CameraFRAUD vs. Redflex Debate is Thursday


The Tempe Chamber of Commerce is hosting a debate on Thursday, November 19th at 11:30 a.m. The topic: Automated Ticketing.

Shawn of CameraFRAUD will debate Jay Heiler, former Chief of Staff to Fife Symington and current Director of  Government Affairs for Redflex Traffic Systems . Heiler is featured in this photograph, for those of you who are unfamiliar with his work.

All major media has been alerted and there is a story  about the upcoming debate, tonight on Channel 5 at 10 p.m., featuring Shawn.

Lt. Jeff King of the DPS will be there but will be in the audience to answer any questions. His presence is much appreciated by Arizona Citizens Against Photo Radar.

The cost to attend is $35, but there will be plenty of video taken by FreedomsPhoenix.com for those who cannot attend.

More details and registration info can be found here.

About these ads

116 Responses to CameraFRAUD vs. Redflex Debate is Thursday

  1. Stacey says:

    Good luck, Shawn. The chamber of commerce needs to understand that photo enforcement only hurts their members.

    And it sure as hell isn’t helping anyone who gets hit from behind at these intersections.

    Peoria saw a 480% in accidents at one intersection. How many of those people had to take time off from work?

  2. Glyph says:

    I’m going to suggest that Lt. King works for DPS and not Tempe PD.

    Aw, who am I kidding… Lt. King works for Redflex, everyone knows that!

  3. Glyph says:

    Crap, someone fixed it before my post! That’s ok, it’s still true/funny!

  4. Sorry for the misprint!!

  5. Mike says:

    Go get ‘em Shawn!!!

  6. B says:

    Will people be allowed to ask or submit any questions? I’m thinking not, but…?

  7. LoneWolf says:

    Thanks for stepping forward on behalf of those of us who are against photo enforcement and I wish you the best of luck, Shawn.

  8. aztecguy says:

    I do not support photo radar as I believe that it is primarily a fund raiser and does not protect anyone. It does not take drunk or reckless drivers off the road. The experience of those that I know is that most are flashed through what used to be called a speed trap. In order to avoid the cameras and not impede traffic they travel at the speed limit of 64 to 67 miles per hour. At that point, the speed limit is dropped to 55 and they are trapped and fined for going 12 miles over the limit. (or what they thought was 2 miles over the limit of 65) that is a speed trap and people are flased for doing nothing wrong and traveling the approximate speed of surrounding traffic.

    Speed cameras, fund raisers, speed traps….. All the same!

  9. Stacey says:

    Shawn man versus Alien Man! Who knows what will happen.

  10. RPr says:

    Redflex board of directors just resigned

    looks like the new board is getting rid of Karen finely

  11. Stacey says:

    The rats are jumping ship!

  12. who says:

    It costs to get in?! And where is that money going?

  13. jas84 says:

    i think this stuff should be banned

  14. Charles Brown says:

    I think you will find a formidable opponent. Jay is quite knowledgeable and has good command of the debating arena. His weakness are facts that could not be argued against.

  15. Stacey says:

    Oh, Charlie Brown, go play with your dog.

  16. Stacey says:

    Let’s see Charlie, are you talking about this dope?

    “According to Jay Heiler, Redflex Director of Government Affairs, “Cameras are less intrusive,” “Motorists quietly get a ticket in the mail instead of being stopped and interrogated for 25 minutes while their car is examined and their documents are checked. In court, they can make their case by reviewing video evidence instead of arguing about a cop’s judgment.”

    • B says:

      Funny how common sense and human judgment are being thrown out by that argument. “We don’t want a cop to make human judgments. We want a cold, impartial algorithm to punish people, regardless of circumstances.”

      The cameras are the judge, jury, and executioner – without actually using any judgment. The irony…

  17. Stacey says:

    WTF!

    Jay Heiler:

    On homosexuality: It is my impression that by `coming out of the closet,’ as their emergence has come to be called, homosexuals hope to make the rest of us less uncomfortable about their aberration-and despite one’s feelings about it, it is most definitely an aberration.”

    On illegal immigrants: The immigrants come here to start a new life, then try to cling to their own language and customs. This tendency leads to all sorts of societal problems, ranging from interracial unrest to unexplained disappearances of dogs. The former difficulty crops up wherever aliens are to be found; the latter arose in California when the Vietnamese arrived.”

