Best speed camera pictures ever

Message

CNF2002 · #21 Unread post by **CNF2002** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:49 am

I'm so tired of hearing the big brother excuse against traffic cameras.

Wake up! You are constantly being video-taped. When you walk into a gas station, get cash from the ATM, order from the drive-thru, walk past any commercial business or stand around in their parking lot, or eat a burrito at Taco Bell...you are on camera.

I don't hear anyone complaining that the Quickie-Mart videotapes you when you go to buy a candy bar, except maybe the guy who wants to steal it.

The ONLY reason people are against these cameras is because they know they'll get caught doing what they do every day; speed, because they think the laws are stupid and therefore should not apply to them. They've gotten away with it for SO long with no consequence, they suddenly freak out when they realize it might be time to pay the piper. Maybe the traffic laws wouldn't be such a big cash cow for the city if people would stop breaking them!

Hey...good for them! The more of you that get tickets, the more our city has to spend on building nice parks, putting police where they really need to be (not nabbing soccer moms and listening to sob stories about why they were going 15 over) and fixing the roads.

#22 Unread post by **Jamers!** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 11:11 am

VermilionX wrote:
JWF505 wrote:
the US has em too, there are all over my neighborhood, especially around the schools.

JWF
i know there's a lot of them around downtown LA.

is that where you live? if not please tell me so that in case i drive/ride by there, i'll be careful.

Pasadena and Burbank have a decent ammout, thats where i am.

JWF

< I Fly > · Mon Jun 12, 2006 1:38 pm

I really can't believe how many tools of big brother there are on here.

Do you honestly think our safety is first in their mind with these cameras?
The bureaucracy is full of sleazeballs who want our money to pay for their ana-pencils.

The people vandalizing the cams are fine by me.
I think the law should be more concerned about terrorists, DRUNK drivers, and violent crime than drivers going a few miles over the speed limit.

Chris8187 · Mon Jun 12, 2006 2:33 pm

CNF2002 wrote:I'm so tired of hearing the big brother excuse against traffic cameras.

Wake up! You are constantly being video-taped. When you walk into a gas station, get cash from the ATM, order from the drive-thru, walk past any commercial business or stand around in their parking lot, or eat a burrito at Taco Bell...you are on camera.

I don't hear anyone complaining that the Quickie-Mart videotapes you when you go to buy a candy bar, except maybe the guy who wants to steal it.

There is ONE major difference in the examples you used. The quickie mart and banks are PRIVATE property not public like the roads we travel on.

#25 Unread post by **Jamers!** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 2:53 pm

< I Fly > wrote:I really can't believe how many tools of big brother there are on here.

Do you honestly think our safety is first in their mind with these cameras?
The bureaucracy is full of sleazeballs who want our money to pay for their ana-pencils.

The people vandalizing the cams are fine by me.
I think the law should be more concerned about terrorists, DRUNK drivers, and violent crime than drivers going a few miles over the speed limit.

you seem to be against any sort of law that concerns bikes or speeders, why?

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2007/budget.html

why dont you check out the budget, and see how much we are spending on Dep of homeland security and Dep of Justice, then compare those #s to how much we are spending on things like speed cameras and traffic light cameras, we dont spend all that much. And the law is concerned about EVERY law, you can not enforce or work harder on one law over anouther, so to propose speeders be left alone so drunk drivers are watched more closely is stupid, every law is enforced equally no matter how stupid or pointless it may seem.

JWF

Chris8187 · Mon Jun 12, 2006 2:58 pm

JWF505 wrote: you seem to be against any sort of law that concerns bikes or speeders, why?

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2007/budget.html

why dont you check out the budget, and see how much we are spending on Dep of homeland security and Dep of Justice, then compare those #s to how much we are spending on things like speed cameras and traffic light cameras, we dont spend all that much. And the law is concerned about EVERY law, you can not enforce or work harder on one law over anouther, so to propose speeders be left alone so drunk drivers are watched more closely is stupid, every law is enforced equally no matter how stupid or pointless it may seem.

JWF

]

Do you even know what you are saying? Every law should not and is not equally inforced. That doesn't even make any sense. We should concentrate on speeders the same as we do with murderers and rapists??? I hope you just don't understand what you said because if we did what you want us too, everyone would go the speed limit or we would have a lot more "poo poo" going on in the world than we already do.

#27 Unread post by **Jamers!** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 3:11 pm

Chris8187 wrote:
Do you even know what you are saying? Every law should not and is not equally inforced. That doesn't even make any sense. We should concentrate on speeders the same as we do with murderers and rapists??? I hope you just don't understand what you said because if we did what you want us too, everyone would go the speed limit or we would have a lot more "poo poo" going on in the world than we already do.

What im saying is that we should not turn a blind eye to one law to focus more on another, or corse a murder is higher priority than a speeder. Speed cameras are a way to do that. By eliminating the need for an officer on the streets watching speeders they can put more badges in the areas that have murders and prevent them and other serious crimes. By saying that speed cameras are dumb and un-needed it would force officers to spend part of their time keeping an eye on the street. I can see how i worded it wrong, what im saying is, if we can enforce speeding laws while keeping officers on more 'important' crimes then we can enforce laws more equally. And i disagree, i think if every law could be enforced equally without sacrificing how we deal with it, we should. Laws are laws and if we could enforce them all equally and properly we would and should.

JWF

Chris8187 · Mon Jun 12, 2006 3:27 pm

Okay, now that makes more sense

. Cameras aren't bad in theory, but the government does change speed limits and put cameras in unneeded areas to only make money, which is wrong.

#29 Unread post by **Jamers!** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 3:36 pm

Chris8187 wrote:Okay, now that makes more sense . Cameras aren't bad in theory, but the government does change speed limits and put cameras in unneeded areas to only make money, which is wrong.

agreed, but when they are put on a big empty street that was often used for racing by the high school in my town, and they stop the racing, at least at that loaction (that i happened to live on) then i must thank the camera people, but when they are used simply to feed the politicians then "fudge" em.

JWF

CNF2002 · #30 Unread post by **CNF2002** » Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:42 am

Chris8187 wrote: There is ONE major difference in the examples you used. The quickie mart and banks are PRIVATE property not public like the roads we travel on.

No, there are cameras all over public roads. I suppose all traffic condition reports should be thrown out in the interest of your privacy (there are already cameras on every major freeway).

And you hit the nail on the head...public. I can stand on the corner with a camera and videotape an intersection if I want to. How is the govt invading your privacy if you are walking around in PUBLIC?

Oh! I forgot this is about you getting caught for breaking the law. That makes it a violation of privacy, right? Right