Speed cameras – a revenue-extracting scam

Since I can’t keep my comments to five minutes and the Fruitland City Council member I’m watching right now is basically feeding us a line of bullshit, here is the REAL truth: it’s all about the Benjamins.

First of all, these cameras aren’t necessarily accurate. Secondly, they are rife for abuse as “school zones” magically expand to areas well beyond the posted zones.

But the scenarios presented seem to ignore some other realities.

To start, let’s assume the cameras are vehicle-mounted. How much cost will it be to send out a deputy to fetch the vehicle and bring it back to the home base? Someone in Fruitland has to do this, but the county will have a much larger area to cover. Meanwhile, static cameras are subject to vandalism.

Secondly, the target is certain to be a moving target. Right now it’s 12 miles per hour over, in school zones during certain time periods. But once the camel’s nose under the tent it’s certain that the usage will be expanded, the allowable overage will be reduced, and the fine will be increased – particularly when revenues fall short of expectations.

Normally I agree with Mike Lewis, but he’s wrong on this one. Hopefully the County Council resists the temptation to allow Big Brother a little larger slice of our life.

Final thoughts: Yes, our County Council was gutless and rolled over. But here’s the question that should be paramount:

If the concept of safety in school zones is so important, why aren’t deputies and officers enforcing the law there on a daily basis despite the fact the county gets nothing from those fines? Since they don’t currently make this a part of their daily routine, it seems to me that placing a camera there now, when a financial incentive is being dangled in front of them, shows the real reason they’re backing it.

Author: Michael

It's me from my laptop computer.

7 thoughts on “Speed cameras – a revenue-extracting scam”

  1. It passed. It was a bit confusing though because I thought they passed an amendment to limit the zone and the hours and then Lewis spoke and they passed it, so I couldn’t tell if they passed it with or without the amendment. Perhaps it was more clear on PAC 14?

  2. No it wasn’t.

    What is clear is that I lost a little respect for our County Council tonight. A unanimous vote? Come on! I don’t care how many people stand up at the podium and tell me it’s about safety, it’s about revenue. The half-dozen civilians who spoke for the speed cameras don’t understand the ramifications of what was passed and the cops know they’re about to get a bonanza, so they’re not going to let us in on the real truth.

    I make these predictions right now: the county will bend the rules just like Fruitland does, and some child will be injured or killed in an accident caused by a driver jamming on his brakes for the speed camera being rear-ended by the car behind them. It happens at red-light cameras frequently.

  3. I tried Mike. Clearly I was in the minority in this case, at least for those who chose to speak out. I guess that makes me a target again.

  4. Speed cameras.. a tax for going too fast. Only the bad drivers need to worry. Only bad drivers need to pay.

    …nothing wrong with that.

  5. Let’s have a camera follow you and see how many laws you break a day. That’s the direction we’re heading, straight into a police state. But we will be “safe.”

Comments are closed.