    On the media: Beware of these media hogs. Their tremendous girth is ever growing and it has become too obvious that most of them wallow on the left side of the pigpen.”

    http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/1992-06-03/news/fife-s-new-operativethe-governor-s-hire-of-ex-asu-flame-thrower-jay-heiler-sends-chills-through-liberals/

  18. We’re looking forward to an exciting and informative discussion between Shawn Dow and Jay Heiler. DPS will indeed have a representative in the audience (not on the panel) but the Tempe PD officially declined to participate. We realize the price of the event may deter some from attending, but we do incur a cost for the room, lunch and AV for the event. Sorry about that! For those that can’t make it, video of the event will be provided free to all.

  19. Sure says:

    Talk about hitting the nail on the head.

    No matter, for old schoolmates such as Jay Thorne–a partner and vice president of Jameson and Gutierrez, a Democratic political consulting firm–still recall reading Heiler’s columns with “amazement.” Now Thorne is amazed that Symington is embracing someone with Heiler’s political leanings.

    “He is the Nazi of the week up there, the fascist of choice, and is growing more and more influential,” Thorne says.

    Jay Heiler, then a student at ASU’s law school, was a student senator that year. He proposed the amendment that cut funding from the gay and lesbian union. In honor of the occasion–and the ensuing criticism–he penned a guest column for the State Press.

    “The position of homosexual activists, that to feel an instinctive revulsion for this act is to be a bigot or a Nazi, is the ultimate expression of self-righteousness,” Heiler wrote.

    http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/1993-11-10/news/the-righteous-stuff/

  20. If anyone needs details, or wants to leave comments on the blog post, please feel free to visit http://bit.ly/tccblog

  21. Just FYI everyone, we’re 2/3 of the way to capacity. If you try to register and the online link is shut down, try to call 480-967-7891 before 5 p.m. today or after 8 a.m. on Thursday. We may or may not have SRO seating but I wouldn’t count on it.

    CBS 5 footage can be seen here http://bit.ly/qYIZH

    • Brent says:

      Shawn, great job in this piece. Exposing the lies of the corrupt is always a noble mission to be on, and we all know you’ll do it well. Jay is a propagadist, a bigot, and will soon be even more unpopular in this state than he is already as his friends and neighbors begin to see the person he really is.

  22. Jim Walker says:

    Shawn — TEAR ‘EM UP — and have fun doing it.
    From an NMA member in Michigan

  23. RPr says:

    http://www.kbtx.com/home/headlines/70459597.html

    “I knew that we had four that were going to vote to terminate it, but I honestly had no idea that it would be a unanimous vote,” Lyles said.

  24. B says:

    Has anyone noticed that azcentral.com hasn’t said a peep about this debate? Maybe they don’t want people to go?

  25. Stacey says:

    Hey B, I noticed Ch 12 also didn’t mention it – at least I didn’t see yesterday.

  26. Stacey says:

    It is 12:13 – the suspense is killing me!

  27. B says:

    I’m sick and I wasn’t going to go, but I doped up and decided to try and go at the last minute and called at 10:45AM. It was booked up. (It’s probably for the best so I don’t spread what I have, but I’m really bummed that I couldn’t ask my questions.)

    I hope Shawn is holding his own.

  28. LoneWolf says:

    10 New scameras installed at various intersections throughout Phx

    http://www.abc15.com/content/traffic/story/Phoenix-adds-red-light-cameras-at-10-Valley/peEcw670-0-mMHOIp6aY9Q.cspx

    35th Avenue & Dunlap
    40th Street & Pecos
    16th Street & Jefferson
    51st Avenue & Van Buren
    15th Avenue & Missouri
    53rd Avenue & Indian School
    12th Street & Camelback
    67th Avenue & McDowell
    40th Street & Broadway
    7th Street & Union Hills

  29. B says:

    Did anyone go? Can anyone offer any kind of synopsis? How did it turn out?

  30. Mike says:

    It went very well, unfortunately very well for the photo people. We really should have had someone with experience in these debates like they did. I hate to say it, but we got our *ss handed to us. :(

  31. Stacey says:

    It is too bad you didn’t get up there and speak, maybe you can do the next one that we are lining up.

