Welcome to The Purse Forum.

Jahpson · Mar 27th, 2009, 04:45 PM

Very Interesting read!

________________________

The village of Schaumburg, Ill., installed a camera at Woodfield Mall last November to film cars that were running red lights, then used the footage to issue citations. Results were astonishing. The town issued $1 million in fines in just three months.
But drivers caught by the unforgiving enforcement -- which mainly snared those who didn't come to a full stop before turning right on red -- exploded in anger. Many vowed to stop shopping at the mall unless the camera was turned off. The village stopped monitoring right turns at the intersection in January.
Once a rarity, traffic cameras are filming away across the country. And they're not just focusing their sights on red-light runners. The latest technology includes cameras that keep tabs on highways to catch speeders in the act and infrared license-plate readers that nab ticket and tax scofflaws.

Associated Press Vehicles drive past a speed surveillance and ticketing camera on a road heading into downtown in Cleveland, Ohio, earlier this month. The cameras measure the speed of passing motorists and make a photo of the car's license plate so the city can mail a speeding ticket to the offending driver.

Drivers -- many accusing law enforcement of using spy tactics to trap unsuspecting citizens -- are fighting back with everything from pick axes to camera-blocking Santa Clauses. They're moving beyond radar detectors and CB radios to wage their own tech war against detection, using sprays that promise to blur license numbers and Web sites that plot the cameras' locations and offer tips to beat them.
Cities and states say the devices can improve safety. They also have the added bonus of bringing in revenue in tight times. But critics point to research showing cameras can actually lead to more rear-end accidents because drivers often slam their brakes when they see signs warning them of cameras in the area. Others are angry that the cameras are operated by for-profit companies that typically make around $5,000 per camera each month.
"We're putting law enforcement in the hands of third parties," says Ryan Denke, a Peoria, Ariz., electrical engineer who has started a Web site, Photoradarscam.com, to protest the state's speed cameras. Mr. Denke says he hasn't received a ticket via the cameras.

Protests over the cameras aren't new, but they appear to be rising in tandem with the effort to install more. Suppliers estimate that there are now slightly over 3,000 red-light and speed cameras in operation in the U.S., up from about 2,500 a year ago. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety says that at the end of last year, 345 U.S. jurisdictions were using red-light cameras, up from 243 in 2007 and 155 in 2006.
One traffic-cam seller, Arizona-based American Traffic Solutions Inc., recently reported it had installed its 1,000th camera, with 500 more under contract in 140 cities and towns. Rival Redflex Holdings Ltd. says it had 1,494 cameras in operation in 21 states at the end of 2008, and expects to top 1,700 by the end of this year.
Municipalities are establishing ever-more-clever snares. Last month, in a push to collect overdue taxes, the City Council in New Britain, Conn., approved the purchase of a $17,000 infrared-camera called "Plate Hunter." Mounted on a police car, the device automatically reads the license plates of every passing car and alerts the officer if the owner has failed to pay traffic tickets or is delinquent on car taxes. Police can then pull the cars over and impound them.
New Britain was inspired by nearby New Haven, where four of the cameras brought in $2.8 million in just three months last year. New Haven has also put license-plate readers on tow trucks. They now roam the streets searching for cars owned by people who haven't paid their parking tickets or car-property taxes. Last year 91% of the city's vehicle taxes were collected, up from "the upper 70s" before it acquired the technology, says city tax collector C.J. Cuticello.

WSJ's Stacey Delo explores efforts to develop "smart intersections" which advocates hope can create a better informed driver and safer roads.

