Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Public and Critics Banned from MaCo Speed Camera Meeting

page: 1
2

log in

join

posted on Dec, 6 2013 @ 08:16 AM
link   
There is nothing that burns me up more than scameras. Red, speeding, doesn't matter. They are unconstitutional. And my state can't put them up fast enough.



The public, including a member of the Maryland Drivers Alliance, was banned from attending a speed camera symposium in Bowie Maryland today.

The event, which we had discussed in a previous posting, was sponsored by The Maryland Association of Counties(MaCo) and the Maryland Municipal League (MML), both of which are funded in large part by taxpayer dollars. The heads of the speed camera programs for Montgomery and Prince George's County, Captain Tom Didone and Major Liberati, were leading the event. AAA also co-sponsored the event.


MDDriversAlliance

So a meeting about camera laws, updates, and best practices, did not allow the public to attend the event.




"Capt. Didone called me back and informed me that I was denied permission to attend tomorrow's meeting in Bowie." wrote Simmers "He mentioned that he especially didn't want anyone from our group to attend since Ron is so anti-speed camera.


Who isn't anti-speed camera?

Could it be that it breaks Constitutional laws because you are refused the right to face your accuser? And you are not granted due process? There is no way to contest the accuracy of the camera?

And considering that cameras are failing left in right in the scamera state, people should be up in arms.

Is it even legal that proceeds from the fines received go to pay the contractor???




WASHINGTON - In Montgomery County, 40 percent of each $40 speed camera ticket goes to the camera vendor.


linky

Xerox has received $4 million dollars in fees from ticket revenue received by the State Highway Administration.




posted on Dec, 6 2013 @ 09:48 AM
link   
reply to post by nixie_nox
 


The people in your city are allowed to vote on whether to have them up or not. The vote (when your people order them down) is constitutional. Being denied the right to vote on that issue is unconstitutional.

Hey Congress and Pres, or State Legislatures and Governors. Can we get a nationwide ban on these cameras? Seriously, the "DON'T SPEEDCAM ME BRO! ACT of 2014" Yes? No?
edit on 6-12-2013 by Nephalim because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2013 @ 10:05 AM
link   
I personally have mixed feelings on this, but not in how it's being used right now. How it's being used now is outright wrong and an automated cash machine for the cities and private contractors running the various systems.

Having said that for current use? I don't mind the idea of automated traffic enforcement within some context. It's gotten absurd for use now in the red light application (they cause rear end accidents, IMO, they don't significantly improve driving outside THOSE specific intersections, otherwise), but I liked them on the open interstate where some dipstick drivers seemed to think they could just make it the autobahn if we wouldn't be nice enough to legally declare it one. Unfortunately, over years of trucking, I also saw more than one idiot fly by and then literally see the outcome of the wreck they caused down the road. Just a couple times for the cause and effect directly like that...but it sticks too.

I think they should DROP the $$ fine entirely, make the point penalty matter and leave it right there. Exactly the opposite of how the systems began (Pay $$ but no points, is how it was sold to people around here). Make it about enforcement so people stop driving like Mr Toad's Wild Ride OR...Driving Ms Daisy, which is equally bad...and I'm all for it.

The money doesn't need to even be a part of it, if it's about the right thing.



posted on Dec, 6 2013 @ 03:06 PM
link   

Wrabbit2000
I personally have mixed feelings on this, but not in how it's being used right now. How it's being used now is outright wrong and an automated cash machine for the cities and private contractors running the various systems.

Having said that for current use? I don't mind the idea of automated traffic enforcement within some context. It's gotten absurd for use now in the red light application (they cause rear end accidents, IMO, they don't significantly improve driving outside THOSE specific intersections, otherwise), but I liked them on the open interstate where some dipstick drivers seemed to think they could just make it the autobahn if we wouldn't be nice enough to legally declare it one. Unfortunately, over years of trucking, I also saw more than one idiot fly by and then literally see the outcome of the wreck they caused down the road. Just a couple times for the cause and effect directly like that...but it sticks too.

I think they should DROP the $$ fine entirely, make the point penalty matter and leave it right there. Exactly the opposite of how the systems began (Pay $$ but no points, is how it was sold to people around here). Make it about enforcement so people stop driving like Mr Toad's Wild Ride OR...Driving Ms Daisy, which is equally bad...and I'm all for it.

The money doesn't need to even be a part of it, if it's about the right thing.



Very interesting point wrabbit. About not making it about money but about penalties. You start messing with people's licenses which affect their careers and they will take it much more seriously.

But these have nothing to do with safety, as you said, they are just atm machines for local governments.

And you are right about the accidents:




Baltimore experienced a nearly 5 percent increase in traffic accidents from 2009 to 2012 — a four-year span during which the city rolled out and ramped up its network of now-idle speed cameras, according to state police.


Ba ltimore sun



posted on Dec, 6 2013 @ 03:08 PM
link   

Nephalim
reply to post by nixie_nox
 


The people in your city are allowed to vote on whether to have them up or not. The vote (when your people order them down) is constitutional. Being denied the right to vote on that issue is unconstitutional.

Hey Congress and Pres, or State Legislatures and Governors. Can we get a nationwide ban on these cameras? Seriously, the "DON'T SPEEDCAM ME BRO! ACT of 2014" Yes? No?
edit on 6-12-2013 by Nephalim because: (no reason given)


It is not just the city, they are used throughout the counties, and by the state. No one has voted on them. You think anyone would vote it in?

As I said, from stem to stern these things are unconstitutional.

I think someone here mentioned that their town in England managed to get them banned. I would like to know what it took.



posted on Dec, 6 2013 @ 10:45 PM
link   
reply to post by nixie_nox
 


Taking my post down, sorry- language.