    E-mail me your number and we can talk about the dates that will work for you.

    Of course, we will all get to watch the video soon.

  32. who says:

    Well, so much for saying Ms. Findley is done for making fun of Mr. Heiler!
    Like your supporters said… Good Job Shawn!

    Hahahahaha! Oh my, that was like a taking a bbgun to world war two…

  33. Mike says:

    Hey “Mike” I have been posting here under my name for months. You just now noticed??

    • Mike says:

      I’ve been posting here pretty much since day 1 – and when an obviously pro-camera redflex troll comes along and posts under the same name, it’s pretty obvious what you’re trying to do.

  34. Mike says:

    Heres a great example, azcentral says “A violator can ignore the ticket and wait to be served by a process server within 120 days of the ticket.”

    That law changed years ago, its 90 days not 120. If someone is going to debate on our behalf atleast have the information correct so we look intelligent.

  35. Ray says:

    I have to say the debate didn’t fare well for our side. I was so excited when I learned that the scamera folks at redflex finally agreed to a public debate as I was sure they would end up eating crow but the outcome was the opposite.

    Jay Heiler was well composed and Shawn…not so much. :( I’m by no means a debate expert but some simple missteps were made. A few would be:

    1. Never say “don’t listen to me” in a debate.
    2. You shouldn’t state that statistics are pointless and can be swayed to say whatever you want, then immediately refer to a statistical report that supports your argument.
    3. If your going to cite terms of a contract to support your argument then you should understand what the terms refer to (re: yellow light timing). What I thought was going to be a slam dunk for us got thrown right back in our faces.

    I’m sincerely hoping that in the event a debate is held in the future that some forethought be given on who will debate our side. I thank Shawn for his courage and his efforts but if it went this way every time we’re going to lose ground on this issue. Also, those of us who attend a public forum and are given the opportunity to ask a question should think long and hard before they do so. The dude that stated the stuff about redflex being in breach of their statewide contract clearly doesn’t understand what the definition of a “press conference” is. He made us supporters look like a bunch of yahoos.

    If we’re going to get these cameras taken down we have to step our game up. Is there anyone who has any previous formal debate experience out there that can step up and help us?

  36. Stacey says:

    Mike,

    I think you are just the guy for the job. I am home right now so e-mail me and I will give you call.

  37. B says:

    Dang it… Didn’t anyone get up and get a chance to take a coherent shot at Heiler and Redflex?

    Did anyone bring up:

    * The $16.50 “conflict of interest” with each photo radar ticket?
    * That despite Redflex saying that even though the cameras have already made a difference, Redflex was lobbying to turn it up a notch by attaching points to all photo tickets?
    * That crash statistic fear mongering and anger against speeders, and not safety, is what’s driving the average Joe to persecute “the other guy”.

    * And the BIG ONE!!!!! That the recession is a big reason that the DPS’s crash numbers are down, and that the correlation != causation? (We need to blow that statistic up NOW – they’re riding that to the end).

    And so on… Dang it, people. Tell me someone hit something out of the park… Anything…

  38. RPr says:

    video will be up soon

  39. B says:

    The statistics have to assailed at every turn. They have to have nothing to ride on… period.

    They’re going to put on their “safety blanket” and ride that to victory if those numbers aren’t debunked.

  40. LoneWolf says:

    I don’t care what the critics here think. Shawn did a great job. It takes a lot of guts to go up against a multi-million dollar industry that’s tied in with law enforcement… and in front of dozens of people and the press nonetheless. If there’s anyone who believes they can do better, please step forward. Good job Shawn!

  41. duece says:

    Way to go Shawn, Heiler had you for lunch. Way to represent Camera Fraud.

  42. Alyssa says:

    I attended the event, and although it did go as well for us as one would hope, maybe people will start to do their own research and learn how utterly wrong and illegal this whole thing is. All I can say is that Jay only won the debate by being completely rude and personally attacking Shawn. Jay is just another corporate asshole who is a top man at Redflex for a reason: He’s good at what he does (i.e. lying like a rug, sucking government c*ck).
    Like Shawn said, none of this will matter on November 2nd 2010.

    • Brent says:

      Agreed!

      Those who are critizing Shawn probably couldn’t do any better, so perhaps they should bite their tongue.