Not that it's been smooth sailing. Mr. Cuticello recalls the time he tried to help tow the car of a woman who owed $536. She knocked him over, jumped in the car and drove away. She was later arrested for a hit-and-run.
City leaders have generally maintained that while revenue is a welcome byproduct of traffic citations, the laws are in place to improve public safety or reduce accidents.
But a study in last month's Journal of Law and Economics concluded that, as many motorists have long suspected, "governments use traffic tickets as a means of generating revenue." The authors, Thomas Garrett of the St. Louis Fed and Gary Wagner of the University of Arkansas at Little Rock, studied 14 years of traffic-ticket data from 96 counties in North Carolina. They found that when local-government revenue declines, police issue more tickets in the following year. Officials at the North Carolina Association of Chiefs of Police didn't respond to requests for comment.
George Dunham, a village trustee in Schaumburg, says installing the red-light camera at the mall "wasn't about the revenue -- no one will believe that, but it wasn't." On the other hand, he says, with fuel taxes and sales taxes falling, its retreat on the camera has had a "painful" impact on Schaumburg's $170 million budget.
View Full Image

Associated Press An intersection in Jackson, Miss., bears a sign warning drivers that the intersection is being photographed for possible traffic violations.

Cameras to catch speeders on highways, which are common in Europe, are just starting to spread in the U.S. Last June, Arizona added a provision for speed cams on highways to its budget bill, with an anticipated $90 million in fines expected to help balance the budget.
State police started placing the cameras on highways around Phoenix in November. In December, a trooper arrested a man in Glendale while he was attacking a camera with a pick ax. In another incident, a troupe of men dressed as Santa Claus toured around the city of Tempe in December and placed gaily wrapped boxes over several traffic cameras, blocking their views. Their exploits have been viewed more than 222,000 times on YouTube.
Republican state representative Sam Crump has introduced a bill in the legislature to remove the cameras, which he says were approved "in the dead of night...as a budget gimmick."
In the meantime, the cameras are still being rolled out, and have already issued more than 200,000 violation notices since September. They are set to take a picture of cars going more than 11 miles over the speed limit, and they also photograph the driver.
Some entrepreneurs are trying to help camera opponents fight back. Phantom Plate Inc., a Harrisburg, Pa., company, sells Photoblocker spray at $29.99 a can and Photoshield, a plastic skin for a license plate. Both promise to reflect a traffic-camera flash, making the license plate unreadable. California passed a law banning use of the spray and the plate covers, which became effective at the beginning of this year.
A free iPhone application available on Trapster.com lets drivers use their cellphones to mark a traffic cam or speed trap on a Google map. The information on new locales is sent to Trapster's central computer, and then added to the map.
Other anti-cam Web sites counsel people to examine the pictures that come in the mail with citations. If the facial image is too blurry, they say, drivers can often argue successfully in court that no positive identification has been made of them.
Studies are mixed on whether traffic cameras improve safety. Some research indicates they may increase rear-end collisions as drivers slam on their brakes when they see posted camera notices. A 2005 Federal Highway Administration study of six cities' red-light cameras concluded there was a "modest" economic benefit because a reduction in side crashes due to less red-light running offset the higher costs of more rear-end crashes.
A study of crash causes released by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration last July found about 5% of crashes were due to traveling too fast and 2% were from running red lights. Driving off the side of the road, falling asleep at the wheel and crossing the center lines were the biggest causes identified.

Click for original: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1238...?mod=yhoofront

Roo · Mar 27th, 2009, 05:57 PM

Traffic cams have been really common in Calif. for years, and as the economy puts the crunch on government more and more, methinks we'll be seeing this more than ever as a revenue generator.

caxe · Mar 27th, 2009, 09:15 PM

No doubt, Roo!

coachmommyofmin · Mar 28th, 2009, 02:02 AM

too much power- they are getting too much power over people. i don't like the idea. soon they'll monitor your home as well, to make sure you don't run any "red lights" inside, as well....

LV-PRADAfanatic · Mar 28th, 2009, 02:09 PM

geezz... glad i am not there...

kmh1190 · Mar 28th, 2009, 02:14 PM

My uncle was the head traffic engineer for the city I live in. He had monitors in his office of some of the traffic cams around the city and says the cameras may look small but you can actually see a lot. He says a lot of people pick their nose and scratch things in their cars. So before you pick or scratch that itch......be aware that someone may be watching!

kirkcaldy · Mar 28th, 2009, 03:38 PM

just a money maker

HauteMama · Mar 28th, 2009, 08:38 PM

Originally Posted by coachmommyofmin

too much power- they are getting too much power over people. i don't like the idea. soon they'll monitor your home as well, to make sure you don't run any "red lights" inside, as well....