I get heated about these cameras.
edit on 6-12-2013 by Nephalim because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2013 @ 11:55 AM
link   
reply to post by nixie_nox
 


If you don't want to get dinged by a speed camera, don't break the speed limit that has been set for your safety and the safety of those around you.

Its kinda simple really.



posted on Dec, 8 2013 @ 08:54 AM
link   
There are working alternatives in place already Nef and they actually encourage people to drive the speed limit.
edit on 8-12-2013 by Nephalim because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 8 2013 @ 10:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 





I think they should DROP the $$ fine entirely, make the point penalty matter and leave it right there.


Completely disagree with that. I don't believe my state has point penalties (and I don't agree with them to a certain extent). Also who would fund the things if there were no tickets? Everyone instead of just the speeders. I take issue with the things because I don't see them being a real deterrent and just a revenue maker, but popping someone who goes 10 miles an hour over the limit a few times shouldn't affect their ability to drive if conditions are safe. The only place I actually want/encourage speed cameras are around schools, and in the downtown areas where there are pedestrians. On the highway it's perfectly safe to cruise along at 80 in many places.

There is no discretion with speed cameras like there is with cops (don't be the annoying guy that tries to blast cops here reader). If a cop catches you doing 75 on a clear highway in fair weather he will probably let you go with a warning. If we allow speed cameras we might as well have our cars set to only go the highest MPH that's legal in the country. The majority of people getting those tickets aren't doing 120 or even 80. 75 MPH (which is a joke) and you get popped. It's like getting a public indecency charge for peeing in the freaking woods.

I think red light cameras should still be in place, but only used to fine if there is an actual accident. Otherwise I agree, they cause more collisions. People are so freaked out about getting a red light ticket they floor it and end up rear ending someone. I believe there are a number of studies showing this, or at least that the cameras don't reduce accident rates, only increase revenue.




edit on 0820131220131 by Domo1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 8 2013 @ 11:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Domo1
 



Completely disagree with that. I don't believe my state has point penalties (and I don't agree with them to a certain extent). Also who would fund the things if there were no tickets? Everyone instead of just the speeders. I take issue with the things because I don't see them being a real deterrent and just a revenue maker, but popping someone who goes 10 miles an hour over the limit a few times shouldn't affect their ability to drive if conditions are safe. The only place I actually want/encourage speed cameras are around schools, and in the downtown areas where there are pedestrians. On the highway it's perfectly safe to cruise along at 80 in many places.


Well then we don't completely disagree. We only disagree about degree and specific application of them. For the record...I think 80mph across I-70 in Indiana or Illinois is bordering on mental illness and menace to society. In Arizona or Texas, it's just getting from one place to another across nothingness. I think we could have fair debate at the community level about where they are needed and what settings.

As for who'd pay? How about taxes do something other than just fund even more ways to screw us or funding the studies which eventually will? Almost every public facing agency already charges user fees or whatever, while double dipping the back end of tax money to operate. For once, they can spend for the true public welfare without collection like it IS welfare in reverse.

Just my two carrots into the blender.
edit on 8-12-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 9 2013 @ 01:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Nephalim
 


To me - when I was a boy racer - that would have been a challenge to see how high I could get it to go.

Like them or not, camera enforcement reduces casualties.

Folks need to remember that limits are set for a reason based on road geometry, topography and the surrounding environment, and that it is a upper limit, not a base point to start off or a target.



posted on Dec, 9 2013 @ 02:34 PM
link   

neformore
reply to post by Nephalim
 


To me - when I was a boy racer - that would have been a challenge to see how high I could get it to go.

Like them or not, camera enforcement reduces casualties.

Folks need to remember that limits are set for a reason based on road geometry, topography and the surrounding environment, and that it is a upper limit, not a base point to start off or a target.



It doesn't make sense in my mind to put cam lights all over the city when the city speed limit is basically 20-35-40 (35 in all residential areas) already... everywhere you go. and stop lights functioning just fine as they are. People don't need CAMS on top of that. Why would I seriously think recording someones license plate is going to make them drive safer...lol . What stopped you btw? Nothing stops that sort of behavior on the road like a good cop sitting right there and proper speed regs.

I should mention that Ive never had a speeding ticket in my life. Not one and I drive four and eight teen wheelers and Ive lived in the same city since birth. Furthermore, I don't wanna hear from city employees who want a raise at tax payers expense, I don't wanna hear from people who support tracking people like animals Nef. I dont wanna hear from the people backed by bankers who make loans to these cities that get stuck paying for this crap for decades. Or people who spent/borrowed over their budget and need to cover their butts in this sorry manner. These people have no room to talk about someone going 5mph over the SL.

I DO wanna hear from the elderly on social security and single moms who on their way to buy their kid diapers or groceries may go a few over the SL or don't stop just before a white line and then get jacked with 150 dollar fine or several. Which I might add is some peoples electricity payment, or some college kids gas for the month. Anyones car insurance payment, their car payment. RENT not paid, causing homeless issues. A childs pair of glasses or dentist visit. Hmm? Some dad who's on his way to work, has 3 kids to feed and cant be a minute late or he gets fired. Cams don't fix messed up neglected roads either folks. You fix roads first. There are lots of reasons you don't do this cam crap to people, and not near enough to justify ignoring them when its the truth.

But you know, tell those people above they need cameras all over the roads, as if its not bad enough that there are cams in every store; in every house, every pocket and now on every street regulating every part of peoples lives. Someone has to draw the line somewhere man. I mean good god.
edit on 9-12-2013 by Nephalim because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join


Help ATS Recover with your Donation.
read more: Help ATS Recover With Your Contribution