Red Light Cameras
First Prev
of 2
Next Last
fred87

Saint Petersburg, FL

#1 Mar 14, 2013
Comments? Good, bad, necessary, rip-off of citizens? What say you?
Jackson

Saint Petersburg, FL

#2 Mar 16, 2013
RIP-OFF. Acs, the company that owns them collects, as an example $900K from St. Pete. St. Pete's share was $700K and the state got over $1M. They have some chick from Bradenton who's husband got killed by a red light crasher make appearances and cry to convince cities to install. Nevermind her "buzzed" drunk brother was driving and hit the gas as soon as the light turned green, without looking if cars had cleared the intersection (and didn't see the headlights of the car coming at them). They've reduced the yellow light cycle to generate more tix. Google red light cameras and Naples, FL. Naples finally got rid of theirs, admitting it was nothing but a revenue generating mechanism to screw the citizens. The chick who's husband died appeared in St. Pete with the mayor to tell her story and cry on cue. She's raking in the cash, but hasn't registered as a lobbyist for the industry. Red light cameras are nothing but a rip-off screw and accidents have gone up in every intersection they've been installed in. The sham needs to end.
Smile

Orange City, FL

#3 Mar 18, 2013
Jackson wrote:
RIP-OFF. Acs, the company that owns them collects, as an example $900K from St. Pete. St. Pete's share was $700K and the state got over $1M. They have some chick from Bradenton who's husband got killed by a red light crasher make appearances and cry to convince cities to install. Nevermind her "buzzed" drunk brother was driving and hit the gas as soon as the light turned green, without looking if cars had cleared the intersection (and didn't see the headlights of the car coming at them). They've reduced the yellow light cycle to generate more tix. Google red light cameras and Naples, FL. Naples finally got rid of theirs, admitting it was nothing but a revenue generating mechanism to screw the citizens. The chick who's husband died appeared in St. Pete with the mayor to tell her story and cry on cue. She's raking in the cash, but hasn't registered as a lobbyist for the industry. Red light cameras are nothing but a rip-off screw and accidents have gone up in every intersection they've been installed in. The sham needs to end.
Don't drive like a jerk and you won't have to worry about it moron.
Jackson

Saint Petersburg, FL

#4 Mar 19, 2013
Don't drive like a jerk, don't crash lights. Who I'm worried about is the idiot bearing down behind me, certain to make the light, who rear-ends me. Auto damage can be repaired. Getting rear-ended at 50 mph is usually a certain visit to the hospital and on-going therapy for back/spine problems thanks to the "moron" in a hurry. Sorry, when I see that coming at me, I'd rather take the ticket. But kool-ade drinkers like you have no problem bending over for another revenue source for a city, even when repeated facts show an increase in accidents at cameraed intersections. Where's the increase in safety?
Smile

Orange City, FL

#5 Mar 20, 2013
Jackson wrote:
Don't drive like a jerk, don't crash lights. Who I'm worried about is the idiot bearing down behind me, certain to make the light, who rear-ends me. Auto damage can be repaired. Getting rear-ended at 50 mph is usually a certain visit to the hospital and on-going therapy for back/spine problems thanks to the "moron" in a hurry. Sorry, when I see that coming at me, I'd rather take the ticket. But kool-ade drinkers like you have no problem bending over for another revenue source for a city, even when repeated facts show an increase in accidents at cameraed intersections. Where's the increase in safety?
It's because there are other morons like you on the roads.

You just got caught and thought everyone would jump on your little 'bandwagon bitchin' post.

Here's a fact for you pal, park your car and you and the rest of us won't be concerned about it.
smile-hole

Saint Petersburg, FL

#6 Mar 21, 2013
Why don't you do some research and see that EVERY intersection that has been cameraed has had an increase in accidents and not a decrease as is the selling point. Non-cameraed intersection of Gandy and 4th St. in St. Pete. Which is one of the top rated accident intersections in the state had a decline in accidents without any cameras. Research the city of Naples dumping them after admitting they were nothing but a revenue generating source and that the yellow cycle has been decreased to accommodate such. St. Pete Admin conveniently removed the statistics of the INCREASE in accidents from the report that went to council, until the Times discovered the intentional omission. In 40 years of driving, I've had 1 ticket (not from a camera) and one accident in a funeral home parking lot. So put down the beer that keeps you a smiling and reads some FACTS before shooting off that hole you call your mouth.
Smile

Orange City, FL

#7 Mar 21, 2013
smile-hole wrote:
Why don't you do some research and see that EVERY intersection that has been cameraed has had an increase in accidents and not a decrease as is the selling point. Non-cameraed intersection of Gandy and 4th St. in St. Pete. Which is one of the top rated accident intersections in the state had a decline in accidents without any cameras. Research the city of Naples dumping them after admitting they were nothing but a revenue generating source and that the yellow cycle has been decreased to accommodate such. St. Pete Admin conveniently removed the statistics of the INCREASE in accidents from the report that went to council, until the Times discovered the intentional omission. In 40 years of driving, I've had 1 ticket (not from a camera) and one accident in a funeral home parking lot. So put down the beer that keeps you a smiling and reads some FACTS before shooting off that hole you call your mouth.
Research this: You're upset that no one, that isno one, is lining up behind what you thought would be a real popular rant against the cameras. NEWS FLASH: Not that many drivers have a problem with them.

