| Posted: Wed Jul 7th, 2010 07:00 pm |
|
1st Post |
SometimesRational
Member
| Joined: | Thu Sep 18th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 208 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
back to top
|
DBuell wrote: We need more police officers, not cameras!
I follow the speed limit and all laws. I've seen people gripe about the cameras and say it's about privacy or protecting law enforcement jobs...blah blah blah. What they really oppose is the fact that they now have to obey the speed limits.
Personally, if I were to speed, I would much rather a camera snap my picture, and send me a ticket in the mail. If I want I can go to court and protest it just like any other citation.
I don't want a police officer to turn on the lights and siren, risking the safety of other drivers, make me pull off of the freeway, all while everyone watches. Then, make me sit there for half an hour while he runs a check on my license and writes me a citation. If I am speeding...I'm obviously in too big of a hurry to want to sit there that long.
Privacy issue: There are ADOT cameras all over the place that record 24/7 and broadcast on the internet.
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12th, 2010 05:49 am |
|
2nd Post |
DBuell
Member
| Joined: | Thu Nov 26th, 2009 |
| Location: | AJ, USA |
| Posts: | 593 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
back to top
|
No Report Needed wrote: You are blind to the benefits of speed cameras but enforcement spports their use! Go figure!
Only some support their use. I've met several officers who have no problem blowing right through your civil and due process rights by any means necessary. Most are opposed to the cameras because they know they cannot be replaced.
The negatves of cameras does not get outweighed by any positives.
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12th, 2010 04:34 am |
|
3rd Post |
No Report Needed
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jan 29th, 2010 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 481 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
back to top
|
You are blind to the benefits of speed cameras but enforcement spports their use! Go figure!
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12th, 2010 03:50 am |
|
4th Post |
DBuell
Member
| Joined: | Thu Nov 26th, 2009 |
| Location: | AJ, USA |
| Posts: | 593 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
back to top
|
No Report Needed wrote: People see though your spam! Sad!
People ready to give away their rights for some so called safety, really sad.
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12th, 2010 03:45 am |
|
5th Post |
| Posted: Mon Apr 12th, 2010 03:35 am |
|
6th Post |
DBuell
Member
| Joined: | Thu Nov 26th, 2009 |
| Location: | AJ, USA |
| Posts: | 593 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
back to top
|
Say What wrote: More spam from someone who has many tickets or just wants to speed!
I have no tickets and I don't speed. Haven't had a ticket in more than 30 years.
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12th, 2010 02:30 am |
|
7th Post |
Say What
Member
| Joined: | Sat Mar 14th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 610 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
back to top
|
More spam from someone who has many tickets or just wants to speed!
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 11th, 2010 04:03 am |
|
8th Post |
DBuell
Member
| Joined: | Thu Nov 26th, 2009 |
| Location: | AJ, USA |
| Posts: | 593 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
back to top
|
All one has to do is read the bill. Why are out of state drivers and politicians and government employees exempt if this is about safety? Really?
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 11th, 2010 02:03 am |
|
9th Post |
| Posted: Sat Apr 10th, 2010 07:06 am |
|
10th Post |
DBuell
Member
| Joined: | Thu Nov 26th, 2009 |
| Location: | AJ, USA |
| Posts: | 593 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
back to top
|
Say What wrote: And you are the expert? Bull!
I don't need to be. I can only point out the facts and try to get people aware, but I cannot fix stupid.
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 10th, 2010 04:10 am |
|
11th Post |
Say What
Member
| Joined: | Sat Mar 14th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 610 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
back to top
|
And you are the expert? Bull!
|
DBuell
Member
| Joined: | Thu Nov 26th, 2009 |
| Location: | AJ, USA |
| Posts: | 593 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
back to top
|
No Report Needed wrote: Cameras slow traffic and saves lives!
Crapola. Cameras do nothing of the kind and repeating this lie over and over will not make it true. The Cameras on our highways have caused an increase in collisions of about 17%.
