As the economic recession has caused tax revenues to plunge, I was wondering how long it would be before they started to look for ways to generate more revenue from traffic violations. I felt like I knew it was coming, but just what ways would be used.
Here's an article, where they are trying to install more cameras at intersections, those cameras being hooked to speed sensors. But, the real kicker is in some places they are decreasing the length of the yellow light, which because people are not used to the shorter periods are causing more red-light violations. And the camera is right there to take your picture. It doesn't seem to matter that decreasing the yellow light length also increases the likelihood of intersection collisions.
Fortunately, 15 states and many cities have outlawed using these systems. There's a link in the article to that state list, if you want to check for where you live.
http://www.alternet.org/rights/145752/cities_shortening_yellow_traffic_lights_for_deadly_profit (http://www.alternet.org/rights/145752/cities_shortening_yellow_traffic_lights_for_deadly_profit)
Ah, shortened yellow light may well explain why the local speed-trap, wide spot in the road town around here, Hulbert, OK, has moved their police from where the highway speed limit rapidly drops to city speed and relocated at the one intersection that has a stop light.
I hate that town. I mean really.
I was driving in Maine a couple of months ago on I-95 heading north from Kittery with a minivan following me. There was a line of seven cars and they were all going about 80. The Charger was the lead car and the minivan was the last car behind me. I was actually not going 80 so the line of cars was pulling away from me. The minivan was tailgating me and would drop back and then speed up driving right up on my rear bumper. It felt like the driver was attempting to push me to speed up and join the line of cars. I didn't speed up, rather I slowed down to about 70 and the minivan finally passed me. A few miles down the road I saw the line of cars pulled over by fully marked state police cruisers. The Charger and minivan had pulled into one of those authorized only turn around spots and the drivers, cops, were talking to each other. With a speeding fine of a little over $200 per car for 6 cars means they made $1,200. Obviously they had the whole thing orchestrated and the two unmarked cars were waiting for the marked cruisers to get done writing tickets and they'd do a repeat performance. If they do this twice an hour for eight hours and average 6 cars per incident they're making the state of Maine over $19,000 per day.
Back in the fifties in Georgia and NC, there were little towns on route 1 that had traffic lights with only red and green lenses and the local cop would park nearby where he had a button that controlled the lights. Out of state cars were targeted for "surprise red lights" and a trip to the local judge to pay the town toll.
:D :D :D
Welcome to Maine, thanks for the money! Our poor state is so poor, we need out-of-state dollars to fund all the welfare programs here. d* [toilet]
We have a light that is so short it will go from green to red before you can get through the intersection. I couldn't be more than 2 seconds long.
Around here at least, all that matters in regards to red lights, is that you do not enter the intersection on red. Entering on yellow is not illegal, even if the light turns red before you get out of the intersection. The problem with a too short yellow is that you end up entering the intersection on red when you thought you had enough time. The other danger that occurs is that once somebody knows the yellow is short they slam on the brakes and stand a chance of being rear ended.
At least one study has shown that lengthening the yellow reduces the number of red light runners and rear end collisions at intersections.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-na-traffic-cameras20-2010feb20,0,2401900,full.story
http://www.twincities.com/rosario/ci_14466682
From our local paper.
The feds got the state to institute a primary seat belt law through the use of bribes federal funds.
The local cops glommed right on with their "fund raiser".
This state is going to nickle and dime us to death in their effort to not raise taxes!
Here's the thing, they're not even doing this for safety reasons. The Gubinator even admitted he's proposing enforcement cameras to generate $338 million per year. This is all about raising money.
Well, that's more honest that what the City of ABQ says out loud. >:(
They're being honest for sure, but Arnold is mister "Lower taxes and smaller government" and he's proposing a whole new enforcement bureaucracy. Yeah, this isn't a tax and if you obey the law you won't have to pay a fine. However this will be just like cigarette taxes. They raise they cigarette tax revenue goes up, but after a few years the tax revenues start to drop off because people quit smoking, so they raise the tax again. The first few years they'll reap tons of money from these enforcement lights, but then people will stop running red lights and speeding. Hence the revenue stream dries up so they'll raise the fines to raise more revenue, and fewer people run lights and speed. Typical politician's solution, a short term fix for a long term problem.
Quote from: pagancelt on February 26, 2010, 10:56:40 AM
They're being honest for sure, but Arnold is mister "Lower taxes and smaller government" and he's proposing a whole new enforcement bureaucracy. Yeah, this isn't a tax and if you obey the law you won't have to pay a fine. However this will be just like cigarette taxes. They raise they cigarette tax revenue goes up, but after a few years the tax revenues start to drop off because people quit smoking, so they raise the tax again. The first few years they'll reap tons of money from these enforcement lights, but then people will stop running red lights and speeding. Hence the revenue stream dries up so they'll raise the fines to raise more revenue, and fewer people run lights and speed. Typical politician's solution, a short term fix for a long term problem.
So when it's no longer profitable for them to do that, we can all go back to smokin' and runnin' red lights?