I'm torn on this. On the one hand, I do feel like Big Brother is starting to be omnipresent, but on the other hand, there is no presumption of privacy in public places. And there isn't anyplace more public than a street. Cameras in subway trains and buses can increase safety and catch criminals, and people approve of cameras when they are used in that way. But when they are used to catch regular people breaking the law, people get upset. We can't have it both ways.

purly · Mar 28th, 2009, 08:57 PM

I don't like being watched.

schadenfreude · Mar 28th, 2009, 10:35 PM

People in AZ, for the most part, are very vocal about the cameras - pro and con. I agree with whoever said something about being in public opens oneself up to being photographed, but my main issue with the cameras is that the public never voted to install them. It's a slimy government move to increase revenues while pretending to care about the public's safety. It's such crap. Let's just raise taxes on gasoline and be honest about it, if there is no other way around our financial woes (heaven forbid we actually trim the budget). In response, my family all has reflective license plate covers, and I always shield my face when I drive past a camera (which on some highway stretches, is every couple of miles).

Those who are more intimately familiar with the law say that the whole process is unconstitutional -- a human being never observes you committing a crime and thus the charges weigh on a machine, which in the eyes of the law is always right and free of malfunction. The citizen is truly powerless. Furthermore, the tickets come in the mail; the "criminals" are not formally served. The way around this is to ignore the ticket. In 60 or 90 days it "expires" for lack of a better word, that is, if you can ignore the process servers they actually send to the house.

DH actually got served at home on New Year's Day while watching a football game!!! Who ever thinks that's going to happen then? He was livid.

For those of you who live in Arizona and want to learn more about protesting this act of Big Brother, go to www.camerafraud.com.

devoted7 · Mar 28th, 2009, 11:28 PM

I love Schaumburg! It's the best place to be day or night! I don't blame people not wanting to shop there if cameras are up. I believe that Illinois will be passing a law soon regarding speed traps along with more traffic light cameras. It's crazy!

kattykay · Mar 29th, 2009, 01:05 PM

I think there are cameras in NJ at some of the newwer traffic lights but im not exactly sure. They look like cameras but they could just be sensors. Either way if you dont run the light you shuld have nothing to worry about. However the speeding thing on the highway bothers me. not that im doing like 90 in a 65, but here the cops always let you go 10 over on the parkway and cameras would be a major pain in the ass.

~Fabulousity~ · Mar 30th, 2009, 09:40 AM

Originally Posted by Roo

Traffic cams have been really common in Calif. for years, and as the economy puts the crunch on government more and more, methinks we'll be seeing this more than ever as a revenue generator.

Right! A news station did a story on this, I can't remember which one it was.

Odette · Mar 30th, 2009, 02:51 PM

Well I think if you run a red light you should get a ticket - it is against the law.

If you don't want people to turn on a red light, put up a sign that says "No turn on red."

As long as the intersection is clearly labeled with a sign that states the intersection is monitored by a camera, I don't really see anything wrong with it. It's like the cameras in construction zones. In Illinois we have "Speed Photo Enforced" construction zones to help eliminate speeding that is dangerous to workers and other cars. It makes things safer.

