If peeps stop breaking the law...we'll go broke

[gogoblender 3,071]

Or at least this is what the city of Dallas is saying because of the huge success of cameras used on street corners to catch nefarious light burners. Ticket infractions regarding red lights have now dropped by fifty percent and have put a crunch on the coffers of City Hall!

 

By DAVE LEVINTHAL / The Dallas Morning News

dlevinthal@dallasnews.com

 

Dallas City Hall has idled more than one-fourth of the 62 cameras that monitor busy intersections because many of them are failing to generate enough red-light-running fines to justify their operational costs, according to city documents.

 

 

Initial gross revenue estimates for the red light camera system during Dallas' 2007-08 fiscal year were $14.8 million, according to city records. The latest estimate? About $6.2 million. City Manager Mary Suhm on Friday estimated net revenue will fall $4.1 million under initial estimates.

 

That leaves Dallas government with a conundrum. Its red-light camera system has been an effective deterrent to motorists running red lights – some monitored intersections have experienced a more than 50 percent reduction. But decreased revenue from red light-running violations means significantly less revenue to maintain the camera program and otherwise fuel the city's general fund.

 

read more here

 

 

oh the irony

 

 

gogo

[Totalimmortal 0]

whats worse is when you get people who obscure their license plate so they can avoid the ticket from running red lights. on my way home from work the other night, some moron blew by me at a high rate of speed, I turned to get the plate, and the guy had the plate covered. jerk...

 

-Total

[DreDBanGeR 32]

Don't Steal, the government doesn't like competition

[gogoblender 3,071]

I kept thinking about this all day...I mean, if they're making stuff safer..wouldn't it mean that they'd have to offer less services cuz peeps are policing themselves?

Sound like they're used to having all that money to work with in the first place, and even if they don't really need it anymore the fancy stuff they were probably buying with it would be missed

 

 

gogo

[Totalimmortal 0]

speaking of people policing themselves... it seems you are right gogo. my dept's taking a budget cut, and it looks like I may have to go. we'll see how it works out in the next few weeks, but I completely understand what they're trying to get people to do... only problem is most people arent responsible enough to police themselves. not only that, it seems some cops arent responsible to police other people! so far this year, 4 cops in my state have been arrested, 2 for drug dealing, one (a state trooper, who I knew and considered a friend) for 11 counts of armed robbery, and 1 for forging overtime slips... what is this world coming to? it almost seems like the apocalypse is coming, with the way people are acting. what I never understood is why people had to be genuinely disrespectful and uncaring towards other humans! criminal behavior should be taught at a young age that it is inappropriate and morally wrong. the problem (where I am at least) is that criminal behavior is supported here, especially since the public views the local cops as crooked. so maybe self-policing is what we need for a while, so people learn to appreciate what the police do for them. people will always need police, and police will always need people. its like the circle of life (at least my life lol). I couldnt imagine a world where everyone was responsible to take care of themselves (god I wish it were so though) but yes gogo, I agree with you, that people are seeing that technology can replace the job of police officers.

 

-Total

[gial 2]

Interesting. Last year the Minnesota Supreme Court declared red light cameras in violation of the state constitution, and I'd say the argument holds against the U.S. constitution as well.

 

Seems the presumption of guilt placed upon the owner of the vehicle is not accepted here . . . the presumption is supposed to be innocent until proven guilty, but the red light cams require the vehicle owner to prove they are not the driver -- hence to prove their innocence. This places the burden of proof upon the accused.

 

The city of Minneapolis turned their cameras off, and was required to pay restitution to drivers "found guilty" by the cameras.

[locutus 1]

Hmmmm interesting....the damn things are too mucha deterrent