Is This Proof That Redlight Cameras Are Just For Revenue, Not Safety?

Despite the will of the people, Houston keeps it's redlight cameras because it is worth $10,000,000 to the cops. Why have the vote in the first place if they had no intentions of honoring it. They claim it is a contractual thing, but I bet once the contract runs out they will be lightning quick to renew it. More proof that the powers that be are bastards & don't give a stuff what the people say.

www.click2houston.com...

Fifty-three percent voted to turn off red-light cameras on Tuesday. The cameras document motorists who run red lights at 70 Houston intersections.
"This is over. The citizens have voted. They said take the cameras down," attorney Paul Kubosh said.
Kubosh led the fight against the cameras and he wants them turned off now.

Houston Proposition No. 3 Red Light Cameras
Won Option Votes %
Against 181,082 53
For 161,737 47

"The citizens said take them down. You're violating the will of the people. You're signing your own political death warrant," he said.
Houston Mayor Annise Parker said the contract with the camera provider runs another four years.
"I understand the will of the voters. I respect the vote of the citizens of Houston," she said. "We have to go through the contract and we're going to have to find out what our options are. I don't know the answers to that. It's not going to be to me to decide. It's what's available under the contract."
The mayor said the cameras contribute $10 million a year to the Houston Police Department's budget. She said jobs will be lost during an already lean economy.
"We're not going to lay off police officers. We're not going to lay off firefighters. But the ability to fund everything else in the city is in question," Parker said.
"They're just trying to distract from the vote. The vote is, the cameras come down, repeal the ordinance, plain and simple. Handle your budget the way you handle it. Repeal your ordinance and you go on. This is over," Kubosh said.
Proposition Three asked voters, "Shall the city of Houston continue to use red light cameras to enforce state or local laws relating to traffic safety?"
The vote came four years after the first cameras were activated in Houston.
Numerous studies have found a drop in collisions at intersections with cameras, partly because signs warning people of the cameras make them drive more carefully.
Kubosh contends that the devices are a municipal shakedown of the city's motorists and have not been proved to be a life saver.
American Traffic Solutions Inc., the Scottsdale, AZ-based vendor chosen by the city of Houston in May of 2006 to install and administer Houston’s red-light safety camera program issued the following statement.
"American Traffic Solutions is proud to have stood with an unprecedented safety coalition including Houston police, firefighters, medical groups and other community leaders in support of the Keep Houston Safe campaign to keep the red light safety cameras and save lives. Now that the voters of Houston have spoken, we have reached out to city officials for their guidance on the steps ahead. These consultations have already commenced, and we pledge our fullest cooperation throughout the process."

In the state of Arizona, and after much deliberation, it was found that not only were the camera's not properly maintained, but the camera company was based out of Canada! So when a moving violation was sent, the tickets paid, 3/4 of that price tag was sent to the canucks. Further investigation found that in almost ALL states, any citation issued must be "served" by a member of the law enforcement community, ie., cop, constable etc...
because these tickets were being mailed, the recipient was not officially "served" and the courts found that by not being properly served per the law, the ticket was now null and void.

reply to post by Whereweheaded

Further investigation found that in almost ALL states, any citation issued must be "served" by a member of the law enforcement community, ie., cop, constable etc...
because these tickets were being mailed, the recipient was not officially "served" and the courts found that by not being properly served per the law, the ticket was now null and void.

In my part of the world the bastards that be, mail fines out all the time, speeding tickets as well. Usually people receive the fines up to three weeks later when you can't remember anything about it. Also if you want the photo they claim to have as proof, you have to pay more to get a copy of that photo. So even if you fight it & win in court they still make money out of you by charging for the photo.

Numerous courts, and at least 1 in AZ that I know of ruled these cameras unconstitutional.

Personally, I have received 3 tickets, including one that caught me doing a little housecleaning up in a nostril. I ignored all 3, and nothing ever happened. Phoenix didnt mail theirs out using certified mail, and as a result, if I ever had to go to court, they could never prove I actually received the ticket.

Redlight and photo radar are blatantly unconstitutional, and should simply be ignored.

Of course they are all about revenue, the same with any traffic violation. Yet another way for criminals in government to steal more of our money.

reply to post by acrux


Is it not possible to demand that they prove your guilt? You can simply say that you were not there at that time and that their machinery is faulty until you are provided with some evidence to the contrary. Surely every "civilized" country must provide evidence of guilt. You can't have to pay them to defend yourself. They could send tickets to every person simply at random.

By the by, I just thought I'd drop this tidbit of info here. When I drive, I go exactly the zone's speed, but our car is about 4km below the actual speed, so I always know I'm safe. Plus, when the light turns yellow, I won't go through it anymore. I never run reds -- ever. But I notice the cops do it regularly, along with most other drivers.

reply to post by BigTimeCheater


I totally agree, but had to laugh! Nostril cleaning?!!!