Even if it were true, it is still a poor excuse for selling your rights away.
|
No Report Needed
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jan 29th, 2010 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 481 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
back to top
|
Cameras slow traffic and saves lives!
|
DBuell
Member
| Joined: | Thu Nov 26th, 2009 |
| Location: | AJ, USA |
| Posts: | 593 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
back to top
|
Redflex the main supplier of photo enforcement cameras in Arizona is an Australian for profit company. They are the ones watching us, recording our every move, gathering data about us. Their goal is to produce profit. They will do this any way they can...lobby our representatives, prey upon our desire to have safe roads and lie. Yes this is the same company that testified to our state government that it was only taking photos of violators. At the same time it was boasting on its web site that it was in fact taking streaming video of every driver. Redflex was advertising that for a price it could easily trace a person's whereabouts via it's photo recognition software (license plates & they have our photos and other personal information from our drivers license and vehicle registration) and of course a large data base. With this information out in the public, the legislature changed their tune and most Arizona citizens who thought maybe there is some good in cameras realized that just how much personal privacy and freedom were at stake. The salt in the wound is that this is at the hands of a private foreign company.
How it works if you haven't read the newspaper in a couple years...is that Redflex has a few low paying employees that sit at a computer and review the photos or videos, they enlarge or enhance them to compare to our drivers license photos, then send us something that looks like a ticket. If we pay the invoice to that for profit private Australian company then the governments cut is forwarded to the respective town or state.
When the cameras first came out they were at red lights, when profits at red lights dwindled it was common to see yellow lights shortened. When drivers realized the quick yellow and revenues declined the company said let's get them accelerating to clear the intersection, we will do speed too which will give us two chances to generate revenue. Since speed was generating so much revenue next they came out with speed cameras everywhere. When interstates were backed-up and moving less than the speed limit, the camera revenue declined and of course the next progression to sell the surveillance information. When that became public (January 22, 2009) most people realized that our government had hung it's hat on a very unethical company. Our government had not considered the cost of freedom or had they evaluated if there is any net safety gain because this bill was slipped into the State Budget by former governor Janet. - That's where we are today riding out the end of those contracts....except Redflex will not go away quietly.... they will once again dangle some money in front of our government and prey upon our desire for safety.
or as Reflex ( http://www.redflex.com/ ) states to their stockholders:
The program has experienced many unforeseen issues related to the legislation that governs
the operation of the program; proposed legislative revisions underway to resolve many of
the current issues. Once corrective legislation is passed payment rates are expected to rise
to the average historical payments rates typical for the Arizona business model.
In spite of the negative publicity given to the program by the vocal minority, opinion polls
show strong support for the safety and economic benefits of photo enforcement in Arizona.
The Arizona state‐wide program is up for a term extension in July, 2010. Redflex is working
aggressively to secure an extension of the agreement. These efforts, as well as our push to
reform the laws governing traffic enforcement with the Arizona Legislature and with the
Arizona Supreme Court makes 2010 a critical year for our Company in Arizona.
I don't like my personal freedom referred to as a "business model" or this private foreign company pushing to reform or correct our state laws....I didn't even know that private companies lobbied the Arizona Supreme Court....all this just doesn't sit well with me. I thought our government was supposed to be "For the people..by the people", I thought for the people was for the people of Arizona, me, my neighbors, not for private foreign companies.
Check out the February report to Stockholders on the Redflex website:
82% of their business is in the US
RISK REDUCTION STRATEGIES
Several initiatives to improve collection rates, particularly in Arizona
Automation projects to streamline processes and reduce direct costs
New technologies being developed to reduce system capital costs
– Reduce both installation and overall system costs
– improved ability/viability to relocate equipment
Litigation threats are managed aggressively as they arise
Legislative issues are dealt with through broad efforts directly, through lobbyists, and with
campaigns directed at the public
Developing alternative uses for current technology in less contentious areas
Leveraging current customers to provide new products and services
ARIZONA STATEWIDE PROGRAM
The Arizona state wide program continues to have a positive impact on public safety and
accident reduction. In the first year of the program, the State of Arizona experienced:
– 17.6% (2940) fewer property damage collisions
– 18.5% (1189) fewer injury collisions
– 19.2% (43) fewer fatal collisions (24 fewer lives lost)
The program has experienced many unforeseen issues related to the legislation that governs
the operation of the program; proposed legislative revisions underway to resolve many of
the current issues. Once corrective legislation is passed payment rates are expected to rise
to the average historical payments rates typical for the Arizona business model.
In spite of the negative publicity given to the program by the vocal minority, opinion polls
show strong support for the safety and economic benefits of photo enforcement in Arizona.
