Rell wants to catch speeders on camera

Rell wants to catch speeders on camera

There are 50 comments on the Stamford Advocate story from Feb 8, 2009, titled Rell wants to catch speeders on camera. In it, Stamford Advocate reports that:

In the budget she unveiled last week, Gov. M. Jodi Rell included $500,000 to install cameras on highways as part of a trial to snap pictures of the license plates of speeders and mail them tickets.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Stamford Advocate.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Onlooker

Haddonfield, NJ

#1 Feb 8, 2009
We do not need fund-raisers on our highways to pay for building more courts,jails, political jobs,etc.,etc. Clear the roads by making mass transportation maore accessible.
Current Stamford Resident

Moriches, NY

#2 Feb 9, 2009
Outrageous.

Arizona is in the middle of passing a bill to make speed cameras illegal, because residents have told their legislators they'll be run out of town if they don't. The same thing needs to happen here. Just do a Google search on "Speed Cameras" to find the horror stories. My favorite is the one about the traffic court judge in Illinois who was cited by a speed camera, was able to prove conclusively that the ticket had been issued to the WRONG CAR (the plate number was ambiguous on the photo but a side-by-side made it clear it was a different vehicle than the judge's) but was nonetheless found guilty. The judge had to hire a lawyer and appeal to a higher court to have the ticket vacated at a cost of $thousands.

We DON'T need that here.

CSR
Attorney Lionel Hutz esq

New Britain, CT

#3 Feb 9, 2009
This is an OUTRAGE!!!
CT motorist

Hyde Park, NY

#4 Feb 9, 2009
Jodie's gone off the deep end.
First she nominates the head of the WWE to sit on the State Board of Education
(I guess she'll be advocating for steroids and violence)
Now this
Steve

Bound Brook, NJ

#5 Feb 9, 2009
Horrible idea. It will turn into a revenue generation monster & next thing you know they'll be sending $250 tickets to anyone doing more than 56mph.
Adam

United States

#6 Feb 9, 2009
Screw this I dont want the government watching me everywhere I go. I am a Democrat and by all support eavesdropping on my phone calls if they want but cameras taking pictures of license plates if your speeding is pushing th boundaries a little to far. Who in gods name wants to go a steady 55mph? What if you want to go 65mph because everyone else is but you are in the land that has the speeding camera? Should only 1 be penalized even though many are doing it? Another stupid idea by a stupid governor who wants to screw fairfield county some more!
Waste of Taxpayer Money

Farmingdale, NY

#7 Feb 9, 2009
Buy Anti Photo-radar Spray And License Plate Covers. Both are under $20. Problem solved. Avoid tickets, continue speeding and let CT spend $500,000 on a crap program that will not work, when the money could be used to fix highways or schools. Once again another smart financial move by our wonderful state. You know what, tolls on our highways is looking like a better idea, thats sad.
Steve

Farmingdale, NY

#8 Feb 9, 2009
One bad idea after another for the state of CT, we seem to out do ourselves every time. If you Live in CT or travel on I95 you know that the average speed during rush hour is 15mph, the traffic cams will do a lot of good then.
Not Really

Stamford, CT

#9 Feb 9, 2009
Waste of Taxpayer Money wrote:
Buy Anti Photo-radar Spray And License Plate Covers. Both are under $20. Problem solved. Avoid tickets, continue speeding and let CT spend $500,000 on a crap program that will not work, when the money could be used to fix highways or schools. Once again another smart financial move by our wonderful state. You know what, tolls on our highways is looking like a better idea, thats sad.
They did an expose' on those products on Myth Busters. None of them worked as advertised.
Not Really

Stamford, CT

#10 Feb 9, 2009
I should have a right to travel across our state and country, unencumbered by big brother keeping an eye on me. What's next, travel papers as a requirement whenever you leave your house?

I would almost rather have tolls if revenue is the issue here. If safety is the overriding concern, then you need State Troopers doing the job, not cameras.
dehuge

New York, NY

#11 Feb 9, 2009
Make no sense. With your fancy camera, are you catching the speedy or just his racer?

I certainly wouldn't want a ticket, or any points, because a car that is registered to me was traveling above the speed limit.
meeee

Danbury, CT

#12 Feb 9, 2009
I disagree with this. She should put her mind, money and attention in finding and prosecuting all the illegals driving and then ones driving without insurance. They cost the American people more money. Get all the illegals out and then think about this.
Current Stamford Resident

Moriches, NY

#13 Feb 9, 2009
dehuge wrote:
I certainly wouldn't want a ticket, or any points, because a car that is registered to me was traveling above the speed limit.
The way it has been implemented elsewhere, you won't get the points, just the fine. Because it's not about safety, just money.

Imagine that someone doing 70 through the state could come home and find $thousands of dollars in fines in the mail because they tripped the speed cameras all along 95. Whereas with trooper enforcement the first stop would be your warning to slow down (whether or not a ticket was issued).

The other thing is -- can anyone begin to imagine what the TRAFFIC would be like if everyone did exactly 55 or below? The slower the average speed, the more time an individual car spends on the road. The more time each car spends on the road, the more cars are on the road at any given time. Just from the volume increase, traffic would increase by at least a third. That's before you add in the traffic hazards from people slamming on the brakes as they recognize the cameras.

This is one of the worst ideas anyone ever came up with. It increases traffic and REDUCES safety. But hey - the state gets its money!!

CSR
Core

Bronx, NY

#14 Feb 9, 2009
I thought there was a massive budget crunch!!! Is catching speeders a way to recover from it???