Mar 27th, 2009, 04:45 PM	#1
Jahpson OP Member Joined: Aug 2007 Location: The Playground Posts: 25,772	Big Brother is watching you drive... Very Interesting read! ________________________ The village of Schaumburg, Ill., installed a camera at Woodfield Mall last November to film cars that were running red lights, then used the footage to issue citations. Results were astonishing. The town issued $1 million in fines in just three months. But drivers caught by the unforgiving enforcement -- which mainly snared those who didn't come to a full stop before turning right on red -- exploded in anger. Many vowed to stop shopping at the mall unless the camera was turned off. The village stopped monitoring right turns at the intersection in January. Once a rarity, traffic cameras are filming away across the country. And they're not just focusing their sights on red-light runners. The latest technology includes cameras that keep tabs on highways to catch speeders in the act and infrared license-plate readers that nab ticket and tax scofflaws. Associated Press Vehicles drive past a speed surveillance and ticketing camera on a road heading into downtown in Cleveland, Ohio, earlier this month. The cameras measure the speed of passing motorists and make a photo of the car's license plate so the city can mail a speeding ticket to the offending driver. Drivers -- many accusing law enforcement of using spy tactics to trap unsuspecting citizens -- are fighting back with everything from pick axes to camera-blocking Santa Clauses. They're moving beyond radar detectors and CB radios to wage their own tech war against detection, using sprays that promise to blur license numbers and Web sites that plot the cameras' locations and offer tips to beat them. Cities and states say the devices can improve safety. They also have the added bonus of bringing in revenue in tight times. But critics point to research showing cameras can actually lead to more rear-end accidents because drivers often slam their brakes when they see signs warning them of cameras in the area. Others are angry that the cameras are operated by for-profit companies that typically make around $5,000 per camera each month. "We're putting law enforcement in the hands of third parties," says Ryan Denke, a Peoria, Ariz., electrical engineer who has started a Web site, Photoradarscam.com, to protest the state's speed cameras. Mr. Denke says he hasn't received a ticket via the cameras. Protests over the cameras aren't new, but they appear to be rising in tandem with the effort to install more. Suppliers estimate that there are now slightly over 3,000 red-light and speed cameras in operation in the U.S., up from about 2,500 a year ago. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety says that at the end of last year, 345 U.S. jurisdictions were using red-light cameras, up from 243 in 2007 and 155 in 2006. One traffic-cam seller, Arizona-based American Traffic Solutions Inc., recently reported it had installed its 1,000th camera, with 500 more under contract in 140 cities and towns. Rival Redflex Holdings Ltd. says it had 1,494 cameras in operation in 21 states at the end of 2008, and expects to top 1,700 by the end of this year. Municipalities are establishing ever-more-clever snares. Last month, in a push to collect overdue taxes, the City Council in New Britain, Conn., approved the purchase of a $17,000 infrared-camera called "Plate Hunter." Mounted on a police car, the device automatically reads the license plates of every passing car and alerts the officer if the owner has failed to pay traffic tickets or is delinquent on car taxes. Police can then pull the cars over and impound them. New Britain was inspired by nearby New Haven, where four of the cameras brought in $2.8 million in just three months last year. New Haven has also put license-plate readers on tow trucks. They now roam the streets searching for cars owned by people who haven't paid their parking tickets or car-property taxes. Last year 91% of the city's vehicle taxes were collected, up from "the upper 70s" before it acquired the technology, says city tax collector C.J. Cuticello. WSJ's Stacey Delo explores efforts to develop "smart intersections" which advocates hope can create a better informed driver and safer roads. Not that it's been smooth sailing. Mr. Cuticello recalls the time he tried to help tow the car of a woman who owed $536. She knocked him over, jumped in the car and drove away. She was later arrested for a hit-and-run. City leaders have generally maintained that while revenue is a welcome byproduct of traffic citations, the laws are in place to improve public safety or reduce accidents. But a study in last month's Journal of Law and Economics concluded that, as many motorists have long suspected, "governments use traffic tickets as a means of generating revenue." The authors, Thomas Garrett of the St. Louis Fed and Gary Wagner of the University of Arkansas at Little Rock, studied 14 years of traffic-ticket data from 96 counties in North Carolina. They found that when local-government revenue declines, police issue more tickets in the following year. Officials at the North Carolina Association of Chiefs of Police didn't respond to requests for comment. George Dunham, a village trustee in Schaumburg, says installing the red-light camera at the mall "wasn't about the revenue -- no one will believe that, but it wasn't." On the other hand, he says, with fuel taxes and sales taxes falling, its retreat on the camera has had a "painful" impact on Schaumburg's $170 million budget. View Full Image Associated Press An intersection in Jackson, Miss., bears a sign warning drivers that the intersection is being photographed for possible traffic violations. Cameras to catch speeders on highways, which are common in Europe, are just starting to spread in the U.S. Last June, Arizona added a provision for speed cams on highways to its budget bill, with an anticipated $90 million in fines expected to help balance the budget. State police started placing the cameras on highways around Phoenix in November. In December, a trooper arrested a man in Glendale while he was attacking a camera with a pick ax. In another incident, a troupe of men dressed as Santa Claus toured around the city of Tempe in December and placed gaily wrapped boxes over several traffic cameras, blocking their views. Their exploits have been viewed more than 222,000 times on YouTube. Republican state representative Sam Crump has introduced a bill in the legislature to remove the cameras, which he says were approved "in the dead of night...as a budget gimmick." In the meantime, the cameras are still being rolled out, and have already issued more than 200,000 violation notices since September. They are set to take a picture of cars going more than 11 miles over the speed limit, and they also photograph the driver. Some entrepreneurs are trying to help camera opponents fight back. Phantom Plate Inc., a Harrisburg, Pa., company, sells Photoblocker spray at $29.99 a can and Photoshield, a plastic skin for a license plate. Both promise to reflect a traffic-camera flash, making the license plate unreadable. California passed a law banning use of the spray and the plate covers, which became effective at the beginning of this year. A free iPhone application available on Trapster.com lets drivers use their cellphones to mark a traffic cam or speed trap on a Google map. The information on new locales is sent to Trapster's central computer, and then added to the map. Other anti-cam Web sites counsel people to examine the pictures that come in the mail with citations. If the facial image is too blurry, they say, drivers can often argue successfully in court that no positive identification has been made of them. Studies are mixed on whether traffic cameras improve safety. Some research indicates they may increase rear-end collisions as drivers slam on their brakes when they see posted camera notices. A 2005 Federal Highway Administration study of six cities' red-light cameras concluded there was a "modest" economic benefit because a reduction in side crashes due to less red-light running offset the higher costs of more rear-end crashes. A study of crash causes released by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration last July found about 5% of crashes were due to traveling too fast and 2% were from running red lights. Driving off the side of the road, falling asleep at the wheel and crossing the center lines were the biggest causes identified. Click for original: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1238...?mod=yhoofront
	__________________

Mar 27th, 2009, 05:57 PM	#2
Roo lemme know Joined: Apr 2006 Location: Rue Roo Posts: 13,083	Traffic cams have been really common in Calif. for years, and as the economy puts the crunch on government more and more, methinks we'll be seeing this more than ever as a revenue generator.
	__________________ I know now that there is no one thing that is true - it is all true. -Hemingway

Mar 27th, 2009, 09:15 PM	#3
caxe Established 1976 Joined: Mar 2007 Location: The Southeast, US Posts: 4,983	No doubt, Roo!
	__________________ Let's get it on. It's time to get down!

Mar 28th, 2009, 02:02 AM	#4
coachmommyofmin Member Joined: Oct 2008 Posts: 2,712	too much power- they are getting too much power over people. i don't like the idea. soon they'll monitor your home as well, to make sure you don't run any "red lights" inside, as well....
coachmommyofmin Member Joined: Oct 2008 Posts: 2,712	__________________ Banned until next PCE hits!!! "There will always be something newer and better, so try not to get carried away -self!"

Mar 28th, 2009, 02:09 PM	#5
LV-PRADAfanatic Built Hot for LV Joined: Oct 2007 Location: That's ME ^_^ Posts: 17,026	geezz... glad i am not there...
	__________________ All so LoVely, so little time to get them all

Mar 28th, 2009, 02:14 PM	#6
kmh1190 Purse crazed Joined: Feb 2008 Location: Northern California/Central Valley Posts: 4,698	My uncle was the head traffic engineer for the city I live in. He had monitors in his office of some of the traffic cams around the city and says the cameras may look small but you can actually see a lot. He says a lot of people pick their nose and scratch things in their cars. So before you pick or scratch that itch......be aware that someone may be watching!
	__________________ Being Mindful of my purchases. Attempting to not buy anymore bags until May-June.