Yay! ;D
Throw in drinkin' beer and shootin' the finger at cops as I drive by, and I'm in heaven!
Nope, they'll just expand the reach of the enforcement cameras and then add a fee to your registration to fund the expansion. Once again it won't be a tax, rather it'll be a "users" fee.
Quote from: pagancelt on February 26, 2010, 11:35:34 AM
Nope, they'll just expand the reach of the enforcement cameras and then add a fee to your registration to fund the expansion. Once again it won't be a tax, rather it'll be a "users" fee.
Why you gotta harsh my buzz? :P
What I meant to say was they'll see these traffic enforcement cameras aren't producing the revenues expected and pull all the cameras down. Cops, not know as overly intelligent to begin with, assuming the cameras are still in place enforcing traffic laws will all congregate at local donut shops for their entire shifts leaving the driving public to drive as they see fit.
Better?
Sure. So long as I can still drive by the donut shop with my arm stickin' out of the window. Repeatedly.
Why not, they'll be too busy stuffing their pudgy faces with jelly donuts to notice. Mmmmm, jelly donut.
We need to say, no offense to the good cops out there who's only desire is to protect the public.
We used to have good cops here in CA, who would sit in hiding behind a bush or sign, wait for a speeder then romp their Dodge Magnum Hemi-interceptor burning rubber for a quarter mile, safely jump into traffic and clock the speeder with his certified speedometer, thereafter pulling him over and issuing a well deserved citation. I respected those guys and usually never fought a legally issued ticket from them.
Now it is .... aim the Geico (insert your insurance co name here____________ ) provided radar gun.... make a medium safe 180 in the middle of the road, stop the possibly guilty target party, issue a possibly accurate citation, go to the coffee shop and refill on the donuts and coffee before returning to the nearest blind corner for another round of revenue generation... [waiting]
(https://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk83/JohnnyEsp123/funny%20pics/donuts.jpg)
Copied from an old posting by me several years ago.... you guys probably missed it...
"Now you just reminded me about our local law enforcement.
Seems a lady was filling her car up with gas not paying attention to what she was doing and spilled gas on the sleeve of her sweater. She paid for the gas and drove off and unthinkingly lit up a cigarette. As luck would have it, of course, the sleeve caught on fire. This terrified her and the only thing she could think of to do was stick her arm out the window and step on the gas to blow the fire out.
As usual the local law enforcement was parked on the hill by the cemetery and he immediately took off after her in hot pursuit. The officer quickly caught up and proceeded to pull her over and issue a citation. Talk about unfair. You'll never guess what he charged her with.......
He wrote her up for waving a firearm. " ... [waiting]
Now I really want a jelly donut. Why did I type that. ???
I do not understand why people do not find that joke hilarious.... [waiting]
Quote from: glenn kangiser on February 26, 2010, 10:31:36 PM
I do not understand why people do not find that joke hilarious.... [waiting]
Nobody saw it. It's gotta be that.
Just gotta be. ???
Quote from: pagancelt on February 26, 2010, 12:13:59 PM
Why not, they'll be too busy stuffing their pudgy faces with jelly donuts to notice. Mmmmm, jelly donut.
You know we have ex cops here on the board who don't stuff their faces with jelly doughnuts. I know one of them who is a darned nice fellow.
Absolutely right, Peter.
I also know a lot of them who kid around about it as much as the next guy though so I didn't view it to be real offensive... I love donuts myself and have stuffed down a ton of coconut covered glazed donuts as well as chocolate covered creme filled ones. Jellies are a special treat and have been used to bribe information out of secretaries.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKFgfdtKdys&feature=player_embedded
:)
Let me tell you where I am on this stereotype thing.
I am a Lithuanian. What is that you might ask. It is simple. A Lithuanian is a Pollock with his brains kicked out.
I don't see Polish people as being dumb, in fact to the contrary, the ones I know of are exceptionally smart (speaking of a painter - master craftsman who redid our old house and the ones who mined and built the salt mine in Poland). I also have Polish relatives.
Police - I respect the good ones such as our member who held his men to the highest standards of protecting and serving from what I know of him, and he is one of the friendliest most helpful people on the forum... still serving. I respect the Sheriffs who helped me with an eviction and the ones who helped evacuate for the fire here without overstepping their bounds. I respect the CHP who held a flashlight so I could fix my shorted out truck lights. I respect the CHP who let me readjust my load rather than ticket me for snow and ice causing an overweight condition on my reefer.
Radar gun cops are marginal. The speed laws are made - they zealously enforce them partly for safety but in my opinion mostly because it is a big revenue generator for the state and the insurance companies who raise your rates after you are caught. The insurance companies donate many of the radar guns to catch you. A conflict of interest since you pay both of them and the judge who will convict you. I have no respect for the Sheriffs who tailgate to get citizens to speed in the dark and then identify themselves and issue a citation. I know of at least 2 cases of this.
I have no respect for the cops who would not show up when I tailed a whore and 2 pimps with her for 1/2 hour or so, who stole our bandsaw from our truck as we were eating lunch.