The Arizona state‐wide program is up for a term extension in July, 2010. Redflex is working
aggressively to secure an extension of the agreement. These efforts, as well as our push to
reform the laws governing traffic enforcement with the Arizona Legislature and with the
Arizona Supreme Court makes 2010 a critical year for our Company in Arizona.
REDFLEX TRAFFIC SYSTEMS, INC.– GROWTH INITIATIVES
REDFLEXspeed Tow and Go™ mobile (a towable trailer) launched in October 2009
– This onsite unattended vehicle offers the combination of remote security surveillance
capabilities (video, intrusion detection, GPS tracking) with the proven mobile photo
enforcement system in a highly secure and flexible package
– The system is monitored throughout its deployment from a central monitoring location
– Equate to more efficient and effective speed enforcement
Implementation of a corporate‐wide quality initiative program
– Initial projects are focused on the areas of customer service, profitability and supply chain
management
– Focus is on Internal Controls and Transaction Processing Review
– A new Customer Service application began rollout to customers in July 2009, expected to
reduce call duration resulting in Redflex labour savings per citation in the Violator Call Center
of approximately 20%.
exert from January 22, 2009 East Valley Tribune
from: http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/134428 Speed cameras record streaming video 24/7 Howard Fischer, Capitol Media Services January 22, 2009 - 4:52PM , updated: January 22, 2009 - 5:32PM
Surprised state lawmakers learned Thursday that the photo enforcement cameras they authorized last year to catch speeders are actually taking - and keeping - videos of everyone who passes. The information came out as a House panel debated legislation to outlaw the operation of fixed and mobile cameras on state roads. Backers of the legislation complained that the cameras are really designed to generate revenue and not to improve public safety. But they learned that the cameras do more than snap still photos of those clocked driving at least 11 miles over the speed limit. In fact, they actually are recording streaming video around-the-clock. Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Gilbert, said what's worse is that Redflex Traffic Systems, the private company hired by the state to set up and operate the cameras, advertises that it has technology that actually can scan in the license plates of every vehicle that passes the cameras. And that, Biggs said, allows creation of a database that can find out where people have been at any given time. Biggs said there is no expectation of privacy on public roads. "But this is more invasive than ever experienced," he said. Foes of photo enforcement weren't the only ones who appeared troubled by the revelation. Rep. Eric Meyer, D-Paradise Valley, voted to keep the system alive, saying he believes it saves lives. But Meyer said lawmakers need to address the issue of whose photos are taken and kept by the government. "That absolutely concerns me," he said. Rep. Sam Crump, R-Anthem, said he crafted HB2106 because last year's legislation authorizing the Arizona Department of Public Safety to set up the cameras never got a full debate. Instead, it was tucked into the state budget, a move he said was designed more to raise money to pay for various programs than to actually benefit public safety. DPS Cmdr. Thomas Woodward said the evidence shows that when the cameras went up, both the number and severity of accidents went down. Crump said he doesn't believe that to be the case. But the discussion quickly turned after Woodward revealed that Redflex had actual around-the-clock videos from each of the fixed and mobile cameras. Biggs said that little bit of information has been kept from both lawmakers and the public. "At the bare minimum, everybody should be made privy to the fact that if you're driving on everybody's highways we're taping you, 24/7, and we're going to hold it for 90 days," he said.
Originally posted by forthegood on another thread! Thank you for this, forthegood! Someone with some common sense! Too many are willing to sell their rights for a bit of perceived safety, which is false. Not to mention, really dumb!
|
DBuell
Member
| Joined: | Thu Nov 26th, 2009 |
| Location: | AJ, USA |
| Posts: | 593 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
back to top
|
Vehicles with out of state plates are also exempt! Still think it's about law enforcement?
|
No Report Needed
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jan 29th, 2010 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 481 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
back to top
|
Cameras slow traffic and slower speeds save lives and fuel.
|
DBuell
Member
| Joined: | Thu Nov 26th, 2009 |
| Location: | AJ, USA |
| Posts: | 593 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
back to top
|
This is why the Photo Radar program needs to be shut down! One of many reasons.
This was on http://www.camerafraud.com and is taken from headlines from the local news in Louisiana!
GOTCHA!
March 23, 2010
Jefferson Parish’s red light camera program is snaring more than heavy-footed pedestrians – and the feds have the subpoenas to prove it.
