Arizona vs Photo Traffic Enforcement

[Richard]

And so it goes...

Richard

Arizona Halts Photo Enforcement of Speed Laws
NYT, 15 July 2010

At the first tick of the clock Friday, an array of automated cameras on Arizona freeways aimed at catching speeders were to stop clicking.

There is no glitch. The state, the first to adopt such cameras on its highways in October 2008, has become the first to pull the plug, bowing to the wishes of a vocal band of conservative activists who complained that photo enforcement intruded on privacy and was mainly designed to raise money.

It was a tumultuous, impassioned run here. A man wearing a monkey mask racked up dozens of tickets, fighting them in court, to protest the system. Vandals at different times attacked the cameras with Silly String and a pickax.

More seriously, the operator of a van carrying a mobile speed camera was shot to death on the side of a freeway in April 2009. The suspect is being prosecuted on first-degree murder charges and the family of the victim has announced a lawsuit against the Department of Public Safety.

Gov. Jan Brewer, a Republican seeking election to a full term, never embraced the program, begun under her predecessor, Janet Napolitano, a Democrat whose revenue projections from the tickets fell short largely for a simple reason: violators tended to ignore them.

The cameras, which included 76 units either mounted near the shoulder or operated from vans, were adept at snapping speeders as they whizzed past sensors, but getting offenders to pay after the tickets were mailed to them was another matter.

Less than a third of the 1.2 million tickets issued were paid, and the state collected $78 million, far below the projected $120 million annual revenue.

Some of those tickets, typically $181 apiece, no doubt were lost in the mail; others no doubt were not paid as violators tested a legal theory that they needed to be served in person. Process servers who were supposed to follow up could hardly keep up with the load.

Ms. Brewer made no secret of her disdain for the system operated by Redflex Traffic Systems, which will turn off the cameras the moment its contract expires.

“She opposed this program because it was designed primarily as a state revenue-generation tool,” Ms. Brewer’s spokesman, Paul Senseman, said this week. “She also is uncomfortable with the intrusive nature of the system. She is willing to allow the voters the opportunity to decide the future fate of the system, and anticipates there will be continued discussion and debate of the proposal in the Arizona Legislature.”

Some of the loudest critics were conservatives, who organized protest groups and prodded legislators to impose restrictions on their use, arguing the cameras amounted to, as one put it, the “government spying on its citizens.”

“It is unconstitutional,” said Shawn Dow, founder of Arizona Citizens Against Photo Radar, who also questioned the safety benefit and the propriety of having Redflex, whose parent company is based in Australia, involved in issuing tickets to Americans.

The Department of Public Safety had reported a 19 percent drop in fatal collisions in the first nine months the cameras were in use, but after Ms. Brewer took office and named a new director of the department, no further data was released.

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety has backed photo radar systems as a public safety improvement and says their use is increasing, mostly to catch drivers running red lights. Red light cameras are now used in 475 communities, including New York City, and speed cameras in 57 jurisdictions, according to the institute.

A spokeswoman for Redflex, whose camera systems in 14 cities in Arizona are unaffected by the state’s withdrawal, predicted speeding would spike on the freeways.

“Though few government agencies have opted to deactivate road-safety camera systems, we have learned from those that speeds will spike to dangerous levels,” said Shoba Vaitheeswaran, a spokeswoman for Redflex.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/16/us/16camera.html?hp

[JJ_BPK]

Congratulation to Arizona, It's Gov, & Speeders of the World...


Maybe Gov Brewer could use the cameras to catch transients coming over the border?? Don't want to waist the money spent on all that hi-tech gear...

[Green Light]

Sounds like Ms Napolitano, friend of veterans and nemisis of foreign invaders, was more interested in the cash flow than enforcing laws.

It also sounds like the citizens of Arizona did some non-violent protesting of an unpopular law. I seem to remember that the people have some sort of say in it and protests (civil disobedience) is an old American tradition.

[craigepo]

The Missouri Supreme Court recently struck down red-light cameras. While Missouri and Arizona law will be a little different, the Missouri court found a big difference between parking tickets and moving violations.

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/30/3067.asp

[Pete]

NC

Fayetteville used to have the Red Light cameras. But not anymore.

The ticket would be mailed to the house and the car owner had to pay. I was 50-50 on the law but Red Light runners are like ticks on a hound around here.

What killed it here was a State law that traffic fines went to the state school systems. The camera company was taking 50% of the money and the city was getting the rest. The state would not settle for anything less than 100% so the cameras were shut off.

When the light turns green look both ways before stepping on the gas around here.

[Last hard class]

Or radar for that matter?

http://www.autoinsane.com/2010/06/03...t-youre-going/

Hey, all the way to go Ohio.

[mojaveman]

If people would drive like they're supposed to there wouldn't be any cameras. I've been driving for over thirty years and can remember when people were better about obeying traffic signs and lights. Considering the way that people drive in Southern California I'm kind of glad that we have the cameras. I won't say that I like the idea but they do work. Talk about revenue - run a red light here and you're looking at a $450.00 fine. Oh well...

[greenberetTFS]

Mississippi also ruled out cameras as well as radar in the state.............

Big Teddy

[f50lrrp]

When Los Gatos, California first introduced speed cameras back in the 80's, a friend of mine, Steve Barkley (Professional Comedian - Chicago Steve) received a citation & copy of the photograph in the mail which stated his fine. Steve mailed the citation back to the court with photos of the money to pay the fine... I guess the judge appreciated the humor because he dismissed the citation.

[Roguish Lawyer]

I got three tickets on my last trip to AZ. Ignoring them all.

[Buffalobob]

I got three tickets on my last trip to AZ. Ignoring them all.

Points transfer! You better make sure that California does not count camera tickets for points. At one time I had a very fast 5.0 Mustang and a drivers license and insurance. Then one day all I had was a very fast mustang.

[PSM]

Originally Posted by Roguish Lawyer

I got three tickets on my last trip to AZ. Ignoring them all.

How fast were you going? The speed limit is 75 on the Interstates!

Pat

[Team Sergeant]

The above NYT's article would make someone think the cameras are a good idea, socialist newspaper.

The cameras were emplaced by a socialist (democrat) governor for one reason, money.

That one reason (screw safety) pissed off the people of Arizona, me included. (I've never gotten a ticket here) Big brother sucks.

Most intelligent people now realize they can merely throw the ticket in the trash and are doing just that. The law enforcement folks cannot continue hand delivering the tickets, cost too much.

Now the moron that emplaced the cameras in Arizona is head of DHS......

Anyone remember the DHS "Fusion Centers" Americans spying on Americans. Let's get more cameras out there! Socialism (big brother) at it's best!


http://www.iir.com/registration/fusioncenter/

The fourth annual National Fusion Center Conference is a key mechanism for fusion center representatives to receive training, technical assistance, and other support to achieve a baseline level of capability and meet the goals identified in the National Strategy for Information Sharing. This event supports the ultimate goal of establishing an integrated national network of state and major urban area fusion centers.


The 2010 National Fusion Center Conference is sponsored by the following agencies:

•Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)
•DOJ’s Global Justice Information Sharing Initiative
•U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
•Federal Bureau of Investigation
•Office of the Director of National Intelligence
•Office of the Program Manager, Information Sharing Environment
•Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives
Target Audience
•Fusion center directors and senior leadership
•Homeland security directors
•Officers/analysts within intelligence units and senior leadership
•Local, state, tribal, and federal law enforcement