      Heiler will be unemployed starting next November and will be blacklisted after that. Who would hire this schuck after having been a paid liar as a profession for a company who operates illegally in the first place..

      November 2nd, 2010- it all ends.

  43. Stacey says:

    Hey Ray,

    If you (along with Mike) would like to speak at our next scheduled event please e-mail me your phone number and we can go over what you would like to talk about. You can call up until ten tonight.

    I can’t wait to speak with you guys. We are always looking for new public relations people to represent us and speak at our events.

  44. Stand4something says:

    I wasn’t able to be at the debate in person, but on the evening news, Shawn appeared knowlegeable and empassioned (rightly so!) whereas Mr. Heiler came across as if he was wearily regurgitating Redflex’ standard corporate boiler plate message. I’m certain he was unflappable. He’s been rehearsing for years!

    I know how skilled the media is at creative editing, and (other than the gentleman who wasn’t as adamant against PR as he had been before the debate) the evening news portrayed both sides pretty fairly, IMHO.

    If there was a ‘winner’ at the today’s luncheon, it wasn’t obvious from my living room. It was yet another chance to inform the voters that we’re working to let THEM decide. 2010: The cameras are coming down.

  45. Sure says:

    The only thing these cameras will do for our economy is hurt businesses. The money is going to Redflex and its Australian shareholders and a local government that has run itself into the ground. This is money that could have been spent at local establishments – creating jobs.

    On top of that, people will also have to pay more for insurance due to points. And others will lose their jobs because because they have a CDL.

    Redflex can’t refute the data that shows an increase in accident at intersections with these cameras.

    How many people will be hurt and take time off of work?

    • Impartial Patriot says:

      I attended this debate in an effort to become more educated about the programs. As you may guess from my name, I am impartial on most issues because I am uneducated about how the systems work. The debate has definitely given me some direction on what to research in order to form my ultimate opinion should this thing go to vote. I thought both debaters did good jobs bringing the issues to the table, but I do believe that much of Shawn’s arguments were based mostly on personally opinion, rather than facts. There were definitely some legitimate facts, but there seemed to be more facts disproved from his arguments than confirmed, which causes me to be skeptical of comments made. Jay definitely is no rookie to debate and I thought that he remained very composed . It seemed that his responses came very naturally and almost rehearsed. But I think that is because he has heard these arguments so many other times before and it seemed as though he was anticipating new arguments. It seems to me that the folks opposed to the automated enforcement may need to do some more digging around in order to obtain more arguments for future debates. I like these kind of public debates because it encourages us limited knowledge citizens to do some digging around. As a citizen who travels the freeways often, yet has never received an automated enforcement citation, I do have to say that I have noticed more free-flowing traffic on the Phoenix highways, which to me is a good thing. This was also apparent when one of these companies had cameras on the 101 in Scottsdale. I also did some digging around yesterday afternoon through a friend of a friend of a friend who works for one of the valley cities engineering departments and it was confirmed that in no way do these camera vendors even have the slightest bit of access to being able to control anything regarding the signal timing. That seemed to be such a hot topic so I thought I’d share the response that I was given. Ultimately, I still remained impartial on the topic by the end and I did not signed the petition to ban.

      • Stacey says:

        Yeah, makes you wonder how these yellow lights are getting shortened doesn’t it.

        • Impartial Patriot says:

          I wondered the same thing and asked. I was told that if a yellow phase is shortened it is the sole act of the City Engineering Department. They have to meet a min yellow timing based on criteria such as speed limit, intersection geometry, etc… Then they can choose to add more time to the yellow or keep it at the Federally mandated min. This is coming from a City engineer, not my opinion.

  46. capitalfraud says:

    In case anyone wants yet another example of the pro-camera bias of the Arizona Republic, here is a fact from their story about the debate.

    Shawn: One quote, 5 words
    Heiler: Four quotes, 97 words

    They gave redflex 4x more space to make their point. Pathetic.

  47. LoneWolf says:

    This answers my question earlier:

    New Effort Under Way To Stop Photo Radar
    Cameras Operating Illegally, Opponents Say

    http://www.kpho.com/news/21669016/detail.html

  48. Impartial Patriot says:

    I posted a comment below. Did not mean to reply to “Sure’s” comment.