If you've only had one ticket and one accident that didn't involve the cameras, what's the problem?

After much research, it has been determined that the real problem is that you're a whinny, old land crab with nothing better to do but bitch about anything since no one, that is no one, wants to associate with a crybaby like yourself and you're lonely and crave attention.

So park your car since you are so paranoid about driving before you're at the funeral home again.
Jackson

United States

#8 Mar 26, 2013
Your momma says it's time to get off the computer and go to bed before middle school tomorrow.
Godless swine

Ankeny, IA

#9 Mar 26, 2013
unconstitutional only serving the communist aspirations of the liberals.... say NO to their social engineering
Smile

Orange City, FL

#10 Mar 27, 2013
Jackson wrote:
Your momma says it's time to get off the computer and go to bed before middle school tomorrow.
Maybe you should have listened to your momma there Jackson Five boy.

Your little rant about 'red light crashers' didn't get any legs so this is what you come back with? Really?

Go cry somewhere else, no one shares your dim witted opinion you moron.
jackson

Saint Petersburg, FL

#11 Mar 31, 2013
Speaking of dim witted cryin smile boy ... how about I bend you over and sodomize your used more than google anus? Bet you'll be smiling thru that. What did you add to the discussion? Nothing but displaying your own self-hatred. Bet your such a pleasure that you have no friends, your neighbors hate you and you family detests being around you. Have a nice day! And, remember to smile toothless white trash.

“Just my opinion”

Since: Jul 08

Location hidden

#12 Mar 31, 2013
Godless swine wrote:
unconstitutional only serving the communist aspirations of the liberals.... say NO to their social engineering
This has nothing to do with the left. I agree red light cameras are wrong. Obviously, you are one of those that justs want to bash the left without any intelligent debate. Florida is a republican state through all levels of government , including our governor and we have red light cameras all over. Listen to something other than FUX News.. Communism? Social engineering?.. Really, and we are supposed to have an intelligent conversation with you.
Smile

Orange City, FL

#13 Apr 1, 2013
jackson wrote:
Speaking of dim witted cryin smile boy ... how about I bend you over and sodomize your used more than google anus? Bet you'll be smiling thru that. What did you add to the discussion? Nothing but displaying your own self-hatred. Bet your such a pleasure that you have no friends, your neighbors hate you and you family detests being around you. Have a nice day! And, remember to smile toothless white trash.
Wow! Didn't realize that your homosexuality perpetuated your paranoia of being rear-ended at a red light. Now we all know you LIKE being rear-end. Just step off the jet from San Francisco, did ya?

And ouch! The toothless white trash comment! Did ya think that one up all by yourself?

To repeat: Don't drive like a jerk and you won't have to worry about it.
jackson

Saint Petersburg, FL

#14 Apr 1, 2013
No, I'm homosexual for you. It's that smile that just makes me want to let a bitch go up the pooper. Trot out that San Francisco=homosexual adage. How enlightened of you. But what do you expect from someone that uses their PC with one hand, the other going between their nose and pants? Since you're so focused on my driving skills, give me your coordinates and I'll come mow you down with wild abandon. No great loss to society, just more worm food.

Again mental deficient, the issue is that the FACTS have proven no reduction in accidents .... the safety argument is just a ruse to generate revenue. But you're one of those go with the flow idiots that believes everything, part and parcel, that their local government tells them.

People like you are a waste of oxygen. You have no friends or family. No one will come within ten feet of the decaying appendage you call genitals. The next time you're self pleasuring yourself, put a dry cleaning bag on your head and a belt around you neck. Pull tight. You'll see nirvana ... heaven.

Remember, SMILE, you're on candid camera.
DSM Local

Ankeny, IA

#15 Apr 1, 2013
tampabayallstar wrote:
<quoted text> This has nothing to do with the left. I agree red light cameras are wrong. Obviously, you are one of those that justs want to bash the left without any intelligent debate. Florida is a republican state through all levels of government , including our governor and we have red light cameras all over. Listen to something other than FUX News.. Communism? Social engineering?.. Really, and we are supposed to have an intelligent conversation with you.
Republicans do not adhere to the Constitution they are just as guilty as the left..... Speed limits are unconstituitonal
DSM Local

Ankeny, IA

#16 Apr 1, 2013
---“An unconstitutional act is not law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; affords no protection; creates no office. It is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.” Norton v Shelby County, Tennessee, 118 US 425, 442; 6 S Ct 1121; 30 L Ed 178 (1886).