Think about it....It is soooooo simple! Why didn't anyone come up with this before????
Core

Bronx, NY

#16 Feb 9, 2009
Not Really wrote:
I should have a right to travel across our state and country, unencumbered by big brother keeping an eye on me. What's next, travel papers as a requirement whenever you leave your house?
I would almost rather have tolls if revenue is the issue here. If safety is the overriding concern, then you need State Troopers doing the job, not cameras.
You don't have any rights. Didn't you know that?
Long time Stamford

North Brunswick, NJ

#17 Feb 9, 2009
This is a cheap way for Rell to make up the money that she has lost the state. I can tell you this for sure, If they pass this I will move out of the state!
Wally in Stamford

Stamford, CT

#18 Feb 9, 2009
All you complainers are the first to cry foul when someone thinks (yes only thinks) of doing something even as far out as cameras to make people drive more sensibly. What is wrong with ticketing the idiot that does 85MPH on a 55MPH road that is not in the best condition, while zig-zagging between the three lanes to show off your nice BMW, Merc, or Lexus, sports cars? If cameras are not your cup of scotch, then do as NYS and Texas and other states do - having the State Police use aircraft to track and ticket you! I know many that were nailed for speeding open and straight roads out West and in the Midwest. Here there are tooo many cars and trucks for idiots to drive as if "I Own the road because I Have a hot car!" attitude. These people should grown up first and complain later, as when there is an accident and traffic is slow or stopped, guess WHO Complains then? The same jerk that does not want police or cameras to ticket the continual speeder and hopefully save a life! Having a license doesn't give a driver the right to do whatever he/she wants, whenever they want, and NOT be responsible. I do not like the idea either, but hey if it gets the jerks off the road and some money into DOT I'm for it. And yes, I do drive fast at times but not 20 or more over the limit. I'm not ready for a pine box yet!
Not Really

Stamford, CT

#19 Feb 9, 2009
Wally in Stamford wrote:
All you complainers are the first to cry foul when someone thinks (yes only thinks) of doing something even as far out as cameras to make people drive more sensibly. What is wrong with ticketing the idiot that does 85MPH on a 55MPH road that is not in the best condition, while zig-zagging between the three lanes to show off your nice BMW, Merc, or Lexus, sports cars? If cameras are not your cup of scotch, then do as NYS and Texas and other states do - having the State Police use aircraft to track and ticket you! I know many that were nailed for speeding open and straight roads out West and in the Midwest. Here there are tooo many cars and trucks for idiots to drive as if "I Own the road because I Have a hot car!" attitude. These people should grown up first and complain later, as when there is an accident and traffic is slow or stopped, guess WHO Complains then? The same jerk that does not want police or cameras to ticket the continual speeder and hopefully save a life! Having a license doesn't give a driver the right to do whatever he/she wants, whenever they want, and NOT be responsible. I do not like the idea either, but hey if it gets the jerks off the road and some money into DOT I'm for it. And yes, I do drive fast at times but not 20 or more over the limit. I'm not ready for a pine box yet!
In all your ranting and raving you failed to realize that the majority of posters here have no issue with troopers issuing tickets. It's the indiscriminate cameras that are of issue here.

A camera will not get a drunk speeder off the road

A camera will not check to ensure a drivers license, registration and insurance is up to date

Heck, a camera doesn't even know who is driving the car

Besides, the locals will just learn where the camera are and avoid speeding in those areas while still speeding in other areas.

Does all that sound like a good solution to you?
Alex

AOL

#20 Feb 9, 2009
This is a great idea. Anyone who is against it probably speeds on a regular basis and makes the highways unsafe for everyone.
Robert

Bethel, CT

#21 Feb 9, 2009
Wally in Stamford wrote:
All you complainers are the first to cry foul when someone thinks (yes only thinks) of doing something even as far out as cameras to make people drive more sensibly. What is wrong with ticketing the idiot that does 85MPH on a 55MPH road that is not in the best condition, while zig-zagging between the three lanes to show off your nice BMW, Merc, or Lexus, sports cars? If cameras are not your cup of scotch, then do as NYS and Texas and other states do - having the State Police use aircraft to track and ticket you! I know many that were nailed for speeding open and straight roads out West and in the Midwest. Here there are tooo many cars and trucks for idiots to drive as if "I Own the road because I Have a hot car!" attitude. These people should grown up first and complain later, as when there is an accident and traffic is slow or stopped, guess WHO Complains then? The same jerk that does not want police or cameras to ticket the continual speeder and hopefully save a life! Having a license doesn't give a driver the right to do whatever he/she wants, whenever they want, and NOT be responsible. I do not like the idea either, but hey if it gets the jerks off the road and some money into DOT I'm for it. And yes, I do drive fast at times but not 20 or more over the limit. I'm not ready for a pine box yet!
Well the only problem is Fairfield county 85 is real speed limit! When you drive 55, or feel as though you can drive slow just because the limit is 55, you are causing more problems as the people that drive fast need to pass you now.
I don't know about you people, but I drive past police all the time going over 70 on 95. They do not pull you over unless you are going over 80 anyways!
I highly doubt this will go into effect anyways, too many loop holes. What if I loan my truck to friend and he gets 20 tickets sent to my house for speeding? Does not sound that will hold up in court, right?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

East Lyme Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Lyme Disease Is Growing, Spreading To New Areas... Jul '15 Noah Webster 3
Review: Tacdab Model Trains Jul '15 jaL24 1
News Police logs - Dec. 23 (Jan '10) Jul '15 Christine 21
News Dunham Farm housing plan is no-go (Aug '08) Jun '15 Scoops 5
News Obama's Fundraising Trip, Hero Cop Top Week's N... May '15 BPT 2
Review: Carelot Children's Center (Sep '14) Sep '14 disapointed mom 1
News Man arraigned for East Lyme consignment store r... (Jun '14) Jun '14 beachgirls 1
More from around the web

Personal Finance

East Lyme Mortgages