  49. B says:

    A new “serial speeder” has been arrested, according to azcentral.com. Here’s a clip I find interesting:

    “The incident was captured on the streaming video systems housed in the photo-enforcement cameras and will be a key piece of evidence against Saloum.

    “Video, for criminal speeders, is very important,” Hawkins said.”
    ************************
    They have FINALLY found an allegedly plausible excuse for the video streams – you know, the ones they didn’t want to initially talk about at all? I guess the sensors are pictures aren’t good enough now?

    To be clear – I don’t agree with these guys that drive around at 85+ everywhere, sometimes exceeding 100+, anymore than the most ardent pro-camera types… However, that STILL doesn’t mean we need Big Brother V1.0 to catch them…

  50. Sure says:

    Well, let’s see what happens with the judge in Peoria.

  51. Stacey says:

    Well, Mike and Ray never e-mailed me or called. Wonder why?

  52. Brett says:

    When I was arrested for a dui the cameras at that intersection supposedly recorded via live video feeds. Charles Barkley and I were both arrested on dates very close together and by the same arresting police department, Gilbert PD. Funny thing is when Barkley was detained they were able to use live streaming video to assist in his conviction that were recorded on that evening. Amazingly enough for me, when I contacted the Chandler PD to assist me in getting copies of any live streaming video from the night of my offense, which I would still object to and would have won, they contacted me after my case went to trial and informed me that the videos were not available and were only captired and saved if/when an accident/incident occurred. Well in my opinion an incident did occur of which I could have proved the police officer involved had lied about where he was when I supposedly made the traffic offense that caused him to pull me over. He lied.

  53. Disappointed says:

    So, no response CF after the debate? I must say, that was a very embarrassing defeat for the CF movement. The normal claims and responses to the movement against photo radar were brought up; big brother, yellow light timings, causes more accidents, etc, and every time they were brought to the table, they were easily argued, and even worse, nothing, NOTHING to back the claims up. There was certainly nothing new debated, which was what I was hoping for. Hate to say it but Shawn looked like a whining teenager that was demanding attention in front of an audience. The worst one for me was the claim of the camera vendor allowed access to the traffic controller to change yellow light timing, which has always upset me when I heard of it, though as it turns out it was argued false, and easily. Watching Shawn flick through a contract on stage while he was asked to quote and backup his statement was one of the most painful things to watch, then producing a sentence later that makes no clear distinction of his original claim; utterly ridiculous. For the first time, I actually did do more research online tonight, particularly on the Jay Specter comment and the traffic controller access which seemed to be hot topics, and both turned out false statements made by Shawn. There have been other supporters here that have commented on the debate, and what went wrong and I agree with most of what was said also.

    I sign my name tonight here as Disappointed. Why, because after today I feel like I should have done more investigating of my own before getting behind a movement like this and finding the real facts, and not just what everyone else is saying. I am not done here quite yet, but I have to say I am back on the fence after this debate. I am going to ask DPS, Phoenix and the camera vendors my own questions and draw my own conclusions; Shawn’s advise after all. I wish there was one place where I could get factual answers to the photo radar questions. I use to think it was here, now, not so much.

    Disappointed

    • Impartial Patriot says:

      Since the camera vendors mouths are tied, I’d suggest approaching some of the local municipalities to request information. They know quite a bit about how these systems are install. And O yeah, and for Arizona Citizens Against Photo Radar…Great choice on your name. I’ve learned that radar only applies to the mobile vans. It does not apply to the fixed systems because they have in ground road sensors. So…does that mean that the Citizens are only against the vans? Like many of the questions of the debate, not very well thought through.

    • Will Kay says:

      Be disappointed all you want, the fact remains the same. These systems are operating unlawfully and without regulation. They are violating Due Process and Constitutional Law. It’s all about the money and a big brother monitored and controlled police state, period.

      • Mike says:

        Do you even know what “due process” is??? It means you must be given notice and allowed the right to be heard. If you want to argue something atleast make it an actual violation.

        • LoneWolf says:

          It’s a hell of a lot more than that. Do your research.

        • Dr Jett says:

          Mike,
          Sending a letter in the mail to the owner of a vehicle is not “proper service” as I proved in court when I beat 2 photo radar tickets when I didn’t receive proper service. You can’t get “due process” if you don’t first receive “proper service”.