---One of Americans' basic “Bill of Rights” rights is “the basic constitutional right to travel,” upheld as long ago as in cases such as Crandall v Nevada, 73 US 35; 18 L Ed 745 (1868), Pinkerton v Verberg, 78 Mich 573; 44 NW 579 (1889), and once again reaffirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court in so many words, "right to travel," in Dunn v Blumstein, 405 US 330; 92 S Ct 995; 31 L Ed 2d 274 (1974). This Constitutional "right to travel" has been used to strike down a number of politician-invented laws, devised on various fraudulent pretexts.
A Nice Story

Ankeny, IA

#17 Apr 1, 2013
In the 1914-1918 World War, the French Army Comander, General Joseph Joffre (1852-1931) "was in constant and personal touch with his [subordinate] commanders. Placidly ensconced in the back seat of his car, he would be driven on his rounds at seventy miles an hour by his appointed private chauffeur Georges Bouillot, three times winner of the Grand Prix auto race," says Barbara Tuchman, The Guns of August (New York: Bonanaza Books, 1962), Chap 11, p. 184 (Dell Paperback, p 210). Those were 1914 roads! Can you imagine the fate of any cop trying to arrest him for speeding: perhaps shot on the spot for treason?!!(The webmaster's former Colonel, then a Captain in October 1962, the night of the "Cuban Missile Crisis," ordered his sergeant to shoot the official attempting at a train embarkation point, to enforce a departure rule, compliance with which would have obstructed troop movement, unless the man shut up, ceased and desisted, forthwith! Troop movement thereupon proceeded unhindered, the would-be enforcer got the point!)
Here is Your LAW

Ankeny, IA

#18 Apr 1, 2013
No person shall drive a vehicle at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions and having regard to the actual and potential hazards than existing.'316.183(1) & (4)
http://www.google.com/url...
Your LAW is TOO VAGUE

Ankeny, IA

#19 Apr 1, 2013
---A law can be "void for vagueness." This circumstance occurs when it "fails to give a person of ordinary intelligence fair notice that his contemplated conduct [driving safely] is forbidden.... United States v Harriss, 347 US 612, 617; 74 S Ct 808, 812; 98 L Ed 989, 996 (1954)," cited in People v DeFillippo, 80 Mich App 197; 262 NW2d 921, 923 (1977).

---"The concept of vagueness or indefiniteness rests on the constitutional principle that procedural due process requires fair notice and proper standards for adjudication. The primary issues involved are whether the provisions of a penal statute are sufficiently definite to give reasonable notice of the prohibited conduct to those who wish to avoid its penalties and to apprise judge and jury of standards for the determination of guilt. If the statute is so obscure that men of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its application, it is unconstitutional.
"The concept of overbreadth, on the other hand, rests on principles of substantive due process which forbid the prohibition of certain individual freedoms [e.g., personal liberty].

"The primary issue is not reasonable notice or adequate standards, although these issues may be involved. Rather the issue is whether the language of the statute, given its normal meaning, is so broad that its sanctions may apply to conduct sanctioned by the Constitution. Frequently, the resolution of this issue depends upon whether the statute permits police and other officials to wield unlimited discretionary powers in its enforcement." Landry v Daley, 280 F Supp 938, 951 (1968).[See 45-stops-in-314-miles example in DWB Context.]

---"Who is to determine when the automobile is under control in going around a curve in a particular case, or whether the speed at which it is operated is reasonable and proper? This cannot be left, or course, to the judgement of the operator, for that would result in a practical annulment of the statute.
"The court and jury trying the case, if the statute be upheld, would, of course, have to determine whether the automobile was under control, and whether the speed was reasonable and proper in each particular case. Nobody would know, until after a trial was had and a judgment rendered, what the law was. No man, in driving an automobile around a curve, would have any criterion by which he could determine at what speed the same might be operated without committing a violation of the criminal law.

"The judgement of each particular jury would be the criterion which would have to be observed, and this judgment cannot be ascertained until after the alleged offense has been committed.

"To state the case in another way, it may be said that the Legislature has not created an offense at all. It has not exercised its legislative power, but has attempted to cast the same upon the courts and juries in this class of cases....

"And not only is it in effect a delegation to the courts of legislative power, but an attempt to delegate to them power to pass ex post facto laws, because the law governing in particular cases would not be declared, or would not be known, until after the offense was actually committed." State v Lantz, 90 W Va 738; 111 SE 766; 26 ALR 894 (1922).

“Just my opinion”

Since: Jul 08

Location hidden

#20 Apr 1, 2013
DSM Local wrote:
<quoted text>
Republicans do not adhere to the Constitution they are just as guilty as the left..... Speed limits are unconstituitonal
I agree DSM...I was just responding to one miseducated FUX news listener that is blaming this on the left and I proved the guy wrong because my state is GOP all the way down the line. We have those stupid spy machines all over.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
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.

Englewood Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Woman finds husband shot dead (Feb '08) 2 hr housecall 74
News Rare panther sighting in Central Florida (May '08) Thu George Washington 94
Alias (Dec '13) Thu Cruzer 123
Stephen McNutt = Deadbeat dad... (sperm donor).... (Jun '10) Wed Chris 55
News Man gets 24 years in murder plea, will testify ... (Feb '08) Apr 20 zell 24
News Lemon Bay Blue Grass Band to perform every Monday (Feb '13) Apr 12 rouge chris 3
Shark fishing and other fishing Englewood beach ? Nov '15 Englewood man 1
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Englewood Mortgages