By Jeremy Alford
It appears that the latest subpoenas issued in connection with the ongoing federal investigations in Jefferson Parish target all of the political positioning surrounding the embattled Redflex camera program. Coupled with the revelation that former New Orleans City Councilman James Bryan Wagner was positioned to benefit from commissions after lobbying for the contract in 2006, the subpoenas were enough to prompt the Parish Council to temporarily suspend the program.
Wagner, currently the president of Bryan Wagner Insurance, was the local guy on the ground for Redflex, while then-regional sales representative Jay Specter reportedly helped out with the heavy-lifting. His involvement may very well be the first red flag: just weeks after the Parish Council awarded the red light contract to Redflex, Specter was convicted in South Carolina for misusing $1.2 million in construction money.
Just as startling is the recent news that Redflex was allowed to provide its own data to help complete a parish study on the benefits of red light cameras. Now officials wonder if the integrity of the study was compromised. It wouldn’t be the first time Redflex found itself in such a mess. In December, the Arizona secretary of state blasted Redflex for falsifying speed camera certification documents.
(Do any of you naysayers get that? In December, the Arizona secretary of state blasted Redflex for falsifying speed camera certification documents!!!)
Wagner, who was set to receive 3.2 percent of Redflex’s share of fines (the $20 million collected thus far in escrow and no one is getting a piece of it right now), is a well known lobbyist among Parish Council members and he has also helped pad a few campaign war chests as a contributor.
According to finance records on file with the Louisiana Board of Ethics, Wagner donated $100 to Councilman John Young last year. Young, as it happens, is credited with pushing the Redflex deal past the finish line in this 2007 account from The Times-Picayune:
The idea to install cameras at 10 of Jefferson’s most accident-prone intersections became a mission for Councilman John Young, a former assistant district attorney who had specialized in traffic enforcement. He gained support from the Jefferson Parish Sheriff’s Office and the parish district attorney’s office for the plan shortly after Hurricane Katrina… the key to Redflex winning the Jefferson contract was a conversation Young had with Chief Deputy Newell Normand of the Sheriff’s Office, Young said.
Wagner also donated $250 to Councilwoman Cynthia Lee-Sheng last year, just about the same time that Julie Murphy, a longtime political consultant, gave her $250, too – and with that we have our next player.
In an effort to move the original deal along, Wagner brought in Murphy, wife of state District Judge Robert Murphy. In 2007, she told reporters that she met with Young and Lee-Sheng’s predecessor, Jennifer Sneed, to discuss the topic, as well as Councilmen Tom Capella and Byron Lee. A search of the Secretary of State’s corporate database shows Murphy is an officer of Bryan Wagner Insurance.
Wagner likewise brought in former Kenner administrator Charlotte Burnell, a consultant with Strategic Planning Associates. Burnell was the technical expert and her company is another donor that played the field in 2009. Strategic Planning Associates contributed $1,000 to Councilman Elton Lagasse in October and $250 to Lee-Sheng in February, according to campaign finance reports.
Fox 8 added the following to the Burnell file in February:
[Interim Parish President Steve] Theriot canceled a parish contract with Burnell [in January]. She was supposed to oversee a $3.5 million FEMA housing grant but Theriot said too much of the money was going to administrative costs and only a small portion was allotted for the actual homeowners.
As for other donor connections, there’s Charlie Buckels of Lafayette, another Redflex pitchman for the southeastern region. Buckels donated $150 last year to former Parish President Aaron Broussard – and here’s where the varying scandals in Jefferson Parish begin to overlap.
Broussard resigned in January practically alongside former Chief Administrative Officer Tim Whitmer. The feds are also interested in Whitmer’s business, Lagniappe Industries, which benefitted from insurance sold to parish contractors and public employees.
For his part, former Parish Attorney Tom Wilkinson, who resigned earlier this month, helped Whitmer negotiate the parish’s $160 million questionable contract with River Birch Landfill, a Lagniappe client and yet another area of interest for federal subpoenas. Then there’s CWC Gaming, which Wilkinson said he helped former Parish President Tim Coulon and Whitmer create for a revenue-sharing scheme involving video poker.
Broussard’s and Wilkinson’s roles in the Redflex deal, though, have only recently begun to surface. Broussard hired former part-time Parish Attorney Steve Mortillaro, better known as a Metairie justice of the peace from 1982 to 2006, to be a hearing officer for drivers with red light camera tickets. Wilkinson was Mortillaro’s supervisor and reportedly told Mortillaro that he didn’t need to come into the office to do his job.
Complicating matters further, Wilkinson classified Mortillaro on the parish payrolls as an employee of the parish health unit. That was enough for Theriot to terminate Mortillaro earlier this month.
According to an Aug. 20, 2005, story in The Times-Picayune, Mortillaro previously received a federal grand jury subpoena five years ago for “testimony and records of political donations and any other gifts” from Bail Bonds Unlimited. It was part of Operation Wrinkled Robe, a lengthy federal investigation into courthouse corruption that resulted in no criminal charges for Mortillaro.
Luckily, for everyone involved in the developing Redflex case, no criminal charges have been handed down for them, either – at least not yet.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And let's not even mention that our local politicians, judges and public servants do NOT have to comply with the laws they enact and set forth for us!
Interesting huh?? That they would make themselves EXEMPT!?!?
|
Say What
Member
| Joined: | Sat Mar 14th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 610 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
back to top
|
Officers cost lots of $$$s! Cameras slow traffic. Slower traffic saves lives and $$$$$$s.
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 21st, 2010 03:30 pm |
|
19th Post |
| Posted: Sat Mar 20th, 2010 03:27 pm |
|
20th Post |
DBuell
Member
| Joined: | Thu Nov 26th, 2009 |
| Location: | AJ, USA |
| Posts: | 593 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
back to top
|
Legislators Expanding Photo Enforcement Program!
I give a special thanks to REBECCA RIOS in my district, LD23 for being so eager to undo and usurp my rights! Click on the link at the bottom of this page and then go to the "Bills" tab on the AZ website to scroll to SB1443 and read it for your self! If you value your rights, don't just sit there!
SB 1443 - Your Worst Nightmare
Senator Gray introduced the legislation claiming it would "reform" the photo enforcement program; the measure was in fact drafted by Redflex Traffic Systems.
"We appreciate Senator Gray for working with us," Redflex lobbyist Mike Williams said. "We've worked with legislators for the past three years
What the Bill Does:
1. Expands photo enforcement to include identifying violations related to:
a) certificates of title and registration and
b) vehicle insurance and financial responsibility.
2. Prohibits MVD from assessing points on a person’s license for a photo enforcement violation only if the person responds within 30 days after the first form of notification is issued.
3. Stipulates that this section does not restrict MVD from refusing to renew a vehicle’s registration if the owner is delinquent in paying a fine for a traffic violation or fails to appear in a criminal traffic case.
4. Extends the time limit for filing a civil traffic violation case that is detected by the state photo enforcement system from the current 60 days to 120 days after the alleged violation.
5. Removes the requirement that the photo enforcement system must record images of a vehicle’s license plate.
6. Allows a duly authorized agent or someone paid to act on behalf of a traffic enforcement agency to testify on behalf of the traffic enforcement agency at traffic hearings.
7. Specifies that a notice of violation and uniform traffic ticket and complaint resulting from a photo enforcement system are not required to be mailed with prepaid postage to the person charged with the violation.
Sponsored by:
Senator Linda Gray and cosponsored by: Senator Rios, Representatives Barto, Stevens, Farley, Antenori, and Reagan are working with Redflex to expand photo enforcement.
Take Action
These legislators seem to think representation means repression. Let them know that this is not acceptable. Forward this e-mail on to others and encourage them to sign up at meetup so we can create an extensive e-mail network.
Ms. Linda Gray District 10
lgray@azleg.gov
Phone Number: (602) 926-3376
Fax Number: (602) 417-3253
Ms. Michele Reagan
mreagan@azleg.gov
Phone Number: (602) 926-5828
Fax Number: (602) 417-3008
Ms. Nancy Barto District 7
nbarto@azleg.gov
Phone Number: (602) 926-5766
Fax Number: (602) 417-3011
Ms. Rebecca Rios District 23
rrios@azleg.gov
Phone Number: (602) 926-5685
Fax Number: (602) 417-3167
Mr. David Stevens District 25
dstevens@azleg.gov
Phone Number: (602) 926-4321
Fax Number: (602) 417-3146
Mr. Frank Antenori District 30
fantenori@azleg.gov
Phone Number: (602) 926-5683
Fax Number: (602) 417-3147
Mr. Steve Farley District 28
sfarley@azleg.gov
Phone Number: (602) 926-3022
Fax Number: (602) 417-3128
See bill here:
http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1443o.asp
These legislators seem to think representation means repression!
|
|