        • Will Kay says:

          Yes “Mike”, I do know what Due Process is, which is always capitalized by the way. I would highly recommend reading the U.S. Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and maybe even taking a Constitutional Law class at a local college. Dr. Jett is absolutely right too, You can’t receive Due Process if you have not first been properly served, and that’s just the first step.

    • LoneWolf says:

      It doesn’t take an Enstein to see what’s going on here. All the info in the world from both sides might confuse you more. You’re either pro or anti, the decision is simple. Even if there were 20 debates and CF lost every single one of them, personally, I’d still be against photo enforcement. If nothing here convinces you, then by all means, move on.

      • RPr says:

        We know who fake mike is LOL

        should have used an anonymous proxy

        • Mike says:

          oh wow the group against people being tracked is now tracking those who post on the forum. Pot calling kettle?? What a joke

        • Mike says:

          Oh wait should I spin this like you guys spin stuff, This was a threat right? Like as in you know where I live? Are going to do me harm? Should I get an protection order? LMAO! Now lets be honest, at best you know who pays for the IP I use. Hhhmmmm, maybe thats why I am rarey on because its not my computer? Oh wait that requires investgative thought. My bad

          • Alyssa says:

            Mike, if you are this bored, will you please go back to using the internet for porn and leave us alone? Thanks, have a good one.

  54. Mike says:

    I won’t go into a 4 page diatribe like the Redflex trolls above… but what does it matter who shortens the yellow light? It sure wasn’t done by the general public, so it would have had to have been done by Redflex or by the city – either way, it’s pretty messed up to trade safety for $$$.

  55. Investigator Bill says:

    As a matter of opinion, Red Flex is conducting investigations for compensation, therefore a license is required. Conducting investigations without a license is a class 1 misdemeanor in Arizona. Red Flex is hired by the State to take pictures. This is the initial stage of an investigation, to develop probable cause. Opinion #2, Due Process is not afforded to those that have had their picture taken as a result of this investigation. Opinion #3, more money is spent on trying very hard make this program work.

    Thank you for your time invested in protecting the Constitutional Rights afforded to us all!!!

    • Mike says:

      Mr. “Investigator” Are you aware this complaint was already filed, investigated, and determined to be unfounded? Come on guys! Pick an actual violation of the law to fight dont just guess and make sh*t up!

      As an “investigator” you should be taking video/pictures of people all the time. How do you think real investigators prove workmens comp cases, cheating on spouse etc??

      And their is no right to speed, no right to run redlights, not even a right to drive! Its a privilege! Geez guys come on!

      • Investigator Bill says:

        Mike, thank you for your input as this is the type of argument that camerafraud needs to be prepared to answer. As a licensed investigator, retired from a large local law enforcement agency, my position stands. I am not sure which superior court unfounded your claim that this is BS, perhaps in the Justice Court, a judge ruled against someone. However, please review the appropriate ARS pertaining to Licensed Investigators. As for taking picures all of the time, again one needs to be a licensed investigator to conduct investigations. Thanks Mike, I hope to have fully explained my background, experience and position on this issue.

  56. Investigator Bill says:

    As a matter of opinion, Red Flex is conducting investigations for compensation, therefore a license is required. Conducting investigations without a license is a class 1 misdemeanor in Arizona. Red Flex is hired by the State to take pictures. This is the initial stage of an investigation, to develop probable cause. Opinion #2, Due Process is not afforded to those that have had their picture taken as a result of this investigation. Opinion #3, more money is spent on trying very hard make this program work.

    Thank you for your time invested in protecting the Constitutional Rights afforded to us all!!!

  57. Alyssa says:

    Look, I really don’t give a shit about Jay Spektor or any of the the little issues that were debated at the debate. For me what it really comes down to is Constitutional Law. Redflex’s program goes completely against due process of law, and even Jay Heiler that day could not refute that. Not only is it an invasion of privacy, but When you get a ticket in the mail (you are already being convicted before given a chance to defend yourself in court) without being properly served, it is illegal. And although you do have the choice to fight your ticket in court, instead of an officer who ‘witnessed’ the crime, you have an officer who signed a piece of paper on the camera’s behalf. If we are willing to give up our Constitutional rights without a fight, what will we let them do next? Screw all the rest of the political mumba jumbo and personal attacks. This is about freedoms and ethics.

