It's all about the safety....

From http://www.reason.com/brickbat/show/120560.html:

Richard Gregory got a ticket for running a red light in Dallas, Texas. But
Gregory says he was nowhere near Dallas when he supposedly ran that red
light. In fact, he says, he was at home, hundreds of miles away in League
City, Texas. The ticket was generated by a red light camera, and the
photograph that accompanied it showed a black Acura 32T running a red light.
Gregory drives a white Chrysler. Gregory says the officer who signed off on
the ticket mistook an N for an M on the license plates. But Dallas officials
say if he wants the ticket voided, he'll have to come there and prove it
wasn't his car.

Full article at http://www.citizinemag.com/texas/070...ightcamera.htm

In article >, Bill wrote:
> From http://www.reason.com/brickbat/show/120560.html:
>
> Richard Gregory got a ticket for running a red light in Dallas, Texas. But
> Gregory says he was nowhere near Dallas when he supposedly ran that red
> light. In fact, he says, he was at home, hundreds of miles away in League
> City, Texas. The ticket was generated by a red light camera, and the
> photograph that accompanied it showed a black Acura 32T running a red light.
> Gregory drives a white Chrysler. Gregory says the officer who signed off on
> the ticket mistook an N for an M on the license plates. But Dallas officials
> say if he wants the ticket voided, he'll have to come there and prove it
> wasn't his car.

Of course... they want it to cost more to fight the ticket than to pay
it.

It's not like a cop actually bothers to compare the pictures to records
if a human even looks at them at all. These sort of errors pretty much
prove it. Either that or the ability of a cop to tell make and model is
far worse than I think it is. I would think even a 2 year old can tell a
white car from a black car.

Brent P wrote:
> In article >, Bill wrote:
>> From http://www.reason.com/brickbat/show/120560.html:
>>
>> Richard Gregory got a ticket for running a red light in Dallas, Texas. But
>> Gregory says he was nowhere near Dallas when he supposedly ran that red
>> light. In fact, he says, he was at home, hundreds of miles away in League
>> City, Texas. The ticket was generated by a red light camera, and the
>> photograph that accompanied it showed a black Acura 32T running a red light.
>> Gregory drives a white Chrysler. Gregory says the officer who signed off on
>> the ticket mistook an N for an M on the license plates. But Dallas officials
>> say if he wants the ticket voided, he'll have to come there and prove it
>> wasn't his car.
>
> Of course... they want it to cost more to fight the ticket than to pay
> it.
>
> It's not like a cop actually bothers to compare the pictures to records
> if a human even looks at them at all. These sort of errors pretty much
> prove it. Either that or the ability of a cop to tell make and model is
> far worse than I think it is. I would think even a 2 year old can tell a
> white car from a black car.

(Sarcasm: on)

Why should cops worry about these trite things? They're busy SAVING
LIVES!

(Sarcasm: off)


John

--


Von Herzen, moge es wieder zu Herzen gehen. --Beethoven

"The Man Behind The Curtain" > wrote in message
ink.net...

>
> Why should cops worry about these trite things? They're busy SAVING
> LIVES!
>

Why, yes they are. Back in Fayettenam, they were renowned for stopping
joggers flipping them the "bird". I feel sooooooo much safer knowing they
are protecting me from joggers flipping the bird.

"US 71" > wrote in :

>
> "The Man Behind The Curtain" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
>
>>
>> Why should cops worry about these trite things? They're busy SAVING
>> LIVES!
>>
>
> Why, yes they are. Back in Fayettenam, they were renowned for stopping
> joggers flipping them the "bird". I feel sooooooo much safer knowing
> they are protecting me from joggers flipping the bird.
>
>
>
>

and while they're doing that,people are running red lights,swerving across
multiple lanes without signalling,blocking passing lanes;committing all
sorts of significant moving violations that truly endanger the public.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

On Jun 20, 3:44 pm, (Brent P)
wrote:
> In article >, Bill wrote:
> > Fromhttp://www.reason.com/brickbat/show/120560.html:
>
> > Richard Gregory got a ticket for running a red light in Dallas, Texas. But
> > Gregory says he was nowhere near Dallas when he supposedly ran that red
> > light. In fact, he says, he was at home, hundreds of miles away in League
> > City, Texas. The ticket was generated by a red light camera, and the
> > photograph that accompanied it showed a black Acura 32T running a red light.
> > Gregory drives a white Chrysler. Gregory says the officer who signed off on
> > the ticket mistook an N for an M on the license plates. But Dallas officials
> > say if he wants the ticket voided, he'll have to come there and prove it
> > wasn't his car.
>
> Of course... they want it to cost more to fight the ticket than to pay
> it.
>
> It's not like a cop actually bothers to compare the pictures to records
> if a human even looks at them at all. These sort of errors pretty much
> prove it. Either that or the ability of a cop to tell make and model is
> far worse than I think it is. I would think even a 2 year old can tell a
> white car from a black car.

Seeing how cops generally perform in their firearm tests, it wouldn't
surprise me if he couldn't tell black from white!

In article >, Scott en Aztlán wrote:

> It's getting better, especially in your neck of the woods. One bright
> side to this story is that Alderman Dumbass wants to ban devices that
> "sense" red light cameras. Of course, the reality is that no such
> devices exist - the devices which warn drivers about red light cameras
> combine a GPS receiver with a database of known red light camera
> locations; when the current location of the vehicle comes within close
> proximity to the location of a RLC, the device sounds the alert. I
> would laugh my ass off if the Chicago city council wrote an ordinance
> which bans "red light camera DETECTORS" - since the GPS-based devices
> don't *detect* anything, they would remain completely legal.

You expect a cop to figure that little difference out? No. You'll still
have to spend a grand on lawyer to prove it in court.

> The other great thing about this story is the uncommon candor with
> which the topic of RLCs is discussed. It's ALL about the revenue, and
> Alderman Blockhead isn't ashamed to admit it. Hell, he's probably
> PROUD of the clever ways his city bolsters its budget!

Of course. I read that stuff from the newspapers, hear it on the TV and
the radio and then when I repeat it I am tin foil hat kook for believing
it's all about the revenue. Governments in IL are so corrupt and money
hungry those in office come right out and say these things are about
fleecing money from people. Remember Orland Hills' proposed RLC scam?
They would only ticket people who lived elsewhere. Came right out and
said it was about the money.

For some reason people just don't believe it even when it comes right out
of the elected office holder's mouth and is reported in a major paper.

Chicago alderman comes out and says RLCs are for revenue and it's in the
SunTimes, I repeat that I am a tin foil hat kook for taking him at his word.
Dick Cheney says he was a director and is still a member of the CFR on
Cspan, I'm a tin foil hat kook for taking him at his word.

In article >, Scott en Aztlán wrote:

>>Of course. I read that stuff from the newspapers, hear it on the TV and
>>the radio and then when I repeat it I am tin foil hat kook for believing
>>it's all about the revenue.

> I believe you're a little too sensitive about this particular issue. I
> haven't read any non-troll poster in this group disagree with the
> obvious fact that RLCs are more about revenue than anything else, nor
> has anyone called you a THK stating the obvious.

Only in _THIS_ group. When the typical r.a.d topics come up in other
newsgroups I have been considered a kook for saying that speed limits are
underposted for revenue, that RLCs are for revenue, etc and so forth.
Even in face to face conversation I've been the kook for saying RLCs are
to fleece motorists. You've had to see the chi.general RLC threads...
where I'm the odd one out.

I've been called a kook for what is accepted fact here in r.a.d.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Larry Bud wrote:
>
> Seeing how cops generally perform in their firearm tests, it wouldn't
> surprise me if he couldn't tell black from white!

Of course they do! How else do they know who to shoot?

(Okay, that was uncalled for, but it was too easy to pass up. :-)

- --
John Mayson >
Austin, Texas, USA
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFGfFbk2kz4fWh3iuERAtbkAJ9bf2xGP7M9mHbzRkeX5Z 2XSTB3eQCfcdRt
NFQpg6wS9CiH6akOgFGYnQI=
=ZRA2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

US 71 wrote:
> "The Man Behind The Curtain" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
>
>>
>> Why should cops worry about these trite things? They're busy SAVING
>> LIVES!
>>
>
> Why, yes they are. Back in Fayettenam, they were renowned for stopping
> joggers flipping them the "bird". I feel sooooooo much safer knowing
> they are protecting me from joggers flipping the bird.

Fayetteville police are also well known for racial profiling and harassing
UofA athletes.