, Insightful)
A "rolling stop" is not a stop. It's running the red light, but in slow motion, and it's against the law.
When you have to accelerate from a dead stop to make the turn, you're more likely to check the crosswalks, rather than just look to see if you can make the turn before any oncoming traffic gets there.
the only speeders they will catch there are the ones trying to beat the short yellows that have been put in place to raise revenue.
You're assuming that the only reason to speed through an intersection is to beat the yellow. A driver could just be speeding because that's what they've been doing for the past dozen blocks.
Going thru the intersection at 5 over to beat the light does not cause accidents, because cross traffic is already stopped, pedestrians are not permitted to be crossing at that time.
Then once you leave the intersection, you're still speeding down the same road. Are drivers really going to hit their brakes after getting through the light, so they're driving legally again? Of course not. They'll coast back down to whatever speed they want to go, with no concern for pedestrian safety.
There is no point where speeding only a little or for a purpose is legal. There is no point where a rolling stop is legally equal to a full stop. Why should the cameras offer any leniency? Would you accept the same leniency in an elevator that came to a rolling stop at your floor?
Re:How to disable these cameras for cheap (Score:4, Insightful)
Or you could just not run red lights
Maybe the particular intersection is one where the length of the yellow light has been shortened? [slashdot.org]
Am I missing something? (Score:3, Insightful)
Speed cameras register speeding offenses, nothing else. Whether, and to what extent, that's met by fines is determined by local politics (which everyone of us has a say in).
I can understand people who get a ticket don't like the camera, but that can't be a reason not to install them, can it?
As I see it, all those posts that wax eloquent about beating short yellow are barking up the wrong tree. It's easy enough to set the cameras so that they only register serious speeding offenses. It's just a matter of getting local politics to set reasonable criteria.
The essence of the problem seems to be that people simply distrust their local government to set a reasonable policy for those cameras. And isn't that a far more serious problem than mere cameras?
Re:City overpaying? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Then they came for me (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes. Breaking the law is always reckless. Well said, comrade.
I once sat at a red light that refused to change for five hours before finally a police officer came and granted me permission to go across the otherwise empty intersection. And rather than go a perfectly safe 5MPH over the speed limit, I always drive 5MPH under the speed limit to make sure I don't ever, ever cross over. And I have my speedometer calibrated weekly. I also check to make sure my signals are working every time I get in the car. Sometimes, on trips lasting more than 5 minutes, I'll pull over into a parking lot and check my signals again.
Can you believe there are maniacs out there who don't do these things?!
Re:City overpaying? (Score:5, Insightful)
... or you could be rolling, because the intersection was designed properly and you can clearly see the crosswalks etc before even reaching the intersection.
This is a case of enforcing the letter of the law over the spirit of the law. It should be the other way around.
Re:Example in Italy, and a simple solution (Score:5, Insightful)
Nobody ever suggests this, but maybe just don't speed.
You've never driven in almost any downtown street where they've timed the lights to be green only if you're traveling 3-5 miles per hour over the speed limit. If you don't speed, you get stuck at almost every light. But the cops know this, because when they're not camping those streets, they're traveling at 3-5mph over the speed limit with the rest of the traffic.
Re:City overpaying? (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't forget the current President is also a Chicagoan, and he's obviously corrupt.
Conveniently he's a Chicagoan when discussing corrupt Chicago politics, a Washington insider (former Senator) when discussing national politics, and a secret Kenyan when discussing whether he should even be president. Welcome to "Newspin" on the Faux News Network.
Re:Don't speed. (Score:4, Insightful)
something that's supposed to be an informed estimation of the maximum safe rate of travel under ideal conditions (high visibility, dry pavement, etc.).
This is the part where you're several decades out of touch. As has been demonstrated in numerous jurisdictions with shortened yellow lights, arbitrarily reduced speed limits in areas with heavy enforcement are a well-known cash cow as well. Ever driven through a "safety corridor" with a 10mph lower limit than the surrounding freeways, even though it has the exact same road conditions and traffic levels? It's not about safety, it's about money. If it were about safety, ALL the highways would be lowered by 10mph. But then they wouldn't know where to put the speed traps. Incidentally, I do slow down for those corridors, despite all the cars whizzing past me. And despite your herp UR A SPEEDUR derp, I haven't been pulled over for speeding since 1991. Being against speed cameras doesn't make one a speeder, any more than being against the Patriot Act makes one a terrorist.