Mar 28th, 2009, 03:38 PM	#7
kirkcaldy Sofa King Banned Joined: Aug 2008 Location: moved=where no sucking up is aloud! Posts: 1,643	just a money maker

Mar 28th, 2009, 08:57 PM	#9
purly God Save McQueen! Joined: Sep 2006 Posts: 4,675	I don't like being watched.
purly God Save McQueen! Joined: Sep 2006 Posts: 4,675	__________________ .

Mar 28th, 2009, 10:35 PM	#10
schadenfreude yes please Joined: Nov 2007 Posts: 1,741	People in AZ, for the most part, are very vocal about the cameras - pro and con. I agree with whoever said something about being in public opens oneself up to being photographed, but my main issue with the cameras is that the public never voted to install them. It's a slimy government move to increase revenues while pretending to care about the public's safety. It's such crap. Let's just raise taxes on gasoline and be honest about it, if there is no other way around our financial woes (heaven forbid we actually trim the budget). In response, my family all has reflective license plate covers, and I always shield my face when I drive past a camera (which on some highway stretches, is every couple of miles). Those who are more intimately familiar with the law say that the whole process is unconstitutional -- a human being never observes you committing a crime and thus the charges weigh on a machine, which in the eyes of the law is always right and free of malfunction. The citizen is truly powerless. Furthermore, the tickets come in the mail; the "criminals" are not formally served. The way around this is to ignore the ticket. In 60 or 90 days it "expires" for lack of a better word, that is, if you can ignore the process servers they actually send to the house. DH actually got served at home on New Year's Day while watching a football game!!! Who ever thinks that's going to happen then? He was livid. For those of you who live in Arizona and want to learn more about protesting this act of Big Brother, go to www.camerafraud.com.
schadenfreude yes please Joined: Nov 2007 Posts: 1,741

Mar 28th, 2009, 11:28 PM	#11
devoted7 ♥♥♥ Joined: Jan 2006 Posts: 8,030	I love Schaumburg! It's the best place to be day or night! I don't blame people not wanting to shop there if cameras are up. I believe that Illinois will be passing a law soon regarding speed traps along with more traffic light cameras. It's crazy!
devoted7 ♥♥♥ Joined: Jan 2006 Posts: 8,030

Mar 29th, 2009, 01:05 PM	#12
kattykay sofa king sexy! Joined: Jun 2008 Location: new jersey Posts: 4,479	I think there are cameras in NJ at some of the newwer traffic lights but im not exactly sure. They look like cameras but they could just be sensors. Either way if you dont run the light you shuld have nothing to worry about. However the speeding thing on the highway bothers me. not that im doing like 90 in a 65, but here the cops always let you go 10 over on the parkway and cameras would be a major pain in the ass.
	__________________ Some say the glass is half empty, Some say the glass is half full, I say "are you gonna drink that?"

Mar 30th, 2009, 02:51 PM	#14
Odette Member Joined: Aug 2007 Posts: 5,493	Well I think if you run a red light you should get a ticket - it is against the law. If you don't want people to turn on a red light, put up a sign that says "No turn on red." As long as the intersection is clearly labeled with a sign that states the intersection is monitored by a camera, I don't really see anything wrong with it. It's like the cameras in construction zones. In Illinois we have "Speed Photo Enforced" construction zones to help eliminate speeding that is dangerous to workers and other cars. It makes things safer.
Odette Member Joined: Aug 2007 Posts: 5,493	__________________

Welcome to The Purse Forum.

Our Purse Forum, or TPF, is the #1 online social network for everything designer handbag related. Join over 250,000 enthusiastic members in this friendly community and start engaging in the discussion today.