    “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”–Ben Franklin

  58. Barnet Fagel says:

    As the Illinois traffic safety researcher/advocate I think debate is healthy. Google recent news stores by CBS in LA and the Chicago Tribune which was released a few hours ago for Sunday’s edition. Both are noteable because they each took their respective city’s claims of reduced collisions after the installation of red light ticketing cameras and challenged them.
    Briefly, in each incidence the cities were caught manufacturing “non-realistic” statistics. In each city the media held the city’s claims to peer review. Coincidently, both cities stated RLTCs decreased traffic collisions, but the facts demonstrated the RLTCs increased traffic collisions by alarming percentages accounting for up to sixty percent increases!

  59. Barnet Fagel says:

    As to our U.S. Constitution it’s only as strong as we, the citizens make it. If we don’t defend it and our rights at every incursion we will dilute and it and our rights will become worthless Asa a scrap of paper.
    If AZ’s approach to this subject is anything similar to Chicago’s our Constitutional protection against equal protection, due process, to be considered innocent until proven guilty and the right to face our accusor are some of our rights that we can’t allow to be taken away. The profit motive makes this a dastardly endevour. So if we, as a people and as individuals sit back and allow an entity to ursurp us while putting our very safety into jeopardy then they should be stopped, challenged and debated at every legal opportunity. For an initial YOUTUBE video of Chicago’s short traffic signal yellows Google MrBFagel.

    • Will Kay says:

      You’re right Barnet. Constitutional freedoms are not just a right, but also a RESPONSIBILITY! How most citizens trust others to safeguard their freedoms, lives, and livelihoods is how the country has come to be what it is today. I know full well that I am a Sovereign Individual with inalienable rights. Period.

  60. Sure says:

    Our reporters here just go along with whatever DPS tells them.

  61. Investigator Bill says:

    Mike, if you are interested in the ARS, check out on line, ARS 32-2401 paragraph 16 and ARS 32-2411 as this applies to conducting investigations in Arizona. Thank you for your input! I hope this will provide some insight.

    • Mike says:

      Investigator, I’m licensed for PI and Security for AZ so I’m pretty well versed. My point was that whether we feel they are violating or not really doesnt matter. The complaint was filed, investigated, and unfounded a long time ago. To keep going back to a cleared invstigation is a waste of time.

      Its like if you say I punched you, the cops investigate and say I didnt. Then a year or so later you run to the cops saying I hit you a year ago. Its over move on

  62. Jokn says:

    I’d like to ask, If someone knows about a law or anything pertaining to road surveying, someone mentioned if the road has not been surveyed or done properly officers can not take radar or give tickets.
    Could also apply to machines, And this could also pertain to under construction areas……
    thanks camera fraud.

  63. LoneWolf says:

    I just watched the complete debate on video. Shawn did an excellent job. He was confronted I think 2 times by Jay about the facts (and Shawn did quote the sources) but yet Jay agreed with Shawn on several occasions. Shawn could’ve covered many other photo enforcement issues but both sides had to answer a very small number of questions from the Tempe Chamber of Commerce so it’s not like Shawn could’ve thought of all reasons and facts on why people should oppose photo enforcement. In the end, there were no winners or losers of the debate. Given the information from both sides, it’s ultimately up to the people to decide. I applaud Shawn for the thought and work he put into this debate.

    I am, however, curious about the masks. I just thought that was rather strange and out of place… Is that really necessary?

  64. Stacey says:

    Shawn did an outstanding job! That boy rocks!

    • Stacey says:

      Barnet,

      You will have to get used to our resident troll.

      Can you post the links to the CBS stories you were talking about over at the message board? Thanks

  65. Rio Abbad says:

    nice share brother :D :D

  66. list proxy free update,list socks 4, list socks5, traffic exchange…

    [...]CameraFRAUD vs. Redflex Debate is Thursday « CameraFRAUD.com – The Cameras are Coming Down[...]…

  67. GOP Debate says:

    GOP Debate…

    [...]CameraFRAUD vs. Redflex Debate is Thursday « CameraFRAUD.com – The Cameras are Coming Down[...]…

  68. vps software says:

    vps software…

    [...]CameraFRAUD vs. Redflex Debate is Thursday « CameraFRAUD.com – The Cameras are Coming Down[...]…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,188 other followers

%d bloggers like this: