Dec 18th Demonstration Pictures
CameraFRAUD greeted hundreds of thousands of east-valley residents today during rush hour, once again drawing the attention of local media and law enforcement. Floods of constant honks, along with countless "thumbs ups" from drivers kept activists out past dark before packing up for the night.
(Special Thanks to Glyph for most of the photos in this gallery.)
KTVK-TV 3
Police, as well as Channel 3 and 10 (not pictured), sent their helicopters to cover the event
DPS officials keep a close eye from a nearby parking garage
Getting an eyeful
DPS assigned three units to cover this event
"End Photo Radar – CameraFRAUD.com"
Demonstrators wave to traffic below
This entry was posted on Thursday, December 18th, 2008 at 7:14 pm and is filed under News.	You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
73 Responses to Dec 18th Demonstration Pictures
http://www.azfamily.com/video/geaz-index.html?nvid=314672
video from channel 3
do u guys have proposition wrote yet? where do i sign to get it in the ballot?
will be done soon
lawyers LOL
J.W. says:
Holy Crap! Was that Ms. Teen South Carolina giving that report?? The only thing that was missing from that was "Boom goes the dynamite!" WOW, all that effort to have it ruined on air by an inept reported bumbling over her words.
Other than that you guys looked good. My wife and I were concidering going out there, but by the time she got home from work it would have been dark when we got out there. Keep up the great work!!
Cheryle says:
I agree with Jerry. I am an advocate of cameras. Since people refuse to drive the speed limit it IS necessary to put these up. IF I AM SO STUPID TO SPEED I DESERVE THE TICKET. Pure and simple, same with red lights and any other infraction. I believe we do not have enough police officers and since this is just another facet I wish they put them up all over the state. My husband had to drive to CA recently. He went south from Flag on I 17 hit the 101 and amazing, he said people were not speeding. He said it was pleasant. He did not get run over by speeding motorists and he enjoyed the drive as well as the drive back from San Diego. I find it is amazing people complain about the cameras. Why can't we take responsibility for our actions. Why do people think that if an officer isn't present then they didn't break the law. Take responsibility for your OWN actions, slow down, do the speed limit, don't run red lights. Everybody would be safer, and there would be NO need for cameras. It just takes one idiot to drive over the limit that causes pile ups.
what did she just say?
She said "I'm an idiot who slows everyone down in the passing lane and don't know why everyone is mad at me"
AZ ATTORNEY says:
Cheryle this has nothing to do with speeding vs not speeding. Grab a kitchen knife and try to scratch the surface of this issue a little deeper before coming to play with the big boys.
your ok with a foreign company recording every car driving in AZ?
Cheryle-
Have you read the contract between DPS and Redflex that was posted a couple of days ago? If not, please do so now, and take note of how many times the word "safety" is in it. (And no, the "S" in DPS doesn't count.) Heck, while you're at it, look for the words "citizen" and "protection" in the same sentence. Anything at all that remotely indicates their concern for the people they are supposed to be "protecting." I counted 0, but perhaps I'm just too stupid to remember it. After all, I've been caught speeding before. Maybe you'll have better luck.
Having made note of that number- whatever number it is- take a look at how many times words such as "actionable offenses" "revenue" or other euphemisms for tickets and fines are mentioned.
Compare the two.
Given the fact that this document is DPS's solicitation of exactly what they want, and it is Redflex's response of exactly what they are planning to deliver, I believe the comparison of those two numbers will tell you everything you need to know on the subject of the "safety" of this issue.
Please make this comparison and come back with your thoughts.
Have fun. I look forward to reading your next post.
azmojo says:
It's so sad that these people just see the surface of the issue. No one here would be opposed to putting 1000's of cop cars on the streets to catch people the right way.
They have no idea about the rights that are being trampled, and what the system has become. A summary of these arguments is at http://PhotoRadarScam.com/summary.html, as well as a proposed alternative.
Wow, that news reporter was awful. She butchered the piece!
Congrats, the radio even mentioned how you all had traffic jammed up on the sixty.
One of your biggest arguments against photo radar is that it actually causes a hazard on the highway because it causes people to jam on their breaks and slow down…
no, the ironics of this one didn't pass me by either.
Freedom From The Flask says:
I love the report, the reporter did great. She was doing it on the fly. Thank you News Channel 3
We did not have the traffic jammed on the sixty…it's always that way because of stupid cameras, 65, 55, 65 spped changes and scam HOV lanes. The traffic will be the same whether we are there or not.
Perhaps DPS should fire Redflex and just pay us a few thousand dollars a day to hold up signs.
Talk about traffic calming— LOL!
And, just so you know "me", people weren't slamming on their brakes when they saw us like they do with the cameras, it was a consistent slowing of traffic — and it wasn't intentional.
Sorry I wasn't able to make it. You guys represent the silent majority and we appreciate your efforts. I'll make the next rally for sure
Can You say Bye Bye Freedom? says:
Cheryle is just one example of how governments are able to take away civil liberties and rights one by one. I always love the "if you don't break the law, you don't have to worry about it" line. We can relate this to any number of laws on the books. "Sheeple" will just follow along and say, "Don't speed, don't break the law and you won't have to worry about it". I don't go out and shoot people, but I worry that someday I won't be allowed to own guns. One by one, slowly but surely our liberties and rights are being stripped away. On another scary note, there is talk that Obama is going to be having armed military patrolling our cities? Next we will all be spying on our neighbors for the "better good", or having to show our "papers", or god knows what else, can anyone say communism? If these things don't scare you sheeple, you deserve no freedom. Foreign private compaies enforcing our laws…. sheesh, what next? Will they start running our elections, or start deciding what our laws should be here? It is much bigger than just snapping pictures of speeders. Why can't you sheeple see it? Oh, and just so you sheeple know, I have never gotten a photo ticket, and have not had ANY violation including parking violations for over 25 years (yeah, I was young and wild at one point) and YES these cameras DO affect my life, not because I speed or am worried about speeding, but because my civil liberties are being stripped away one by one.
Wait a minute, I thought the do-gooders at DPS WANTED people to slow down. So the demonstration slowed people down. Win-win, if you ask me. Slow = safer, right?
Don't blame the protesters, blame the criminal drivers who allowed themselves to be distracted. All those criminal drivers had to do was keep driving the speed limit and everything would have been fine. DPS should have been issuing citations to the criminals who drove below the minimum speed limit.
James Howard says:
Good job folks! I can't get the KTVK link to work this morning. Sorry I could not make it. I need to make a sign and stand on the sidewalk by our red light camera so any pictures of "violations" have "Ban Photo Enforcement" in them.
FOX news has us in their sites LOL
http://www.myfoxphoenix.com/myfox/pages/Home/Detail;jsessionid=04172262796AFCBB2EEC5034C4F2A223?contentId=8107330&version=4&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=VSTY&pageId=1.1.1&sflg=1
imay3kbug says:
Great going guys. I heard the demonstration mentioned on the radio three times on my way home from work last night, as well as a news story about it this morning. Wish I could join in the demonstrations…maybe in the future.
Bring those cameras down!
You clowns on the overpass caused more of a traffic jam than the cameras. Totally bad call on your part. I hope the cameras stay and I will support them all the way.
www.Youtube.com/rp4409 says:
Dear dgpjr777,
To claim that a first amendment sign wave could cause a traffic jam on the I-60 is just about the most laughable argument I've heard in awhile.
First, we ask people to document the traffic flow before and after each first amendment sign wave. Furthermore, they also document the flow of traffic in areas where we may be considering doing a first amendment sign wave.
Fact – The traffic on the I-60 was already at a virtual stand still before anyone showed up with a sign to express their right to free speech on a public sidewalk.
What is the REAL root cause of the traffic issue on the 60 on Dec 18th 2008?
1. The dangerous and blatant speed drops on the I60 that take you from 65mph to 55mph and back up to 65mph. These photo robot speed traps confuse drivers and lead to more accidents and traffic problems.
2. The Scameras, which emit a powerful booming, light from the flash that scares drivers in all lanes. This leads to many drivers slamming on their brakes, which causes more accidents and traffics problems.
3. The "Privileged, I'm better than you, HOV lane scam." This "Privileged, I'm better than you HOV lane" removes valuable space from the roadways that the hard working people of Arizona have already paid for but are refused access to it unless they buy some special car picked out by some bureaucrat like a prius or take a person with you wherever you go or pay the $500 fine issued by the corporation called DPS once a day.
Why have they not eliminated the "Privileged I'm better than you HOV lane" to relieve traffic? The elite love the traffic backed up….all better to control you. In as much it's another tool cash cow to catch you no good scum of the earth single drivers……
http://www.Youtube.com/rp4409
Thats funny, no stand still when I went by, except for people braking and looking up at you guys with the signs. The whole matter of fact here is something needs to be done about the speeds on our highways. Granted my suggestion would be to keep the cameras, but raise the over the posted speed capture on the cameras. Lets face it 15 mph over would be very acceptable being that it would put you at 80mph.
Come on now and admit it,most of the people complaining about the cameras are the ones flying through traffic and weaving in and out causing more problems than we should have to encounter.
Not eveyone likes them but you know what it is slowing the traffic down and keeping the idiots paying attention to their driving habits.
The highway speeds in phoenix are easy, it's like a big red and white target, just like you see for 'target' stores. The inner circle, closest to the city center is 55, the next ring is 65, and the outlying ring is 75.
The only places this differs is where the speed drops to 55 or 45 for construction zones.
So, apparently you have a problem with slowing down in construction zones where workers are present? In 2005 a study was done that showed 1 worker was killed every eight hours in construction zones. Go tell an ADOT guy that his lowered construction zone speed limit is a fraud, and you could care less about his life, and you should be able to do 70 no matter if the road is narrowed and guys are working on the street. Go tell DPS that putting a camera in a construction zone to slow people down is a fraud, and you don't care about a workers life, that you demand that right to speed freely, no matter whose life is at stake.
Straight from DPS website
"The flash duration is less than 1/2000th of a second. That is shorter than lighting due to weather."
Guess mother nature is a scam now and you need to protest weather.
I want to see just ONE police report, detailing the cause of an accident was a radar camera flash. Time to Put up or Shut up! Tired of hearing about your moma's cousins best friends boyfriend, oh but it wasn't me, got in a wreck due to a camera flash. Bring on the police reports.
1. How many of those construction zones that you drive by have "workers present"? The 51, in particular, has rarely had any workers "present" during the last few months of construction, yet the speed is still 55. The HOV lanes are open, paved, marked, have traffic, but the speed limit is still 55 from Shea all the way up to where they finally continue to have lanes blocked off for construction just after Union Hills. And yes, I've seen speed vans there, and I'm betting they'll plant permanent cams soon.
2. I'd like to see some statistics where there was this great rash of accidents involving speeders that killed or injured people, which brought about the "necessity" of these speed cameras. Did you know the NHTSA just released a report not too long ago that showed the highways in Maricopa county were in the lower third of fatalities per 100,000 of all counties in the U.S. in 2007? That was BEFORE the speed cameras, and that's the federal government's own study.
Don't feed me shit and tell me it's chocolate pudding. The self-righteous have found themselves what they consider a politically correct cause and are supporting it with their own emotions and media driven fear. Read about the capabilities of those cameras and ask yourself why any government should have the capability to track your movements without a warrant or probable cause anytime they wish. Ask yourself why a foreign company should have control over that data. Answer MY questions, because I have never stated those cameras wouldn't make the highways "safer". I've always said the price to pay for that "safety" is too much to bear for a free country.
edit: lower third of fatalities per 100,000 population of all counties
Youtube 4409 says:
dgpjr777 you said "The whole matter of fact here is something needs to be done about the speeds on our highways. Granted my suggestion would be to keep the cameras, but raise the over the posted speed capture on the cameras. Lets face it 15 mph over would be very acceptable being that it would put you at 80mph."
I thought you were all concerned about speed but in the same paragragh you don't mind speeds of 80mph. You are confused or brainless.
I will just repeat what I stated earlier because of your ignorant comment.
catch says:
Some points:
1. Day before Thanksgiving DPS Patrol Results
http://www.azdps.gov/news/pdf/2008/photo_radar_12.02.08.pdf
2007 – 29 collisions -> 2008 – 2 collisions. Who wants to be the jerk that wants to argue there wasn't significant reduction in the possibility of serious injury, the day before Thanksgiving? Car loads full of children and families out there? Who wants to be THAT guy?
2. Don't speed, don't get your picture taken, don't get spend your life complaining about it to everyone else.
Yes we must be "Sheeple" to explain such a simple concept. There are folks that comment on this blog that claim they are angels; don't speed; never had a ticket in 25 years, etc. So, do you guys constantly lose sleep every day for being accused of committing a crime in a public place, even though you may have been filmed, scanned, tracked 1000 times as you walked around that public place? Why? Because you didn't commit a crime!!! (hopefully) and therefore nothing to worry and complain about. No one is holding scamera signs in front of public facing video cameras, constantly filming people in public places. Not complaining about civil rights there? Why is photo enforcement an invasion of privacy and the stripping of my civil rights when it only takes pictures and fines those people breaking the law? Well, darn those video cameras that protect people in public places, that's just terrible…………
I like how speeders who decide upon themselves that speeding is OK, and THEY are the ones that PAY. Be responsible for your own actions, and think about others in this world. Oh my civil liberties are being stripped away…… boo hoo.
3. Cameras cause people to re-end each other and flashes get people confused
I see that argument all the time on this riveting blog. Let's ask, what the hell was the person driving so close to the vehicle in front of them in the first place, and why are they not paying attention to what's around them? 2 second rule ring a bell? My friend was almost killed just the other day; rear ended by some jerk @ 55MPH that was not "responsible" .
Confused by a flash? "Powerful Booming Light"? Hmm, has anyone ever seen people posing for a photo? Do they stumble around dazed, blinded, lost after the picture was taken? No. Perhaps celebrities on the red carpet that get flashed about 1000 times in a minute have super awesome flash fighting powers. Perhaps Batman slips them Anti Powerful Booming Light Pills. Give me a break. What a stupid argument. I love watching people fly past me approaching a camera and getting caught. Dummies.
Get a real cause, please.
This one is my favorite. Did they ever release any numbers on just exactly how many people drove that weekend as compared to the same weekend a year before. All over the news you heard "Many people stayed home this holiday due to gas prices, housing issues, bad economy, etc." I'd venture to say that less drivers on the road equates to less accidents. The cameras being there was just a coincidence.
As far as the camera flashes being faster that a flash of lightning goes here is where that argument falls apart. When I see big clouds in the sky, and big drops of water falling from those clouds then I expect that there will be lightning. When a radar van is hiding around a blind corner and someone trips it as I am coming around that corner, I did not expect it and therefor it may very well catch me by surprise. Another consideration is that when lightning flashes I don't have to worry about getting a $180 ticket in the mail. You tell me what your reaction would be though if a bolt of lightning struck the the shoulder of the freeway as you were driving by. I'd probably crap my pants, slam on my brakes, and point my steering wheel in the opposite direction of the flash.
And for those of you who think we are all a bunch of idiot speeder let me give you a little insight on my driving habits. I drive a Ford Focus, not a Mustang, not a Corvette, not a Porsche, not even a sooped up Honda Civic. I drive a plane Jane bone stock Focus. I bought this car because it was rated to get 27MPG in the city and 37MPG on the freeway, not because it can go 0-60 in 5.2 seconds. Now like I said it was rated at 27/37, yet when I check my MPGs every time I fill up I have gotten as much as 34MPG in all city driving and 43MPG on the freeway. Now there is no way that I would be able to get 7 more MPG than the EPA rating in the city if I were an "idiot speeder" nor would I get 6 more MPG on the freeway if I were driving 90 MPH and swerving in an out of traffic. The golden rule of MPGs is to accelerate gradually and drive at a low, constant speed. I follow the speed limits, and as far as the guy who does fly by me at 90MPH I make sure I surrender the left lane to faster approaching traffic as the law states, and when he is passed me, thats just it, he is passed me. I'm not going to complain that he was going 25 MPH over the speed limit because what other drivers are doing outside of a 3 ft range of my fenders and bumpers is of no concern to me. But when government puts up cameras that could potentially track my every move and fill their pockets with the citizens hard earned money and lie to me by saying that it is for our own safety, then I do get concerned.
"My friend was almost killed just the other day; rear ended by some jerk @ 55MPH that was not "responsible" ."
I beg to differ. According to DPS 55 MPH is a safe speed to travel, so there is no way your friend was in any danger.
"Confused by a flash? "Powerful Booming Light"? Hmm, has anyone ever seen people posing for a photo? Do they stumble around dazed, blinded, lost after the picture was taken?"
The is also a difference between posing and expecting the flash and someone jumping out of a bush while you are concentrating on a task. Now if the Radar Vans said "say Cheese" over a loud speaker as I was approaching that would be a different story.
So what say you on the fact that accidents increased when the vans were introduced in Pinal county. What say you on the fact the the sheriff's office LIED about the statistics in order to make the vans look good so they could keep their cash flow coming in. What say you on the fact a study that just came out from DOT states that speeding is the cause of only 3% of all accidents! Why roll out cameras statewide for such an insignificant cause of accidents? Couldn't be about the money could it? Sorry, I guess we are just too intelligent here to believe the lies and deception that comes out of the government and Redflex to justify their stealing of money from honest tax paying citizens.
"The agency's most recent report lists "speed too fast" as the driver error that caused 2.9 percent of crashes in 2007″
"A pair of photo radar vans have been mailing automated citations to vehicle owners in Pinal County, Arizona since August 8, 2007. In just four months, 4500 citations were issued generating significant revenue, especially on the Hunt Highway. In December, a Sheriff's office press release made the astonishing claim that accidents had fallen on this heavily traveled two-lane route by 53 percent as a result of the enforcement effort.
"It's very effective," Pinal County Sheriff's Office Corporal Paul Compton said at the time. "It's slowing people down and ultimately saving lives."
The East Valley Tribune newspaper reported that this claim turned out to be false. Instead of being down 53 percent, accidents increased 16 percent during the period speed cameras were used, as compared to the same period in 2006 without cameras. The Sheriff's office had issued its statement based on preliminary data that failed to account for 55 crashes that were not immediately entered into the accident database."
Don't matter what you drive, I still have seen all types of vehicles driving in and out of traffic and speeding. So what do the speed limit and quit crying over it.
AA you keep talking about Government tracking you. What the hell is your problem ? They are looking for stolen vehicles and other illegal activities. Is that what bothers you, can't do your criminal activities anymore? I suppose you support Jane Fonda and were one of those war protesters back in the day.
I still get a kick out of you guys stating the flash will cause a rear end collision, well don't follow so close. What is the most given citation for traffic accidents – "Failuer to control speed to avoid a collision". Too many people in a damn hurry everyday here in this state. Again glad to have the cameras and they have my vote to stay.
Quote: "What is the most given citation for traffic accidents – "Failuer to control speed to avoid a collision"." O rly?! Where do those stats come from? Studies done by the US DOT, Virgina and the UK beg to differ:
"US DOT Report Confirms Speed Not Major Accident Cause
"The NHTSA findings are mirrored in accident statistics provided by the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles. The agency's most recent report lists "speed too fast" as the driver error that caused 2.9 percent of crashes in 2007″
"The UK Department for Transport isolated cases where only the posted limit was exceeded and found that, "Exceeding speed limit was attributed to 3 percent of cars involved in accidents" "
HELLO…. did you not get the fact that I said I do the speed limit. It is not speeding that I am worried about, it is the blatant abuse of our rights that I'm complaining about. If you don't want the rights guaranteed to you by the constitution that is fine by me, but a lot of us here would like to keep the constitution from becoming the equivalent of a 200 year old bar napkin that some guys jotted a few ideas on for their amusement.
"I still get a kick out of you guys stating the flash will cause a rear end collision, well don't follow so close."
What if it's not us that are doing the tailgating. I slam on my brakes and the guy behind me hits my car. I think that is what most people are concerned about, not the person in front of them hitting their brakes.
This is just like the cameras themselves–take something that is a legitimate, unaddressed concern, turn it around, make those against the cameras bear the burden of proof.
First, you need to demonstrate how the cameras make it safer, and explain the "coincidence" that traffic laws seem to magically change when they arrive– everything from the shortening of yellow lights to the raising and lowering of speed limits. Then explain why it is that the contract posted a couple of days ago says absolutely squat about public safety, but volumes about revenue generation– yet the system is still for safety. Next, explain how monitoring every last driver on the road, whether accused or guilty of anything at all and shuttling off their name, address, photograph, driving information (which almost assuredly includes our driver's license number) and criminal record to some 3rd party for-profit corporation is NOT worrisome at all. Last, please enlighten us on exactly how fundamental rights are not being trampled. There's many, many specific ones here but I'll settle for the following three— innocent until proven guilty, the accuser bears the burden of proof, and if I am served (which is my legal right) I now have to pay extra for that.
Once you can explain all of the above in a logical manner, without namecalling and fearmongering, I expect most people here will see your point. Until then, your useless posts about "if you're not speeding you have nothing to worry about" "it's for the children" "it's for safety" or "it's just like the camera at an ATM" will be viewed as exactly what they are– hot air.
Oh, and actually, one more–
Please explain the fact that of all these various concerns, including safety and the children, why none of the money generated is going to fund any program related to these issues.
It seems to me that if the cameras were truly implemented for these purposes that the funding generated should also go for these purposes– otherwise they are not being used solely for those purposes and (in my mind at least) this means they may have an alternate purpose of making money. But perhaps I am wrong. Please explain this one too.
There are always lots of assumptions made about the protesters. I'd like to gather some data if possible about the driving records of those who oppose cameras. I vigorously oppose scameras, and I have a clean driving record and have not received any photos in the mail. I imagine that most protesters here are actually good drivers like myself.
Second, the argument was never actually made that we NEED scameras. The roads weren't and aren't dangerous, and statistics show that the rate is very low per million miles travelled. Additionally, the scameras were introduced without a stated goal. How do we know if the roads are safer if we don't establish metrics to show the need for scameras and the improvement we hope to get from having them. The scamera companies seem to think that number of citations mailed = safer roads, but that has not been proven by objective third party data. It should be noted that there has been data presented that show both increases AND decreases in accidents attributed to cameras, so nothing is conclusive as to the effectiveness except for raising revenue.
The 2008 NHTSA report clearly shows that speeding is not a serious contributor to accidents, so I fail to see the reasoning in the focus on safety. It seems to me that it's a case of someone invented a money making machine and they want to use it.
I'll be first– I have nothing to hide.
I have had one accident, over 10 years ago, and it was on the Apache Trail out towards Apache Lake. I've heard they made some improvements in the last few years, but haven't been out there in a while. It used to be a one-lane gravel road cut into the side of a cliff. Sheer rock face on one side, and a drop on the other. No guardrails and no turnouts. It is a difficult road on the best day, but is particularly bad when going the opposite direction of a Dodge Ram dually. We came around a blind turn and had an accident. I was given the ticket and was probably at fault but it was later dismissed (without me asking) because it had been misfiled to the wrong court.
I have had 2 speeding tickets in over 16 years of driving:
One for going 74 on I-10 Westbound right around the tunnel. I was closing the fast food restaurant I worked at at the time, so it was probably 3 AM, and I was planning to help my father pour a new driveway in the morning. The trucks were scheduled to arrive at 5 AM, and I wanted to get at least a cat nap, so given that the roads were deserted I made a conscious decision to push the limit. The policeman came right down the onramp on the HOV lane, and dropped right behind me.
The second is just last year, at about this time. I was trying to get to Target before it closed because I was looking for a specific "My Little Pony" doll that another Target didn't have. I was clocked at 54 in a 45.
The first time I made a conscious decision. The second time, I was just frazzled after a long day and in a hurry. Both times, I thanked the officers for their service and meant it.
That is the grand total of my 16+ years of driving– 3 items. Two of them over a decade old and all of which I learned from.
Does this make me Public Enemy #1?
All the comments on this site are interesting- however only one thing actually matters- THIS TYPE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
This is all that matters… And it's the only argument we'll need to make this history in November..
It violates right to due process..
For this reason alone, this is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
Ed Gradwick says:
I agree with Ron, if it's against the law for violation of right to due process, that alone makes it illegal. I imagine it's also somehow unconstitutional that half your fine dollars are going to an AUSTRALIAN company. Wake up folks…
Lisa McGovern says:
I would like to see who in our state government signed us up for this unconstitutional method of extortion from a foreign company.. Does anyone have any names?
I can help. JANET NAPOLITANO.
Look for her in DC come January. We made her famous. BONZER!!!!
…as such…cameras in Iraq..cameras in Africa…maps on cameras…as such, such as…
Yeesh, my cats could've given a better report!
As for knowing who voted for the cameras, most state politicians were against the cameras and the pros & cons were hotly debated. Finally, it was decided to not put points on driver's licenses to 'avoid voter backlash.'
Voter backlash? They feared a voter backlash? And these clowns have the nerve to say the program has popular support and doesn't need to go to a vote? Dammit Janet!
I had heard the "no points" thing before, but hadn't confirmed it for myself yet.
Kind of shoots the whole "it's for the safety" aspect right in the foot, doesn't it?
Obviously if speeding=unsafe, and someone could have multiple instances of being "caught" speeding, this driver is an unsafe driver. Isn't that what we've been told so much lately? Speed kills and whatnot? So if a person is so dangerous, shouldn't an unsafe driver have points on his record, and eventually get his license taken away? After all, driving is a right not a privilege!
Right? Where's my pro-camera buddies to give me an amen!
Instead, as usual in this whole mess, the net effect of this whole system is the exact opposite of what those in the pro-camera camp would have us believe. Other than the monetary aspect, there is no lasting consequence of speeding– so if someone either has the cash to pay for it or knows the system and knows they only need to avoid the server get off essentially scot-free, while those who legitimately can't afford the ticket, who don't know heir rights, or who actually have faith in the system are essentially screwed.
Yep, sounds like a great plan. Punish the people who can't afford it, while letting the rich and the scofflaws get off no problem. And all the while, the "unsafe" drivers remain on the road!
I feel soooo much safer! Thanks Gov!
They are not unconstitutional, it has been through courts before,especially in Mesa. They are here to stay and that is why Mesa signed another 5 year contract with ATS.
Stats,driving records, ETC, it has slowed people down and that already has made people aware of driving the speed limit. It is working and I urge everyone to support them. Go Cameras Go , keep them !
points or no points, I know I can't shell out $180 left and right. If you can, more power to ya.
dgpjr777, you actually think the majority of people are going to vote in favor of the cameras? You obviously haven't been to any of our demonstrations.
Just face it, dude. The cameras are coming down.
DON'T TREAD ON ME says:
I want to focus on the 60. As far as I can tell the cameras aren't on or operating yet? I see people fly through every morning West bound and never a flash at all. Believe me these people are doing more than 76 mph. Also there isn't any cameras east bound on the 60 so I don't know where people are talking about the slow and go from 65 to 55 to 65. It doesn't happen from what I see in the morning.
What they need to do is take all these cameras and stick them down on the border and keep all the illegals from coming to our state. If they really want to preach moral and ethical behavior then clean up the illegal immigrant issue we have in this state.
If Janet truly cared and wasn't on Obama's dick she would have acted already. As soon as these ripoffcrats get voted out of office and some people with a grain of salt and common sense take over we will continue to be in the state of big brother.
I know all you Janet lovers will say how she has done all these wonderful things for the state, can you truly name one? Has your life improved under her rule? Lost jobs, lost home values, higher taxes and less freedoms.
Sounds like improved life to me.
Keep fighting for your rights. Many of good men and women paved the way with their blood to give us our freedoms today. The hell we should let someone in a suit that doesn't represent us take it away.
DON'T TREAD ON ME
StopBigBrotherMD says:
Keep up your heroic efforts. You guys are an inspiration everywhere this growing threat to liberty exists, and a cautionary example for govt officials who would pervert our justice system into a revenue system.
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year from the Sheeple's Republic of Maryland!
The reason why there is no point penalty associated with the cameras is because this would make the scameras even MORE unconstitutional than they are today. It has to do with the 14th ammendment and the chances of an erroneous citation affecting one's personal right to life, liberty, or property without due process. With such an unreliable system as the cameras, if the penalty for erroneous citations could result in the revocation of a driver's license (and as a result, possibly someone's ability to earn a living), then the scameras would be ruled unconstitutional in a heart-beat.
Other constitutional arguments are waiting to be heard but to my knowledge, no municipality has bothered to fight any appeals to the supreme court level for the reason that they don't want an official judgement.
dgpjr777-
Again I ask, if that's all this entire argument is about is speed and safety, even assuming the system works perfectly (which not even the PR flacks at Redflex have the audacity to claim), and they are not unconstitutional (which is still up for debate) AND pretending that our rights are NOT being abrogated (which they are)—
But let's just assume all these valid arguments against the cameras magically went away. Does it not anger you that certain people are effectively immune as I noted above, and does that not tell you there may be some flaws?
Additionally, how can you look at the past history of cameras in other areas and not wonder about the other unsafe consequences? A major example includes the shortening of yellow lights. Any idiot can tell you, an intersection is the most dangerous place on the road– you have multiple lanes of traffic crossing one another. The yellow light exists as a buffer between those multiple directions of traffic, and the thought of someone purposely eroding that margin of safety solely in the pursuit of money is absolutely abhorrent– but it has happened multiple times in multiple areas. Look it up, it's in many reputable news sources. Now perhaps it hasn't happened here yet, but what makes you think that it won't? The camera companies were either outright complicit or at minimum powerless to stop it, so the just leaves the government. Do you really think that our governor's office is immune to such influences? What assurances do you have or have you seen that this won't happen to us? What makes our governor's office so much better than the various and unsundry list of townships which have done such a thing prior– especially considering the amount of money involved, and the fact that the state is running a deficit?
You see, just because you have apparently seen a visible reduction of speed around town does NOT mean the cameras are working to make us safer, there's much more to safety than a number. And even assuming they ARE working now as you contend, there is no guarantee that that effect will not be countermanded later by the relentless grind of budgetary concerns.
Sorry, next argument please.
Note to DJPJR: Actually its really simple.. they are unconsitutional because they violate right to due process and you must prove yourself innocent versus guilty. Thats it, its really that simple.. The fact that they're operated by a foreign company is just extra points that will make wonderful campaign ads this November…
Get ready politicians who did this- you will be called out by name… Get ready..
they are also unconstitutional because it was never passed by 2/3 majority of the legislature.
dgpr777: They're looking for criminals, stolen cars, ambeer alert vitims, and they're tracking MY movements and storing them in a database? For what? Just in case *I* somehow bcome a criminal in their eyes and it'd make it easier for them to figure out my movements? And I'm supposed to be OK with that? Free citizens don't let the government tap their phones, even though it'd make it easier for the government to trace them *if* they become criminals. As it is, the government needs a warrant to subpoena your phone records. Hey, cell phone signals are "public", do we expect a right to privacy during our conversations? I drive by these cameras every day on the 51. It's not like I'm going out of my way to avoid them. But it's still a load of crap that s many people are so naive they think it's all about safety. I notice you didn't address the other facts I stated. You are trying to pigeonhole me into a group that you want to believe is only paranoid. You'd rather completely ignore the facts and allow your emotions and fear drive your support. Tell me, if the roads are so dangerous, how many accidents have you been in that involved someone speeding and running into you? Seeing as that's such a statistical improbablility, doesn't that mean YOUR position is the paranoid one? Being willing to give up your rights to free movement and privacy just so you can feel safer from something you have never had happen to you?
Brenda Solomon says:
When is the next picketing event? I am thinking of maybe creating some "custom" signs to put on these wonderful cameras… Anyone wanna join?
click the join us link at the top of the page for all the events we are doing
Redflex Executes New Speed Enforcement Contract with Advanced Neural Network Automatic License Plate Recognition (ALPR) Engine for Real-Time Notification of Vehicles of Interest
Redflex Traffic Systems, Inc, a wholly owned subsidiary of Redflex Holdings Limited, is pleased to announce a new comprehensive photo enforcement contract with the City of Show Low, Arizona
As the commercial and tourism hub of the White Mountains, Show Low maintains a seasonal population approaching 30,000.
The contract scope includes fixed combination speed and red-light systems with the advanced Automatic License Plate Reader (ALPR) application for up to 10 systems with a term of five years plus two, two-year renewals.
"With the integration of a leading ALPR engine that uses an intelligent neural network recognition engine, the Redflex solution provides our end-users with distinct advantages over the conventional OCR applications espoused to be offered by our competitors. The Redflex solution provides our law enforcement partners a new bundled crime fighting device that provides real-time license plate cross-checks against various local, regional, state-wide and national databases for identifying vehicles of interest, and that notifies the authorities of identified situations including stolen vehicles, felony suspects and suspects of Amber Alerts. Built upon the robust Redflex platform, the integration of these types of advanced applications with our industry-leading red-light and speed enforcement solutions provide our customers with a truly unique and comprehensive tool-set for enhanced public safety" said Karen Finley, CEO Redflex Traffic Systems, Inc.
Redflex Traffic Systems, Inc. has contracts with more than 220 U.S. cities, and is the largest provider of digital red light and speed enforcement services in North America. With photo speed programs in 9 states and photo red light programs across 22 states, REDFLEX has consistently led the market in contract wins, system installation rates and market share.
Graham Davie
Redflex Holdings Limited
graham.davie@redflex.com.au
Redflex Traffic Systems, Inc.
kfinley@redflex.com
Arizona Official Confirms Redflex Falsified Speed Camera Documents
Arizona Secretary of State blasts Redflex notary for falsifying speed camera certification document.
Arizona Secretary of State Jan Brewer last week confirmed that documents used to convict motorists of speeding in Lafayette, Louisiana contained elements that had been falsified. Brewer revoked the license of Cheryl Krough, notary public for photo enforcement vendor Redflex after concluding that she violated four Arizona laws while purporting to certify a speed camera deployment form for use in official hearings.
"The notary executed a notarial certificate containing a false statement, providing the secretary grounds for a suspension or revocation," wrote Joann Cota, an assistant director with the secretary of state's office. "Therefore, the secretary of state has determined to revoke the notary's commission effective immediately."
At issue was the form used in an attempt to convict motorists Mark and Phil Abshire of speeding on October 10, 2007. Krough signed this document, certifying that van driver Scott Michael Bernard had sworn to the truth of the document's contents in her presence. The secretary of state's office saw no evidence that this ever took place.
"It cannot be determined whether the signer was in the notary's presence when the notary notarized the form," Cota wrote.
Krough, who worked in the Scottsdale, Arizona office for Redflex, was 1400 miles away from the Redflex employee who drove the van that day. The secretary of state's office expressed a certain amount of indignation that in response to an investigation of the matter by the Arizona Attorney General's office, Krough, "wrote a short response to the complaint on a post it note."
This scofflaw attitude at Redflex led to four legal violations, according to Cota. Krough was guilty of ignoring laws requiring the proper keeping of a journal, forbidding the notarization of a document containing blanks and, in general, "failing to faithfully discharge the duties or responsibilities of a notary public."
The Abshires had notified Brewer's office in January about the situation (details) and were thrilled to be vindicated. Krough likely had certified thousands of such forms throughout Lafayette and the rest of the country in violation of the law. The twins called on Lafayette council members to refund citations issued based on the questionable documentation.
"All fines collected by Redflex in Lafayette, Louisiana in 2007 and 2008 that were illegally notarized in Arizona should be voided," Mark Abshire said in an email yesterday. "Restitution by refunding fines to the affected individual citizens of Lafayette, Louisiana should be made immediately as it is unethical and unconscionable to collect fines by violating the laws of due process."
The Abshires were also vindicated in a January hearing where each was found not guilty after arguing the city had not followed the guidelines of its own speed camera ordinance (details).
Redflex Traffic Systems Inc. is facing what could become a class action lawsuit for allegedly using radar that was not approved for use in the U.S., a dispute also hanging up its contract with the Arizona Department of Public Safety.
The lawsuit, which also names the town of Paradise Valley as a defendant, was filed at the end of August in Maricopa County Superior Court by James G. Tavernetti of Paradise Valley. He claims that a ticket he received in mid-July came from a mobile van used by Scottsdale-based Redflex allegedly equipped with a British radar system that had not been approved for such use by the Federal Communications Commission.
Competitor American Traffic Solutions Inc. of Scottsdale set the lawsuit in motion when it complained about the radar's use in a DPS test program, said attorney Thomas Moring, who is representing Tavernetti and potentially seeking class status for the lawsuit. "That's what got us the information that Redflex was using devices that weren't certified by the FCC," he said.
Redflex officials would not comment on the lawsuit, saying the company does not comment on pending litigation. It still has a few weeks to reply to the lawsuit in court paperwork.
FCC approval is required for all speed radar devices, and the British-made system used on the DPS speed vans was not authorized until after the ATS complaint in early August. It is unclear from the lawsuit, however, what vans were responsible for issuing Tavernetti his ticket in Paradise Valley. Redflex also has contracts with cities throughout the country, supplying both speed and red-light cameras.
The two vans used in the DPS pilot program were removed from highways initially, but put back on the road after the proper approvals were received. Earlier this month DPS said it will keep its contract with Redflex for the rollout of 100 speed cameras throughout the state.
ATS has appealed that action to the Arizona Department of Administration, with a decision due by early next week.
Tavernetti's lawsuit alleges Redflex was negligent and committed fraud by using devices that were not approved in the U.S. The lawsuit does not specify the damages it seeks,
While a speeding ticket from a mobile van can run from $180 up, Moring said many people would not sue to get their money back, which is why the lawsuit seeks class action status.
"That's no reason to allow a company to do what Redflex has done," he said.
Redflex Lobbyist to Hire Staff for Arizona Governor
Top lobbyist for speed camera maker lands position handing out jobs in office of new Arizona governor.
A key employee of photo enforcement vendor Redflex Traffic Systems on Friday was appointed deputy director of the transition team for incoming Arizona Governor Jan Brewer (R). Brewer will replace current Governor Janet Napolitano (D) who has been tapped to lead the US Department of Homeland Security. In his new position, Redflex Director of Government Affairs Jay Heiler, 48, will be responsible for selecting personnel to fill appointed positions throughout the state government.
Heiler is no stranger to the governor's mansion, having served as chief of staff to Fife Symington until the then-governor was convicted of bank fraud and forced to step down in 1997. In the announcement of Heiler's new position, Brewer's transition team only referred to the top Redflex lobbyist as "an educator and a consultant," concealing his connections to the controversial Australian firm.
Although Heiler will have the authority to replace Napolitano loyalists in key positions with new hires equally committed to saturating the state's freeways with Redflex products, the leaders of a grassroots revolt movement do not believe it will make a difference.
"The cameras are coming down," boasts the group camerafraud.com.
CameraFraud has been organizing the army of volunteers needed to gather 225,000 signatures required to ensure an initiative banning photo enforcement is certified for the 2010 ballot. No speed camera program has ever survived this type of public vote. In 1991, Peoria, Arizona residents by a 2-1 margin chose to dump the photo radar program championed by the police chief. Voters then ousted the chief. More recently, 76 percent of voters in Steubenville, Ohio voted to outlaw speed cameras in a 2006 referendum. Last month, Cincinnati voters outlawed red light cameras before the program even had a chance to issue a single ticket.
Redflex has tools of influence beyond government to help fight the initiative. The Arizona Republic newspaper recently re-hired Michael Ferraresi, the former associate marketing manager for the Australian firm. The Republic has been generous in its coverage of a rival ballot initiative from two unknown partners in a company that sells environmentally friendly golf balls. This alternative to the forthcoming CameraFraud measure would merely change the speed threshold for photo ticketing instead of actually banning speed cameras.
This says/shows it all.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8470285655709172420
We need to do what Illinois is doing- cameras are here to stay ;
Illinois Speed Cameras to Take License on 2nd Offense
Illinois will begin using photo radar in freeway work zones in July. Second offense tickets are $1000 with license suspension.
Beginning in July the State of Illinois will use speed cameras in areas designated as "work zones" on major freeways. Anyone caught by the devices will be mailed a $375 ticket for the first offense, but a second ticket will cost $1000 and comes with a 90-day license suspension. Drivers will also face higher insurance premiums as the first offense remains on the record for 4-5 years, but a second offense remains for a minimum of 7 years. This represents the harshest penalty structure yet for a city using photo enforcement.
