SPEED CAMERAS

[mikeholzer]

Andy makes a good point. West of me there is a large chain of lakes referred to as "Lake Minnetonka." It is surrounded by a number of small communities which, up until about 40 years ago, were considered merely vacation destinations. As most of these small towns lack law enforcement beyond the local County Sherrif's Department, they decided a number of years ago to form The South Lake Minnetonka Police Department (SLMPD).

Interestingly, this "Police Department" is entirely self sufficient as they generate a great enough income from traffic violations to cover the costs of Officer's wages, equipment, and administrative costs. The primary reason that law enforcement pursues traffic violations is that it is a steady form of income, and similarly to any other type of "business," Police depatrments need to show some degree of progressive growth annually in order to show that they matter. For that reason (I believe), you will continue to see new and more offensive forms of policing which doesn't include actual community involvement by law enforcement officers.

SLMPD's brand new pad...





Perhaps IT personnel are cheaper by comparison...?

[Arnie]

Now here's an AMAZING twist in this story....

NSW (Australia) is REMOVING 38 of their 141 speed cameras claiming they are not helping safety !!

Read all about it here:
  http://au.news.yahoo.com/nsw/latest/a/-/article/9922051/quarter-of-speed-cameras-turned-off/

Cheers,
Arnie

[Klavdy]

And abolishing the RTA!
Yay!
However,Victoria is assured by their State Govt that all is in order, the safety cameras are correct.

[waricle]

A sorry speed camera story
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Einfeld

[Arnie]

Marcus Einfeld got exactly what he deserved.  The only thing sorry about the whole event is that he was stupid enough to try and get out of a minor traffic infringement by committing perjury.  Not what you'd expect from a high ranking judge.

Arnie

A sorry speed camera story
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Einfeld

[Klavdy]

Here's another scumbag,

Richard Retting Cashes in on Lifetime of Traffic Camera Advocacy
Father of the red light camera in America converts advocacy into personal revenue.

Richard RettingThe one man most responsible for the spread of red light cameras in the United States is now enjoying the fruit of his labor. Richard A. Retting was New York City's deputy assistant commissioner for traffic safety programs as the Big Apple considered becoming the first in the US to operate intersection cameras. Planning for the program began in 1983 and continued through 1991 when then-Mayor David Dinkins activated the system. For this achievement, Retting was dubbed the father of the red light camera in America, and today he is earning money directly from the systems that have followed New York's lead.

Brekford Corporation is a Maryland-based firm that sells police car equipment, including video and surveillance systems. In December, the company decided to take on market leaders American Traffic Solutions and Redflex Traffic Systems of Australia in offering red light cameras and speed cameras to this existing client base. Brekford hired Retting to be a partner focusing on the automated ticketing business line.

"Brekford's automated photo enforcement program was implemented during December 2010, and the company is starting to see a fresh stream of revenues from this newly introduced program," CEO C.B. Brechin said in a February statement. "Brekford has been awarded automatic traffic enforcement contracts by several municipalities during the past several months and the implementation of these contracts we anticipate will bring added revenues and profitability to the company beginning this quarter."

So far, the company has so far lined up contracts with five Maryland towns: Fairmount Heights, Landover Hills, Laurel, Morningside and Salisbury. Revenues from the photo enforcement division grew from $100,000 in the start-up year to an expected $8 million by the end of this year. For 2012, the company forecasts $15 million as it lines up contracts in other East Coast states. If the firm is successful, Retting can expect to be well compensated.

That is the reward for Retting's eighteen years spent advocating red light camera and speed cameras for the insurance industry's lobbying arm, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). To this day, reference is made to Retting's 1999 IIHS study on the effectiveness of red light cameras in Oxnard, California -- the first study of its kind in this country (view study, 1mb PDF). This work and a follow-up study in 2001 was criticized by a 2001 congressional report and an independent analysis appearing in a peer-reviewed journal in 2008 (read analysis). Retting's conclusions and comments on the topic have since appeared in thousands of news articles and influenced every city that has a program.

In a November article for the Institute of Transportation Engineers journal, Retting provided his lessons learned from the use of photo enforcement over the past two decades. Out of thirty-two footnotes, Retting cited himself ten times, highlighting his central role in the debate. Retting also works at Sam Schwartz Engineering, a consulting firm, where he offered the following advice to cities with red light camera programs: "Appearance of a revenue motive negatively affects public attitudes toward automated traffic enforcement."

[Arnie]

Retting seems to have an obvious "conflict of interest" if he's still in a position to influence the purchase and installation of these automated revenue systems.

I find it very difficult to get worked up over the Red Light cameras.  In fact, I think they are a "good thing".  Every so often when I get to an intersection with the light just changing, and I go through - its very scary to look in the mirror and see 2 more cars come through.

Before I stop hard at a changing light, I look in the mirror.  I really don't want to be a hood ornament.

Cheers,
Arnie

[NJona86FJ]

    for the record.... 139 km/h in a 90 zone will get you a 710 dollar fine....

[grannyknot]

In Ontario, 50kms over the speed limit will get you an immediate roadside 7 day licence suspension, 7 day car impound and a $2,000 fine at the officers discretion.(No innocent until proven guilty) You also receive a summons for a court date and a possible $8,000 fine in addition.
Talk about revenue generation!

[ddlewis]

Retting seems to have an obvious "conflict of interest" if he's still in a position to influence the purchase and installation of these automated revenue systems.

I find it very difficult to get worked up over the Red Light cameras.  In fact, I think they are a "good thing".  Every so often when I get to an intersection with the light just changing, and I go through - its very scary to look in the mirror and see 2 more cars come through.

Before I stop hard at a changing light, I look in the mirror.  I really don't want to be a hood ornament.

Cheers,
Arnie

Red light cameras don't bother me nearly as bad as speed limit cameras.  Red lights are cut and dry - if the light is red you damn well better stop..  Speed limits are arbitrary and vary between locals.  A 55 in one town might be a 40 in the next.  If you miss the signage you could get nailed.  Also there's potential easy revenue source with camera enforced speed traps.  And with pricks like this Retting character out there you know that it's happening.

Of course red light cameras are probably just the gateway drug for the speed limit cams.

[craigo]

banned commercial the new kawasaki ninja

What speed cameras can cause innocent people....

CraigO