I have no respect for our Sheriffs who murdered their own men for trying to stop major drug running (that went to the federal level ) in the department. Even if it was for Ollie and the boys.
I have no respect for the CHP who strutted around my truck boasting that he could write me for the bugs on my windshield. A few "Yes Sirs" to boost his ego and he was out of there - no ticket but I still don't respect him.
I have no respect for the police brutality and the department running their own auto theft ring and chop shop in Fresno.
I think the numbers may be around 75% good to 25% bad.
The 25% get the stereotype. The good ones, I think will understand the kidding about the donuts just as the Lithuanians with their brains kicked out. I am not saying all of my fellow countrymen or police will agree with me, but if you are a good person or cop, rest assured that you have my respect.
If we can't laugh at ourselves we are in pretty sad shape. :)
A danger in stereotyping, like the donut poster, is that there really are people who believe it, placing all police in the same basket. Stereotyping removes individuality from the assessment. Blonds are dumb. Blonds have more fun. Muslims are terrorists. Guns are evil. Drunken Indian. Corrupt politicians. Some may be able to be pigeonholed into several stereotypes at once.
None of those are completely true as grouped. Certain individuals of the groups may be dumb, be a terrorist or a drunk.
I'll admit it is difficult to not fall into the trap of stereotyping.
At least that's what I think.
That would be the 95% of the people who are dumb as dirt? ...and of course we would never be one of that group - it does not apply to me... it's those other guys...
Yeah, Don. I agree that there are a few cases where people may believe that the stereotype applies to all but more likely the 95% of the people actually know it dies not apply to all and still have a sense of humor.
If like me, a fine normal upstanding intelligent individual, they will be able to see the humor in it, laugh at themselves, and take it in stride, enjoying the absurdity of the implication that it applies to all.
I think stereotypes exist to express a dissatisfaction with aspects of dealing with masses of unknown people and larger quantities of seemingly related happenings or traits.
"I can't stand the masses of people in the cities blindly moving like masses of cattle with their only concern being their immediate goal...."
In reality individually most of them are great people and many are my friends.
Grouping them together is not fair to any of them as in my above statement but it expresses my dislike of living elbow to elbow with masses of people. Working with a group of them on a building project is usually a great enjoyable experience.
I see stereotypes as an attempt at humor in many cases and I suppose we will all have to clam up like frigid old maids to be politically correct, eh?
[noidea' :)
Stereotyping and generalization about groups gets a bad rap nowadays. Mental categorizing is important and basic to logic and rational thought.
"One theory as to why people stereotype is that it is too difficult to take in all of the complexities of other people as individuals. Even though stereotyping is inexact, it is an efficient way to mentally organize large blocks of information. Categorization is an essential human capability because it enables us to simplify, predict, and organize our world."
It's when you apply your generalization or stereotype to a subgroup or individual that you run into trouble.
Cops are stereotyped as having certain behavior patterns and attitudes, but one can't safely assume that Officer John Doe shares these traits.
Stereotype can, of course, be simply incorrect, but still serves the same purpose of mental efficiency to the person holding the belief.
Oh, and how many Lithuanians does it take to screw in a lightbulb? ;D
Quote from: RainDog on February 27, 2010, 01:51:20 PM
"One theory as to why people stereotype is that it is too difficult to take in all of the complexities of other people as individuals. Even though stereotyping is inexact, it is an efficient way to mentally organize large blocks of information. Categorization is an essential human capability because it enables us to simplify, predict, and organize our world."
That is right on.
Quote from: RainDog on February 27, 2010, 01:51:20 PM
Oh, and how many Lithuanians does it take to screw in a lightbulb? ;D
Humpffff..... Like they could get in there.... [waiting]
Peter,
I work with three cops, and in the past have lifted weights with several others. All of them were ok guys. What you're missing is that was a joke. Most of us only come in contact with law enforcement personnel when they're doing their jobs; enforcing the law. I got pulled over for speeding in West Virginia back in 1989 and the cop was the classic "Buford T. Justice" sheriff with a big fat gut hanging over his belt, mirrored sunglasses, and that slow, southern drawl. Does that make me believe all West Virginian cops are like him? Of course not, but I still tell the story and people laugh, because it's funny.
Are we becoming SO politically correct that we're not even able to laugh at the ubiquitous cop with a donut joke without first prefacing the joke as a stereotype and that we understand not every cop likes donuts? I remember exiting the subway in NYC and there were three or four cops in front of me. One of them had his ticket booklet in his back pocket. On the booklet was a sticker: "Bad Cop....No Donut." Wish I had a camera. Doesn't help me though, I still want a jelly donut.
Quote from: glenn kangiser on February 27, 2010, 10:02:36 PM
Quote from: RainDog on February 27, 2010, 01:51:20 PM
Oh, and how many Lithuanians does it take to screw in a lightbulb? ;D
Humpffff..... Like they could get in there.... [waiting]
:D
Took you a long time to get that one, RainDog. [waiting]