The state will begin with two camera vans issuing tickets in zones with speed limits lowered to 45 MPH. Photographs of both the driver's face and license plate are taken. Officials plan to keep at least one van in the Chicago area on the Dan Ryan and Kingery Expressways while other vans issue tickets in the rest of the state. Illinois Tollway Executive Director Jack Hartman promised more work zones: "Since the Tollway just launched our $5.3 billion Congestion Relief Plan, drivers will see more work zones on the Tollway than they have in the past."
LOL you want to charge more money LOL
Oh, and the lovely comment about the state of illinois posted above sounds awfully similar to this article: http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/02/293.asp. In fact, it is exactly cut & pasted (can you say "Plagiarism?")
Now, the really funny thing is, our friend DGPJR says that he is a retired cop and knows "all about" this stuff, and makes sure he is well-informed. Yet he quotes articles from 2005? Surely there's got to be something more current than that that can be pointed to!
Oh, wait, I've got a current source!
http://www.ghsa.org/html/stateinfo/bystate/il.html (see the top, where it says last reviewed in November of 2008?)
Whoops, I don't see anything there about a license suspension or $1000 fine!
Way to keep yourself informed and to convince us! You go!
The Video "Don't Tread on Me" does explain it all.
The rep from Redflex showed video of two terrible accidents and one incedent of someone speeding over 100MPH through an intersection. How did he get this video??? From the Redflex speed cameras of course. So he basicly showed the council, and us, video proof that their cameras do not stop people from running redlights or speeding through intersections.
Also once the Redflex rep was done with his presentation the first question out of the councils mouth was about what??? Revenue not safety. Thus proving the coucil members' real motivation for having the Redflex rep at the meeting.
Gabriel De La Vega Jr. says:
A Kentucky Truck Driver and a Latino Motorist is shot down and killed by an off duty Ex Police Officer committing a drive by shooting…
What prompted ex police officer, Brian Smith to go on a mobile rampage Monday December 22, 2008 in Dallas, Texas, United States of America?
What is going to prevent another Brian Smith copy cat in the near future from going on his rampage?
Let me dissect this situation for you. The Taxi Babblermouth system I developed is built exclusively for this scenario.
I have a exclusive ( Patent Pending) mobile camera live streaming video system mounted to any and all motorist's vehicle's world wide and starting in the United States of America streaming live mobile video for a cost of $20.00 for 60 tokens; each token is worth 1 minute of viewing time with unlimited bandwidth, meaning 1 to an unlimited amount of people can purchase and watch the same live mobile video at the same time, $15.00 of the $20.00 goes directly into the bank account of the person who owns one of my units and a profit sharing check is sent to the owner of my system each month if their camera is on 3 weeks of the 4 to 5 weeks of any given month, since a year has 52 weeks.
My point is: yes!
Police do commit crimes against good standing members of society and if the majority of police had their biased way, they would try to keep evidenced related to this crime silent and do every thing in their power to hide any available video related to this crime unavailable or else corrupted before a honest investigator or press person could get their hands on it, in a multi-cop effort to contribute to the brotherhood of cops and the corruption of our bribe accepting police officer's and government.
Yes! Police officers are criminals and so are many of our US politicians…
My system will provide an unlimited amount of live eye witnesses to this type of drive by shooting crimes on the fly since it is a live mobile video system. The result of my system being released on the streets will be a deterrent from criminal trigger happy cops killing people and being able to control the recorded video; since my video will be live and not available to police to corrupt, destroy, buy or hide.
My corporation also has a sue cop fund attached to legally go after these cops who are criminals.
I'm a God fearing man and fear only God who has contributed the whole idea, concept, and creation of this system. I personally take no credit for the TAXI BABBLERMOUTH & ACCESSORIES, INC. but give all the credit to God who delivered it to me via the holy sprit who resides in all of us humans on planet earth.
Currently as of today December 24, 2008 I'm still waiting on the patent office to do what my lawyer is asking them to do on proof and evidence that I'm the only one in the world that has such a business application attached to this unique live mobile video system on planet earth with such a enormous compensation plan to every person on the earth who owns my system.
I plead with all the believers in the almighty God to pray for the United States of America; patent office to stop being corrupt and approve my claims on this pending patent as soon as possible so lives can be financially changed and saved immediately.
I had this inspiration from God in the year 1996 and I have been running with this idea ever since trying to get our corrupt bribe taking government to issue me what is truly my gift from God, and that is an official stamped patent from the U.S. patent office immediately without any more delays or bogus time wasting talk.
P.S. my business model and Patent Pending application will create millions of jobs and stimulate every economy on planet earth and beyond.
Source: http://www.taxibabblermouth.com December 24, 2008
Source: http://www.cnn.com
Source: http://www.wffa.com
Written by: Gabriel De La Vega Jr.
Cameras are everywhere says:
You guys all crack me up, it is so funny to see you guys complain complain complain complain, make a reality show out of it why don't ya?!
Fun with DPS Public Records Requests « CameraFRAUD.com – The Cameras are Coming Down says:
[…] little insulted that the DPS would take three officers off the streets during rush hour traffic and reassign them to conduct blatant surveillance on a peaceful protest. As such, I wanted to know what information they were looking to gather from their surveillance , […]
Peters Chemical Company is one of the leading suppliers of industrial and chemical lime (calcium oxide and calcium hydroxide and lime kiln dust) and agicultural limestone (PCC Agricultural Limesstone) in the Northeast. We carry a full line of ice melters, says:
Peters Chemical Company is one of the leading suppliers of industrial and chemical lime (calcium oxide and calcium hydroxide and lime kiln dust) and agicultural limestone (PCC Agricultural Limesstone) in the Northeast. We carry a full line of ice mel…
[…]Dec 18th Demonstration Pictures « CameraFRAUD.com – The Cameras are Coming Down[…]…
Leave a Reply to azmojo Cancel reply