I saw in the News & Record (July 19) that High Point was appealing a court's decision that unless the city gave 90 percent of the proceeds from its red-light cameras to the Guilford County Schools, they would have to turn off the cameras. So High Point did turn off the cameras.
I think the city of High Point is more interested in money than the safety of motorists. We should go back to the old way of doing things. A citation should be issued by an officer of the law for a red-light infraction. Then a person should have his day in court.
That's better than some "hearing officer" deciding the outcome if you disagree.
Kenneth W. Kellam
Greensboro
Comments (4)
The only problem is that there are not enough police officers who can patrol the "most dangerous" intersections to catch the red-light runners. The amazing thing is that there has been no information submitted regarding crashes at these "dangerous" intersections since the cameras were turned off.
Basically, Red-light Cameras are a way for municipalities to generate revenue without having to be held accountable. The accountability is avoided due to the municipality only getting the funds, the camera operating company does the judging!
I had a friend who received a ticket via US Mail from one of these cameras. The irony is that my friend HAD stopped. She received a ticket because her front wheels had stopped just beyond the wide white line at stop-light intersections. My friend pleaded her case to the person noted on her ticket. She even used the photo as evidence that she had stopped. She lost! So, does this give any indication of the justice in these cases? Would a police officer in a patrol vehicle had given her a ticket for the same thing? One can only wonder!
Posted by Darryl | July 27, 2005 9:34 AM
Big Brother is getting closer everyday!!!
Posted by Patricia | July 27, 2005 11:48 AM
It's clear that the High Point and Greensboro Red Light camera programs were always ALL about the money, not for "traffic safety". The tip off is seen in the choice to shut them down when the court ruled against High Point regading the fine money.
Had the prevailing interest TRULY been "traffic safety", they would have continued on, at a net loss. Instead, the cameras were shut down, and we heard the old bureaucratic mumbo jumbo about "having to raise taxes" if the program were to continue under the new status quo.
In addition, there is ample evidence from several different sources that suggest red light camera programs INCREASE the amount of traffic accidents at intersections where they are in use. Funny, the bureaucrats never seem to mention that aspect, do they?
The Red Light camera program is a bad idea all around. Let's do what we need to do to keep it from coming back, regardless of the outcome of the appeal.
Posted by Robert Grenier | July 27, 2005 4:41 PM
Right,Robert. the cameras were always about the money. I found it highly ammusing and entertaining to watch them squable and fight over their ill goten bounty. When the court ruled against high point they said "ok,if we can't have the money,NO ONE gets the money! Too funny!
Posted by Yard dog | July 27, 2005 8:53 PM